@Ohiomomof2 - test scores in combination wiith race would mean that an Asian with a ACT of 25 say would be in the reject pile while an African American with ACT of 34 would be in accept pile without looking at any other things. I do agree that this happens because there are a lot of applications to process, and colleges typically will not have problems finding Asians with ACT of 34 so the 25 will get rejected. Conversely, colleges will not find too many African American applicants with 34 so they will accept the 34. These are tough issues in admissions and I’m not saying it’s right or wrong in what the colleges are doing, but that’s what’s happening.
To the point about AA helping the wrong minorities…I agree that does happen more than it should. There was a girl in our public hs that got in to many top schools because she checked the “hispanic” box (her grandparents from northern Europe emigrated first to south america then the family ended up in the US, so she could legitimately check hispanic)…but she was wealthy and blond and looked as caucasian as one can look. She got in to schools like Wash U and Hopkins, but interestingly enough, she did NOT get in to Columbia. Columbia was the hardest one, so who knows if they just figured out that she wasn’t really a URM or if there were URM’s with better applications. She also didn’t get in to UVA…who knows exactly why. But I found it interesting. She ended up at none of the above mentioned schools.
I had a pro-bono client last year that was a true URM who was the daughter of (legal) immigrants from South America. She got into NYU (without NYU stats) with practically a free ride. So AA DEFINITELY helped her. And she is doing great by the way and will make NYU and her parents proud.
I think that the many of the really top schools can figure out who the true URM’s are that need the help. I don’t know much about programs like Questbridge, but I think they do try to reach out to minorities from the needier communities. But there are URM’s that are only URM’s on paper and they may end up with an advantage at some schools. For example, the first girl I mentioned above that got in to Wash U as a hispanic URM. Wash U is need aware so they may have loved the opportunity to be able to admit a hispanic female that didn’t need any money. Helped them look more “diverse” on paper.
As for the Asian vs. Jews comments (and I am neither Asian or Jewish), I’m not sure it’s a fair comparison. First of all, I’m really not sure if religion plays a factor and many Jews would just check the white/european box just like other regular white people. I’m not sure they get an advantage/disadvantage for being Jewish. I do remember touring Georgetown and at the info session they were really playing up their support of religious diversity and talked about their Hillel and Muslim groups (as well as others)…so maybe a school like the would like the idea of admitting someone Jewish to support their religious diversity? But it could also be argued the other way that Georgetown still prefers Catholics…or the right answer might be that they don’t consider religion at all when reviewing the apps.
As for Asians, I actually feel very badly for many of them that are now held to higher standards just because there are SOOO many Asians with amazing stats. I don’t have links to articles at my finger tips but I remember reading somewhere that at some schools the Asians need something like 100-200 points more on the SAT just to compete with some caucasians (and even more to compete with URM’s). But the problem was if applicants were just admitted on stats alone, the entering freshman classes at the top schools would be like 70% Asian and that it NOT where these schools want to go and that would not be good for the overall education of the students because of the lack of diversity.
There are also different Asian boxes to check…there is that Pacific south islander…is that different than being Chinese in the eyes of an admissions rep? I don’t really know, but there certainly different types of Asians and it seems like the colleges are trying to break it down as best as possible.
The colleges really have difficult decisions to make and I think they really try to get the right balance of students enrolled. This helps/hurts different people from different backgrounds. I don’t think that you can argue that the Ivies and similar schools have become so much more diverse than they used to be, and that is a good thing. Yes there are still the legacy white boys that get into Princeton, but Princeton is definitely not as full of white privileged students as it once was. Progress has been made.
This is a healthy debate. In the meantime, if you are an applicant trying to figure out where you might have an “advantage” or “disadvantage” based on your personal situation…just keep an open mind and try to find a school that truly wants you. If you are a strong student, you will have LOTS of great choices. All of these great applicants that don’t get into their top choice schools are still ending up somewhere, and the schools that get them are lucky.
@collegemomjam I generally agree with your post. However, note some high-ranked UCs are around 50% Asians, and I don’t see the schools doing worse. Why isn’t there such forced diversity in NBA, hockey, acting jobs etc? I am fine with having all areas reflect the diversity or just leave it to the market forces as long as there is no discrimination by colleges in the admission process.
Actually, these Supreme Court cases just describe the legal standards and really don’t go into the reasons why Affirmative Action is necessary or not necessary. The fact that these holdings get flip-flopped (and will probably get reversed under the Trump appointed judges) makes it seem that this is just a political game of liberals vs. conservatives rather than a fairness issue. IMO generally speaking, the party arguing for affirmative action for any race should bear a heavy burden of proof rather than the reverse.
So what in your opinion is a “right minority” or a “true URM”?
