@OHMomof2 “Just a minor point here - the HBCU colleges and med schools accept students of any race, not only AA students. They are the majority I’m sure, but it is not the policy of Howard (just one example) to not accept white, Asian, etc students.”
Around 75%-80% of students at HBCUs are URMs and in my opinion it should be 100% because of the shortage of African American applicants in general.
Yes it probably should. I don’t think they take many.
Howard’s med school averages are GPA: 3.41, MCAT Score: 27 according to
http://medical-schools.startclass.com/l/96/Howard-University-College-of-Medicine
This topic has been so thoroughly covered that here is nothing new here to discuss especially by posters who lack the statistical knowledge to understand the many basic errors of their positions.
Feel free to avoid the topic then 
The purpose of this site is to help students and families learn the actual facts about how colleges admit students. There are many other more appropriate places for HS students and others to discuss their ideological free speech rights. There is no controversy about the fact that all elite colleges give large admission preference to URM’s. It varies slightly from school to school and from URM applicant to applicant(poor, first to college versus the child of doctors etc.)How exactly does having sociology discussions with a HS student who lacks basic statistical knowledge do anything except expose the silliness of the discussion.
I think you miss the point of an online forum, @SAY . Within certain parameters we can discuss whatever we want. And you are free to avoid those discussions.
The parameters include giving applicants accurate information. Included in the last few pages of posts are numerous examples of factually inaccurate statements. For goodness sakes professor Sanders has published the actual recent admission data from UCLA which is a school that gives a smaller URM boost than the private colleges. This is the system as it exists today and the applicants and their parents should be told the truth on this admission site. The standards are higher for knowledgeable adults.
Clearly you are invested in stating your opinion on this topic, so why the complaints?
Please highlight what you are calling my opinion. Everything I posted is completely factual and corroborated by large amounts of published data and books. Why would a knowledge person want to pretend that being a URM isn’t a large advantage in admission at every elite school. It’s common knowledge in every competitive HS in the USA. Pretending this fact isn’t true is a disservice to the new readers. The strategy for successful admission to elite schools is all about trying to find a hook of some sort. Without a hook admission to HPYS and a few other top schools is extremely unlikely even with 99th percentile stats. This is a fact not an opinion.
The thing is, so are may other people’s opinions. The world isn’t black and white, @SAY . There’s a lot of grey and a lot of room for intelligent people to disagree.
And that’s what this thread is for. You can say you’re right and everyone else is wrong as often as you like, certainly you’re entitled, but repetition doesn’t make it so 
Who says this? Of course it’s a plus at many schools. Not a huge one and not at all of them, however.
Now that’s MY opinion based on “books and published data” I have read, as well as my own personal experience. I am certainly not so immature as to say that is the only valid opinion one can hold.
It seems like you just want everyone participating on these race threads - all 12 of them holding thousands of posts going back to about 2007 - to acknowledge that you know everything about this subject because you say so and you enjoy putting down others who don’t agree with you.
Ain’t gonna happen.
Mom what a weak response for an adult with a child at a top college. Some things are facts and some things are opinion. Arguing about the fairness of AA is opinion. Stating that being a URM is a major advantage at every elite college is a concrete fact. Now there are many hooks and the athletic hook is even better than being a URM. By openly arguing hooks don’t exist you are flagging yourself as an ideologically driven person not to be taken seriously. You are being dishonest when you say this is an opinion. Is there an exception? Yes Caltech and there over 40% of the admissions go to Asians. Ideology is a very poor substitute for an honest factual analysis.
Here is Cal Tech
Race
White 274 27%
Asian 454 45%
Underrepresented Minority * 156 16%
International 83 8%
Two or More Races ** 32 3%
Unknown 2 1%
@SAY Affirmative Action isn’t the number one reason that Caltech’s demographics are the way they are. The University of Georgia did away with AA at some point before 2001, and that school is 9% Asian and 12% URM. UofM, UT, U of Arizona, and U of Florida all did away with AA at one point or another, and none of those schools have demographics that match Caltech’s. Location is a huge factor as well. Caltech draws heavily from CA. Programs of study is another big factor. Witness MIT’s latest freshman profile (32% Asian) vs any Ivy league school.
