(This is continued from the UC thread on test-optional admissions, but it is more relevant here and could perhaps help prospective African American candidates.)
Maybe. In effect, this concedes that the initiative is targeting low scoring students, which makes sense. I do think it would help on URM as well. For instance, UC is only 4% black, the lowest percentage by far as compared with its peers. The Ivies are 9% black on average (ranging from about 6% through 14%), and so are peers like Vandy, Duke, Stanford, Rice, Northwestern and JHU (ranging from 6% through 13%).
About 1200 black students enter the Ivies each year, and if you add those other peer schools about 1000 more, for a total of 2200 black students, approximately.
Test score requirements in all those other schools apparently do not serve as barriers to applications from the demographic, and most of these schools have similar 25-75 stats, with some exceptions mostly in the second group.
Let’s assume 50% submit ACT scores - that’s 1100 kids. But there are only about 500 black kids in the ACT pool who score 32 or above in a given year*, and 32 is at the UC 25th percentile. I’ll say that it is impossible to increase that 4% (the lowest among its peers by far) without reaching deep into lower scores. Remember we are only talking about 14 schools. What about all the other great schools that the top black applicants might choose? There simply are not enough high scorers to increase URM diversity (a stated goal) in a meaningful way - at least to the lower 6% band - without moving those 25-75 numbers. Now add in other targeted groups who are likely to score poorly, and those numbers might move appreciably. As 25-75 is 8% or so of the USNWR ranking which UC is known to game, my theory is at least worth some consideration.
Anyway, no one knows for certain, but for black applicants reading this, I would suggest that the above numbers imply that **test prep** is probably the **single best strategy** for increasing the odds of tippy top admission. Knowledge is power. There are only roughly 30 black kids who score 35 or above in the entire applicant pool: be one of them!
“University officials have painted the lawsuit as an attack on their ability to consider race in admissions, which they say is necessary to ensure diversity on campus.” This quote is from an article on the Harvard suit: if consideration of race in admissions is necessary to ensure diversity on campus (Harvard’s campus in this case) then the implications are clear.
collegemom I don’t see the connection between some groups of people being smarter and the infrastructure of basic government. Are you saying that it’s government’s role to socially engineer the differences between people’s ability? As I said where is the AA for Jewish people and Asians in major league sports? Why is it OK to have almost the entire NBA black with no worries but then stress that their aren’t as many black neurosurgeons?
The bottom line is that the local, state, and federal governments are broke. The pension costs alone will bankrupt many cities and states. Government by nature is incompetent because no one can be fired and they struggle to perform even the most basic tasks. The idea that government should be involved in helping any kids with elite admission is ridiculous. The vast majority of successful people went to public HS and public colleges and figured it out on their own.
People go to school and college because society demands it.
I’m just saying that quality of schooling usually plays an insignificant role in financial outcome. It doesn’t even reflect post-secondary success.
I didn’t even take pre-call and I walked all over prep school kids in Real Analysis and Abstract Algebra.
I question whether 95% of the population really needs to go past 7th grade.
@StudyingIsBad sounds like you are truly gifted and the exception to the rule.
@SAY who said anything about ELITE college admissions? I’m talking about investing in education as a whole as a society. That might mean we do a little extra to help some communities that are poorer or more ethnic or whatever, but in the end the goal is to make society better for everyone. Not just the “truly gifted” because those people are few and far between. I know I’m not one of them. But I am a hard worker and smart enough and know that I had opportunities that others didn’t. Not saying the playing field needs to be level, and I’m definitely not saying that intelligence and work ethic should be neutralized. I’m just saying that it’s in everyone’s best interest to invest in educational opportunities for all children. Not just the ones that are born into the right zip codes and families.
Different question but appropriate for this thread.
Can anyone recommend any strong colleges that being an Asian will equate to you being treated as an ORM?
