I have a Hispanic nephew who is a very good student who was recently accepted to a top 5 school (HYPSM). I know many here that would automatically assume he got in primarily because of his ethnicity but they would be 100% wrong. I don’t think being a UMC Hispanic applicant is a meaningful hook at this level. In his case, he was in the top cohort of his New England boarding school, had a 36 ACT equivalent and perfect subject test scores. Even with these excellent stats, I know that some here that would question the fairness of his admission success. Regarding the fairness of UMC privilege, they would have a point but in his case I am confident his URM status did not tip the scales. He had other talents that he brought to the table that accounted for his admissions success.
Incorrect, actually (aside from the idiotic US census divisions of “race”). Asian is a continental distinction, comprised of various races. Caucasian is a racial distinction, applying to those in Europe, the Middle East, and all the way through Northern India. As you can see, drawing the distinction you’re trying to make muddies the venn diagram and creates an inaccurate picture of race.
I will say this. Out of white students admitted to top colleges, I would not be surprised if 30% or more were Jews by ethnicity. It’s impressive given a small percentage of total population. Admirable.
I am surprised that this recent poll by Pew Research Center has not made it to this thread. This poll showed that 73% of Americans responded that race or ethnicity should not be a factor in admissions decisions and also showed solid majorities of white, black, Latino, and Asian Americans saying that race should not be a factor in admissions decisions. What I found to be quite amazing is that Asian Americans had the lowest percentage of respondents who said race should not be a factor (59%), although they may be the most affected by today’s current AA policies. I must say that I am surprised by this poll, but it tells me that from at least a philosophical perspective, Americans can see that using race as a factor is flawed (discriminating to right past wrongs or to diversify is wrong).
http://talk.qa.collegeconfidential.com/college-admissions/2131128-pew-research-asks-americans-what-criteria-should-be-used-to-determine-college-admission.html is an older thread about the general results from that Pew Research survey. It does not seem to have gotten much attention.
Note that legacy as nearly as unpopular as race/ethnicity as a criterion for admission in that Pew Research survey, but the use of legacy seems to enjoy much greater support on these forums.
Both race/ethnicity and legacy are relatively low ranking in importance at colleges generally; they increase in importance at top 25 type of colleges, but are still less important than other things like essays, recommendations, extracurriculars, particular talent, and character/personal, according to what colleges say in their CDSes: http://talk.qa.collegeconfidential.com/college-admissions/2131779-what-colleges-use-in-admissions-according-to-cds-listings.html
However, most people outside admissions offices have no way to compare applicants beyond academic stats and clearly defined yes/no attributes like race/ethnicity, legacy, relation to donor, and recruited athlete status, so these attributes (along with academic stats) may be seen as highly important, while the “hidden” (from outside observers) aspects like essays, recommendations, and character/personal tend to be ignored or treated as a randomizing variable, even though they are quite important and not all that random in reality.
@ChangeTheGame from the article it appears phrasing matters a lot.
That was 2014 so perhaps things have changed, but the most recent Pew survey didn’t ask that question, it asked a different one.
But it does seem most Americans think HS grades should be a “major factor” in college admissions (67%), followed by test scores (47%), community service (21%), first-gen status (20%), athletic/legacy (both 8%), race (7%) then gender (5%).
Interestingly:
Of course we all know that it is these 15% or so of colleges that are of the most interest to strong students, and the ones discussed most on CC.
@OHMomof2 I have noticed what I call philosophical practices versus actual practices debate when it comes to AA. When it comes to actual practices, there is a percentage of people who believe that past wrongs makes AA okay, but do not philosophically believe in race based preferences which is why I think we see a difference depending on the question asked. I believe that most people believe that HS grades should be the main factor on CC including myself, but those grades should be tied to rigor and in some ways AP/IB scores to confirm that rigor. The reason that using HS grades are not as reliable as 50 years ago is because of the grade inflation that continues to make it harder to distinguish students, and that has made standardized testing more important today than it was in the past. 15% of schools equate to about 450 4-year colleges and universities so that percentage touches a lot of students.
@ChangeTheGame - I think I’d answer differently on the two surveys myself and I am a supporter of AA. The latest Pew question could include discriminating against Asian students, for instance.
I’ve heard it argued by pro-AA people that the other side doesn’t know how AA/holistic admissions actually works. Unfortunately, after extensive research I do feel like I know how it works, and that is part of why I am so against it.
I challenge supporters of AA to ask themselves exactly what is happening in practice. I’m sympathetic to the black community and believe that they deserve some kind of reparations, but when I see all those protesters in Boston holding “Defend Diversity” signs it makes me sick. It’s the equivalent of waving the “All Lives Matter” flag. Even if one agrees with the general value of diversity, it’s irresponsible to be blind to the blatant racial discrimination that goes on in admissions offices today.
These students don’t want white privilege.