@SAY Please refrain from describing your opinions as facts or that you claim to know how university admissions works. Keep your ignorant views to yourself especially when such accusations aren’t met with sufficient evidence they are worthless, baseless conjecture.
I’ve already had this debate with you previously especially on the topic of UCLA and UC Berkeley. Now you’ve changed the discussion to Caltech. Asians are overrepresented not only because of test scores or GPA. The overrepresentation of Asians is mainly due to demographics since 38% to +40% of applicants to Caltech are Asian then I’m not surprised by this overrepresentation or feel that this should equal Asian entitlement to university places.
Demographically speaking Asians make up 12%-15% of the population in California and around 35%-40% of applicants to top schools there. Whites are actually more demographically represented as top highschool students but apply at a much lower rate in comparison to Asians. This proves demographics is the main reason for Asian overrepresentation not simply merit. in fact, interms of test scores and GPA there’s hardly any difference between Whites and Asians that would result in any major or even minor Asian advantage in admission.
Actually, in terms of merit Whites are underrepresented since they get test scores equally as good as Asians but only make up 27%-30% of students at these universities. Again, the main reason here is demographics since White aplicants only make up 26% of applicants they can only end up making around 30% of the entering class max. The main causes of overrepresentation in all universities is mainly attributed to demographics than merit, When it comes to college representation demographics is the major factor.
Ali I wish you the best but a knowledgable discussion of this topic requires an understand of statistics that you have not yet studied. ThisIsland there are a number of reasons for the mix of Cal Techs entering class but the lack of AA is a major reason as compared to say Stanford. The other schools you mention are not elite schools and are state schools with much lower tuition for in state students and therefore are not relevant in this discussion.
You’re putting words in my mouth.
In which of my posts did I argue hooks don’t exist, openly or otherwise?
When did I compare the relative importance of athletic hooks and being URM?
SAY I know you claim to be a parent but you really, really post like a high school student.
Last I checked UCLA/UC Berkeley and UMich were elite state schools in states without AA.
Why are they not relevant?
OHMom UCLA and UCB both are over 40% Asian but were not the schools mentioned by Island. All are fine schools but none have elite admissions comparable to the top schools. Your have confused yourself because you have clearly stated a few posts ago that being a URM is not a significant hook at the elite colleges. No serious person believes such nonsense. The information has been widely disseminated and is not a personal opinion. My argument with your posts is not about the use of AA but rather the fact that I think the posts should be accurate so it can help new readers to learn about how elite college admission really works. This is the only way they can prepare their optimum personal strategy for admission.
http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-adv-asian-race-tutoring-20150222-story.html
If you’re African American and from a lower-class background, you’re 1,087 percent more likely to be admitted to an elite U.S. college than a white applicant from a lower-class background.
“Elite universities give added weight in admission decisions to applicants who have SAT scores above 1500, are African American, or are recruited athletes,” this Princeton University study found. “A smaller, but still important, preference is shown to Hispanic students and to children of alumni.” The study found that the likelihood of admittance for lower-class African Americans is 87 percent, compared to 8 percent for lower-class whites. But, Moyer says, “it’s not because we all feel bad,” it’s because colleges consider racial diversity an asset to the entire study body. The odds of second-generation Hispanic students being admitted to elite colleges “are almost three times as high as they are for comparable white applicants,” add the researchers.
Thomas Espenshade and Radford, Alexandria Walton with Chang Young Chung. No Longer Separate, Not Yet Equal: Race and Class in Elite College Admission and Campus Life. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2009, p. 128.
@SAY You offer no counter to my argument other than stating I don’t know how statistics works??? Well I’ll counter by stating you don’t know how demographics or statistics works.’
You mention UC Berkeley and UCLA even though I state clearly the reason is demographics. Asians make up 38%-40% of applicants to UC Berkeley and 30%-35% of applicants to UCLA. The overrepresentation is expected purely do to demographics NOT merit. Please stop ignoring and address this point.
You post three news articles and an old outdated Princeton study as proof that no one can argue against your point, can’t you see how ignorant that is?