For example, I don’t know that there are as many Asian applicants to Boston College and Notre Dame as there are to schools like the Ivies and schools that attract similar applicants. So being an Asian there might actually be more of a hook (although maybe not, I don’t really know).
It’s not really about being exceptional. I’m saying that schooling doesn’t really affect your performance in post-secondary education.
When I graduated high school, the highest math class I went up to was Algebra 2 (It was called Math B back then). I didn’t study or do my homework, but I did come to class every day, paid attention and aced every exam easily.
Thankfully, my Math B teacher was hot, and that let me pay attention to her. She had a nice read end.
Anyway, my basics were extremely solid and I scored an 800 on the SAT math section.
The thing is, when you get to college-level math, it’s not really about memorizing a bunch of formulas. That’s what prep school kids probably did back in their high schools, only to be shocked when they get to their first proof-based class and fail miserably. As long as you have a solid understanding of the fundamentals of high school algebra and great logical reasoning skills, you’ll do well against prep school kids despite their $50,000 private tutors.
I am currently an Actuary and I passed all my math-heavy preliminary exams. The only thing I needed to pass these exams as well as my undergrad math and econ classes was just algebra and great logical reasoning abilities. I didn’t learn jackshit in college. My college classes just reaffirmed my high IQ.
I assume you mean Asian students being treated as a URM/hook, rather than ORM. Some strong LACs treat Asians as an underrepresented group, particularly Asian males. However, I’d expect admissions boosts to be fairly small. You mentioned Notre Dame. Religious colleges also tend to have a small percentage of Asian students. IPEDS indicates only 5% at Notre Dame, and their CDS mentions that they consider race in admissions.
For an Asian, being treated as a URM or a hook just means you have to be just a bit above average to have a good chance.
Don’t think you can get in by being just an average candidate. The advantage an Asian gets at Notre Dame isn’t comparable to the advantage traditional URMs get in all elite colleges.
There is a tremendous amount of evidence to the contrary. If you are defining performance in terms of post-seceondary education in terms of GPA, graduation, or sticking with a “tough” major; both performance and rigor in HS have a notable influence, including when controlling for various scores.
If real, your experiences do not reflect current college admissions. Students who don’t do homework and don’t take math above Algebra 2 are rarely accepted in to highly selective colleges, even if they have a high SAT score. And upon attending colleges, such students tend to do poorly, often continuing to not do homework; and often struggling to catch up in intro STEM classes.
Using another anecdotal example from many years ago, I have a relative that tested extremely well and also had what many have described as a “photographic” memory. He could read STEM textbooks at the speed most people read novels, and would understand and remember them. He could do well on nearly any college exam with little effort. Nevertheless, he failed to graduate from a top 10 USNWR college for reasons relating to poor academic performance. Apparently he was more interested in spending time with a girl he met (that he would later marry) than he was with doing school assignments or in some cases attending exams. There are many contributing factors to why students succeed in college besides scores.
@Data10 thanks for the reply…yes that’s what I meant, thanks for catching my typo! I will look into the LAC’s and some of the Catholic colleges.
I’m particularly looking for a Computer Science program for an Asian female.
Here’s another question that you guys night be able to answer, which I think has come up before:
Are Indian Asians considered Asians in the traditional sense and therefore held to the same higher standard at most schools? In this Harvard case right now, are they representing Indian Asians as well? My feeling is yes, but I’m not sure.
Those with lower test scores self-segregate into ‘easier’ majors, which can be gamed through hard work. This is why you hardly ever see a URM in an upper-level math class.
When you take into account the same field, there is a linear correlation between exam scores and performance, even in the top 1%.
I highly doubt this. In high school, attendance, homework and other busywork can account for 50% of your final grade. In college, it’s all about the exams and final project/report. I cut almost all my classes and only went in for the exams. I aced everything.