Her parents would tell her to choose “white” if that’s how Middle Eastern people were classified by the government, she said. There wasn’t a discussion about identity, or what it would mean to properly classify the community.
“It’s like, khalas, just put it,” said Shabbar, using the Arabic word for “enough.” “For them it doesn’t matter. Until you apply for college … then it’s like, there’s no money for Arabs?” the 25-year-old said with a laugh.
*
@OHMomof2 I personally have a hard time dividing the original survey question from the newer question because I believe that AA does discriminate against Asian Americans (Harvard’s own data showed that removing AA would increase Asian American attendance at the school) while I know that you do not believe that AA is actual discrimination, so you are able to separate the 2 questions. Some data that really bothers me personally is when I see the odds of an Asian American student with lower stats showing a low chance of acceptance at some school and then showing an African American student with the same stats having a much much higher chance of admission (UNC Chapel Hill lawsuit data was particularly slanted in that way). I have seen arguments over other aspects of the application (ECs, Recommendations, Essays, etc.) making the difference, but it is hard to quantify and even harder to believe that a particular group would “lose” on those aspects of the college admissions process every single year.
@wyzagamer The issue you mentioned touches on one of my own. It just looks like a significant statistical difference between candidates of different racial groups. I do believe in schools having some leeway in choosing a class, but the question is have schools gone to far (The answer to that question is the crux of the entire debate on race and admissions).
@tpike12 The thing that I think about after reading your article is that those Middle Eastern groups mentioned are not treated with any semblance of “white privilege” in their everyday lives. All of sudden, it is time for college admissions and now they are categorized as a group that their families don’t identify with culturally? I feel like the bigger issue is that the folks in the article are proud of their heritage and want to represent it.
They won’t get it even if they do want it, in most cases. Abundant examples in the article.
We don’t quantify success despite racial discrimination because it’s hard to do. And IMO, we don’t want to,as a nation.
Affirmative action is partly why a degree from a “top” university in and of itself is meaningless, anymore, particularly for URM’s.
At UC Berkeley:
“admitted 374 applicants in 2002 with SATs under 1000 — almost all of them “students of color” — while rejecting 3,218 applicants with scores above 1400.”
“they admitted people who could barely read.”
“preference beneficiaries often chose the easiest majors”
“we started introducing BS majors, in an effort to make the university ready for them [URM’s], rather than making them ready for the university.”
As California goes, the nation goes…
“The university [Berkeley] always put on a happy face when publicly discussing the fate of its “diversity” admits.”
…much like the most recent Princeton admits:
“56 percent have self-identified as people of color”
https://www.princeton.edu/news/2019/03/28/princeton-pleased-offer-admission-1895-students-class-2023
The NYPost piece is an excellent read to understand how we arrived at the “holistic” review of college applicants.
@OhiBro
“Affirmative action is partly why a degree from a “top” university in and of itself is meaningless, anymore, particularly for URM’s.”
Should I let my nephew know that he is making a big mistake in enrolling at a top 5 school next year? He is Hispanic and had nearly perfect scores. Being Hispanic did not get him in but I sense you would doubt that statement. Where do you suggest he go instead?
“At UC Berkeley:
‘admitted 374 applicants in 2002 with SATs under 1000 — almost all of them “students of color” — while rejecting 3,218 applicants with scores above 1400.’”
Making an argument with 17 year old data is not very convincing. There’s too much that could have changed between then and now. I would agree with you that Berkeley should have higher minimum standards for standardized tests Perhaps 1300 but not much higher IMO. Why? Because scores should be viewed in their context. Not everyone is on equal footing or has supportive middle class parents guiding them every step of the way through high school. Who is more really more impressive -the kid whose father is a bus driver at the airport who bangs out a 1300 without studying and is an “A” student at a crappy public high school but who has done the best he can with his limited opportunities or the packaged UMC student from the right zip code whose impressive stats and “accomplishments” are not really all his own because he has gotten so much help along the way? Also, I would make the point as a state flagship UCB should serve good students from high schools all over all over the state not just certain wealthy zip codes. If this is happening at UCB I think it’s a good thing.
“preference beneficiaries often chose the easiest majors”
The thinking that only certain groups (ie - Asians and whites) can handle the difficult STEM majors is frankly supremist and condescending. No one group has a monopoly on brains!. My Hispanic son is doing just fine as a CS major at a respected tech school. I won’t go into detail regarding his grades and accomplishments other than to say they are excellent and competitive. Next year he will be a T/A in the CS department.at his school. Maybe he can change some minds that only the super smart people come from certain races.
As an aside, in my observation UMC whites and Asians of all classes are the two groups that study disproportionately for standardized tests. This is due to both a myriad of cultural and socio-economic reasons. Studying for standardized tests can greatly move the needle if you know how to do it effectively. My own son went from a 1240 PSAT to 1510 SAT, high 34 ACT and a 800 science subject test score with about six months of studying at home with $200 worth of books from Amazon. When he was done we shipped the books off to my nephew who had even better results. My point is if URMs mirror the tactics of other groups they too can get high test scores. It wasn’t that difficult for either kid. I know if my son and nephew can do so can others. I now see super high test scorers as mortals.