@websensation I don’t know, I think any school that becomes too homogeneous runs a risk. The school may not necessarily become any “worse” or “better”, but just not be the kind of school the school wants to be, as it relates to the best interests of its students. I know students that got in to UCLA that don’t want to go because they think it’s too “Asian”. So there are implications and consequences when the student bodies start to change. I also know more east coast caucasians that have gotten in to UCLA than usual this year…could this be why??
While politics may come in to play, I think most people will agree overall that we need balanced diversity in our colleges. There are some schools that are more homogeneous than others and that can work for certain schools. But overall if students were mainly admitted based on their stats and gpa across the board, there might be more negative consequences for society. Just my opinion.
Again collegemomjam…but why is it OKAY to discirminate against one ORM but not the other (ie Asians but not Jews)?
I think we already discussed that it’s not discrimination, at least they way you are implying. If there are more applicants from a certain “group” the college may have to use different standards for the different groups in an attempt to balance their class. And I’m not agreeing with the Jew comments at all. I’m not Jewish, but I have a lot of Jewish friends that would argue that they ARE discriminated against in college admissions. So let’s drop the religious comments.
Would you be OK with them holding students from NJ to a different standard than students from South Dakota? Because that happens too.
I think you need to be careful how you are throwing the word “discrimination” around.
And, for the record, how would you feel about the Ivies being upwards of 70% Asian? Because if we are talking about admitting students exclusively on their stats and objective application details, that’s probably where we would end up.
No one is saying it’s a perfect system. Different people get advantages/disadvantages they don’t deserve in any scenario.
@theloniusmonk you aren’t the one who made that assertion, but OK. How do you know this happens, that admissions reps say “Oh look an Asian with a 25 let’s reject her without even looking at the rest of her app that shows awesome teacher recs and that she raised her family in the absence of her parents (or whatever)” and “Look, an African American with a 34, he’s in regardless of GPA and total lack of ECs and awful teacher recs and essays (or whatever)!”.
I think not.
We can guess all you like but I haven’t seen any evidence that this ever happens, and actually some that it does not (see Princeton/DOE case).
How do you know that her Hispanic background got her in? You can’t know, you can only assume.
You ask this question over and over without any evidence that this is actually happening or that anyone feels this way, except maybe you. Who is discriminating against Asians but not Jewish white people? In what way are they doing this?
@OHMomof2 we will never know for sure but I knew the applicant well and her application and it really was the only thing that explained her being admitted and she admitted it herself. Let’s just say it’s a really good guess. I’m sure we all know some cases like this.
“She admitted it herself” - oh OK. Admissions told her that she got in because she’s Hispanic?
Seriously we can only guess. But I know, and you probably do too, applicants who are the same race and had perplexing admissions results. Why did Brice get into U Chicago but Seth didn’t when Seth was the valedictorian and had a 33 while Brice only had a 32? etc.
These issues are anything but simple. Canada’s Universitys are known for having admissions based mostly on Grades and tests, with no AA. Here is an article about some of the results http://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/too-asian/ It focuses mainly on the Chinese, but both Toronto and Vancouver also have very large Asian populations of other ethnicities, such as Indian, Sikh, and Pakistani.
@OHMomof2 I’m pretty sure you know that I didn’t mean she found out from admissions?? I guess I should have stated the obvious that she admitted herself that that is why she likely got in when others with hight stats did NOT. In fact, I remember sitting next to her mom at a sporting event once during application season and the mom was humbly admitting that her daughter would probably do well compared to her peers with her college applications because she was able to legitimately check the hispanic box. I think it actually made them more uncomfortable than the rest of us. But they knew they should take advantage of the opportunity, and I don’t blame them one bit. It was legit. And up to the schools to decipher if she was the kind of URM they wanted to admit. She’s a great girl and is doing well in college now. But to one of the poster’s point earlier, I’m not sure she is the type of URM that AA is designed to help.
If you believe that AA exists which I think you do, I think you would have to admit there are cases that are pretty obviously the result of AA policies, right or wrong. I’m sure you know of some URM"s that got into schools that other hookless applicants did not, despite having lower stats? So while we can never “prove” it (no one ever said they could), I think that if we all agree that AA exists, we all can agree that we might actually observe some likely cases first hand.
And, as I said in my post, it was a really good guess.
When a 1200/3.4 gets in ahead of a 1500/3.9, unless the higher-stat kid was just a complete jerk in essays, the most likely explanation is that a hook was involved – athlete, URM, first-gen, development case or legacy.
Using anecdotes where one kid got in with a score 50 points lower than a kid who didn’t proves nothing – I think to strongly suspect that a hook was in play (as well as we can…), you need to look at kids getting in with stats far below average – like a kid getting into Yale with a 1300 and a 3.5. To me, that screams “hook”.
Their app went into a smaller, easier pile because of something they have – apart from academic accomplishments – that the school wants: money, URMs, trombone players, a quarterback, a student from Alaska, first-gen, whatever.