The first article is based off of the opinions of certain Asian students as well as refers to the Princeton study. I’m not even going to bother discussing it because it shows rather irrelevant anecdotal evidence
The second article you post really doesn’t prove anything it actually supports my point that there is hardly any difference between Asians and Whites on test scores. The university of Wisconsin Madison has Asian students get in with a 1370 and Whites with a 1340. That’s a 30 point difference in scores? Do you know how trivial this is in the scope of admissions given that GPA, AP scores, extracurriculars are considered? In this case there is no valid reasons for Asians to even have a minute advantage over white applicants.
The third article is completely irrelevant to the topic discussed and lists factors that may increase your admissions chances. There is no mention of being a URM. it actually states that African migrants have a better chance of admission than African Americans mainly because they tend to get much higher test scores and GPA.
Now to the Princeton study that you reference here and come up with this absurd conclusion that URM are over 1000% more likely to be admitted. By the way the study is from 2004, already a reason to be skeptical but I’m sure there’s some useful data here. First, lets look at the number of applicants of each race according to the study there were 60,620 White applicants, there were 28,754 Asian applicants, there were 6,906 Hispanic applicants and finally 6,618 African American applicants, I’m going to ignore the others in this case. This means Whites make up 48.7% of all applicants, Asians make up 23.1% of all applicants, Hispanics make up 5.6% of all applicants and African Americans making up 5.3% of applicants. Although the data is relatively outdated it clearly shows that the proportions are similar to the admitted profile that is 52.5% White, 19.35% Asian, 8.24% African American, 7.02% Hispanic. A relatively small overrepresentation of Whites, Hispanics and African Americans from the applicant. While Asians have a small underrepresentation from the original 23% of the applicant pool at 19.3%
Again when you look at differences in SAT scores between Whites and Asians they are trivial with White applicants scoring a 1347 and Asians a 1363. That is a trivial difference of 16 points? Again, there is no valid reason as to why Asians should have an advantage over Whites because of test scores at all. In fact, since White applicants outnumber Asian applicants, the Asian applicants should be at a disadvantage both in terms of merit and demographically speaking. Therefore, if Asians are less likely to be admitted than Whites that is to be expected given the number and test scores of White applicants.
The study is also flawed in that it seems to control admissions rate with SAT scores only and ignores many other subjective factors in the admissions process. Yes, it does show the advantage of recruited athletes and legacies but doesn’t show what percentage of URMs or whites or Asians fall into these categories of applicants. The study also completely ignores socioeconomic factors in university admissions such as income or first generation student status and bases its whole conclusion purely off of SAT scores.
Now don’t get me wrong I’m not saying that ivies don’t give URMs a boost in admission but this advantage is grossly exaggerated. When you take into account what percentage of Underrepresented minorities are recruited athletes, low income applicants or first generation applicants than the advantage is quite small. Ignoring these factors isn’t adding to this study’s validity nor does the fact that data from the 1990’s is referenced here.
My conclusion is that this study is flawed in its attempt to demonstrate a so called major racial advantage. The White advantage over Asians would be expected given the relatively similar scores that Whites have and their demographic advantage. The African American boost in admissions could also be the result of socioeconomic factors, the fact that most are recruited athletes or first generation applicants, even with this advantage African Americans and Hispanics are only slightly overrepresented from their original applicant pools. Finally this data is very outdated and is back when Princeton had a +20%admit rate which was probably in the 90s, it is completely irrelevant to the super selective Ivy league schools of today that may have different admissions processes and more importantly data.
You only prove how ignorant you are when you dismiss others points and only seek to spread this faulty irrelevant data on the topic of race and admission. I have to ask what is your stake in this argument? Are you one of those Asians that happened to be rejected from Harvard and do you use this forum as a form of emotional release of all that anger you have against these institutions? This isn’t the first time I’ve argued with paranoid Asians that blame institutions for their problems and claim some form of entitlement.
@OnceOnThisIsland Don’t waste your time with @SAY he’s delusional beyond comprehension. He ignores all data and any logical point made against him that are contrary to his race rules admissions belief. There is little point in arguing with ignorant individuals on this forum who clearly have an agenda in this case the Anti-minority, Pro-Asian bandwagon with the belief that Asians are entitled to all top university places.