…".much like the most recent Princeton admits:
“56 percent have self-identified as people of color”
The cited 56% figure may be misleading as it appear to include Asians as people of color. The link also refences that 26% of the class is from lower socio-economic backgrounds. Nearly triple the percentage from 10 years ago. How is that not a good thing? Upward mobility is very important to have in this country. Without it you get a permanent ruling class.
"The NYPost piece is an excellent read to understand how we arrived at the “holistic” review of college applicants. "
The words “excellent read” and NY Post gave me a good a laugh. Thank you for that!
I agree with everything you wrote. I think that folks have always been proud of their heritage. What has changed is that the younger generation sees the advantage of being a minority in America, rather than just trying to assimilate to become American. They see all of these other tribes getting special treatment so they say what about my tribe? I’m a minority too, I’m really nothing like these white Europeans. What do I get? And they are right. Why should these other groups get advantages while they don’t?
More like, the younger generation of Arab Americans and Iranian Americans notices the increasing hostility against them, which results in seeing themselves as a persecuted and disliked minority group, rather than fully accepted members of the majority group or society as a whole.
For example, in the article you linked:
Rather hard to assimilate if others will not yet you assimilate. Also, most of the people in question are American, even though some other Americans refuse to see them as equal Americans.
I think this quote is a little over done. Checking a box hasn’t stopped them from talking about diversity or discrimination. They have organizations that champion their cause, they voice their opinions in college and online, they have political representation and they get quoted in newspapers. They simply want the same benefits as other minorities.
But that’s the danger of a multicultural society, every tribe angles for more power and control.
Tonight I actually overheard my teenager comment to his friend on the Xbox. “Can you imagine if a white director said that?” I asked him what they were talking about and he explained that Jordan Peale said he would never hire a white lead for any more of his movies. This is a topic of conversation for teenagers! He added that it kind of seemed like a double standard.
We are sending the most tolerant and open generation of kids off to college and this new “woke” PC culture and AA is very confusing for them after we’ve taught them not to judge others by the color of their skin their entire lives.
When the largest or most powerful tribe or those claiming to speak for it give actions, statements, and signals that the others should be second class citizens rather than equal citizens, what do you expect the reaction to be?
This makes no sense. My point was that your nephew will graduate with an asterisk because the standards for URM’s have been lowered. High achievers like your nephew are being hurt by affirmative action.
Nothing has changed. The article was written last year, and could only use 17 year old data because that is all that is available. The Berkeley regent was censured for revealing the data, which undoubtedly resonates with any university official wanting to reveal today’s numbers.
Not really. URM’s have no incentive to do well on the tests because it doesn’t matter. If you had read the article, you would remember:
“Tutors in UC outreach programs taught students to emphasize their social and economic disadvantages in their application essay.”
A good sob story is much more effective than academic achievement.
Statistically, whites and Asians are better prepared for STEM majors. Is every standardized test maker supremist and condescending?
Then why isn’t anyone suggesting a $200 set of books be given to every URM to bring their test scores in line with whites and Asians?
Can you provide a better source that does a more thorough job of explaining the evolution of affirmative action and the holistic college application review?
I’ll repeat the link so future readers don’t have to dig through prior posts:
So, @OhiBro and @DoNotStudy Just to be clear
A. Do you not think that URMs are intelligent enough to get into Ivies?
B. The hook for legacy is multiple times that of any URM type hook, and that for recruited athletes is even higher. Yet, I do not see either of you whining about how legacies and athletes are bringing down the standards. Only 17.2% of Harvard’s class of 2022 was Hispanic or Black, while 12% were recruited athletes, and over 36% were legacies of one type or another (14.5% has a parent who went to Harvard). So that’s 17.2% versus 26.5%, yet you claim that it’s the 17.2% who have “destroyed” Harvard. That is VERY interesting, especially in light of the fact that the vast majority of legacies and recruited athletes are White. It’s almost as though you consider the presence of lower than average stats URMs to be more destructive to the quality of Harvard than the presence of White kids with even lower stats (look at the data on the SATs of recruited athletes). Hmmmm…
Debating is a skill which is not the same as intelligence, and being very smart does not give you an edge, in fact, the opposite is true. Profoundly gifted people make poor lawyers and politicians specifically for this reason. You win a debate by being louder, more manipulative, and forcing the other team to play by your rules. None of these are indicative of very high intelligence. Sorry. So the fact that Ivies have not been winning debate competitions says nothing about how smart they are.
Do yourself a favor, and track down where each of the winners of every national math, science, and literature competition is going for college. Look at the schools from which the winners of colleges level competitions in math, engineering, science, and literature come from. THOSE are the measures of how academically able students are, not winning debates.