@prezbucky I agree, but even in the case when the stats are similar you can see trends if you look at enough cases. If you comb through the different results threads on CC you will notice that there are a lot of cases where the “aha” as to why one kid got in with similar stats to someone else that did not was the presence of a hook. But I agree, there are many cases that are more blatantly obvious.
If she didn’t find out from admissions then she is guessing as blindly as we all are,as is her mom. That was my point.
I agree. And in very few cases is it obvious what they had. Is the low-stat kid starting QB on the football team as a first year? An educated guess is that his hook was football, sure. But in most cases it is much less obvious what tipped the scale to that kid rather than others with higher stats…excellent teacher/counselor recs could still be a factor despite somewhat lower stats (and the kid rarely knows what those said, certainly parents of other kids in the HS don’t). A talent not everyone knows about, or the reality that the kid lives in some remote part of Alaska with no roads and the school hasn’t had a kid like that in ten years - whatever, certainly all those can be factors.
What many people say in this thread implies that we all “know” it’s because of AA that a lower stat kid gets in when, in fact, we do not know that at all.
google search it. i gave you sources last time, they are plastered all over the place
Mind you Jews make up a smaller propoertion of population and larger at ivys than asians. they are basially crazy overrepresented at top schools
Your source was about white women and JOBS, not white women and college, which is what you claimed. When you provide a source you should actually read it first, to see if it supports what you are claiming it does. Yours didn’t.
In this latest case you are asking why it’s OK to discriminate against Asians but not Jews, and again provide zero evidence for the claim that any college DOES discriminate against Asians but not Jews.
I know how to do a google search. I also know that everything that comes up in google isn’t automatically true or even cogently argued just because it’s “plastered all over”.
This one isn’t even relevant: http://www.jpost.com/Diaspora/The-most-heavily-Jewish-US-college-and-other-facts-about-Jews-at-American-colleges-437701
This one ( https://philebersole.■■■■■■■■■■■■■/2012/12/10/asian-americans-jews-and-ivy-league-admissions/ ) could be relevant, though it’s someone’s personal blog describing the work of Ron Unz, but includes so much incorrect information that it’s hard to take any of it at face value. For instance:
I don’t think there is a single Ivy that requires interviews and none count them heavily, at all, to the point that none even offer them with admissions staff, only with volunteer alumni. So how can interviews be used by admissions to cap numbers of anyone?
Then he cites science competition winners as evidence that Jewish students have a leg up over Asian students.
But let’s say the notion that Jewish people are favored over Asian people in college admissions is correct.
Who, where in this thread, is anyone saying that would be OK?
As a % of the population, so are Asians. They make up less than 6% of the population. According to your article above, about 20% of elite colleges.
@OHMomof2 I don’t think anyone is claiming to know for sure about anything. But you cannot argue with the overall trends that we see and hear about…I’m sure some URM’s would have gotten in anyway, without AA helping them. But MANY of them were in the shorter stack and you cannot argue that that helped. And unfortunately, depending on the school, many Asians find themselves in the taller stack. This is just a reality.
@ELopez275 I actually see your point a little better about the Jewish people now based on your last post. But I don’t think religion is a factor and I think culturally, the Jewish culture highly values education and therefore many Jewish students perform well. So, to your point about there being a lot of Jewish students in the Ivy league - I think those students were evaluated like regular white students and it just so happens that many of the white applicants with strong stats happen to be Jewish. That’s just my take. There was a time when Jews were denied admission to certain colleges because they were Jewish, but I really don’t think there is any advantage to being Jewish today in that it gives you a leg up in college admissions. So yes, Jews like their non-Jewish peers might have a bit of an easier time with admissions than Asians…but it’s not because they are Jewish, it’s because they are white.
Hope that makes sense. And again, it’s just my opinion.
I completely agree that AA exists and it is there to help URM students, @collegemomjam . I just object to the certainty of “so and so got in because he’s ____” because we can’t know.
Many (obviously not those that admit by stats only, and there are many of those though few among the elites) colleges claim to evaluate holistically, meaning race or ethnicity, family income, education level of parents may all be considered, in addition to the core academic factors like teacher/counselor recs (one helped others after class every day and the other was a jerk) , grades/rigor, test scores and other achievements like academic contest wins and awards, and then all the extra curricular things like athletic ability, legacy status, artistic/musical ability and whatever else - starting a company, fluency in languages, extraordinary service, state/region lived in, quality of high school, etc.
Then throw in the added complication of major applied to - that is a major factor in admissions at some colleges. Jane got into Berkeley and Judy didn’t but Jane applied to be an Bio major and Judy applied to computer science and the latter is much more competitive there.
There’s a lot of stuff besides raw stats and ethnicity being looked at, and it’s not possible to say any one kid got in solely because of that one factor.