As an example, the paper at http://public.econ.duke.edu/~psarcidi/grades_4.0.pdf reviews why students segregate in to ‘easier’ majors at Duke. It found that the higher URM rate of switching in to ‘easier’ majors could almost fully by explained by their controls, which including the scores readers gave to students when they applied to the college . With full controls, the only criteria that were still statistically significant in predicting switching in to the ‘easier’ majors were as follows:
Being Female: +0.188 (0.048), 1% significant
Admission Reader Rating of HS Curriculum:-0.147 (0.058), 5% significant
Year 1 Effect (Harsh grading in individual Duke classes): -0.084 (0.025), 1% significant
In contrast test scores, did not reach statistical significance and had similar influence to various other non-stat components of the application:
Essay: -0.068 (0.044)
SAT Score:-0.031 (0.027)
HS Achievement: -0.046 (0.053)
LORs: -0.034 (0.044)
The selective colleges that tend to be the focus of this site usually grade on criteria beyond just midterm and final, often including problem sets/homework in numerical classes . Classes that emphasize less numerical things tend to have an even smaller percentage midterm and final and instead are more likely to be graded on things like weekly writing assignments or things involving attending classes. You mentioned Real Analysis earlier, so I’ll use that as an example, Percentage of grade on Homework/Program Sets is below for the HYPSM colleges I could find syllabus online (didn’t find Yale). If you are blowing off 25 to 50% of your grade, you are unlikely to do well in the class.
Yes, students of Asian Indian heritage are also considered in the “Asian” pool. The pool has become rather deep in talent due to immigration policies from 1960’s onward that have encouraged top scientific and mathematical talent from Asia (primarily India and China) to come to the US. My dad came here in the early 70’s as part of the initial wave.
So it’s only fitting that the kids of those immigrants not present much of a threat to the ruling elites and alumni and donors of HYP. So just mark them down on personality points and it all works out. I went to college in the 80’s and none of this was even on our radar. Not happy to see that my kids who are born in the US are going to be regarded as a just a stereotype (I will admit that the hyper-academic focus of the Asian-American community is not helping matters.).
How many of the high stat Asian kids who are rejected were looking to major in something other than CS or pre-med? How do the Asian humanities majors do? There is only so much room for kids with a certain kind of profile. The “chance me” threads on here all start to look very much alike. 4.0 GPA, 35 ACT, very similar extra-curriculars and awards – looking to major in CS. How many of those kids can they take of any race?
That may be an issue - but the discussion was about Harvard marking them down for “personality traits” - not about impacted majors - unless wanting to be in CS or math is somehow indicative of a “lesser personality score” .
“personality traits” = blatant racism. no other way around it.
hyper-academic focus of the Asian-American community is not helping matters… says who? lols. apparently a hyper-academic focus of whites is not a problem though?
Universities have been discrminating against Asians for decades in college admissions.
the power structure at selective unis is white and at some level this discrimation against Asians is a way to protect their influence.
reminds me of the acronym for UCLA… united caucasians lost among asians.
When we were younger, for us parents in New York City, UCLA refers to Baruch College (CUNY) – University on the Corner of Lexington Avenue, as in: “I go to UCLA.” lol
The lawsuit claims that Harvard rates applicants on a scaled of 1 to 6 in five categories – academic; extracurricular; athletic; personal; and overall. If you look at the website of nearly any highly selective, holistic college; the website implies that the college considers personal/character criteria in admissions decisions. An example page for Harvard is at https://college.harvard.edu/admissions/application-process/what-we-look . Similarly the CDS for most such colleges mark “Character/personal qualities” as important as test scores, sometimes more important. For example, MIT’s CDS at http://web.mit.edu/ir/cds/2017/c.html marks “Character/personal qualities” as the most important admissions criteria of all – more important than grades, test scores, and everything else. As such, several other colleges besides Havard also include a personality/character in their 1-5/6 ratings, like Harvard does. A few posts back, I linked to a Duke study that showed the average ratings admission readers gave in their “personal qualities” category by race. White students averaged 3.47 while Asian studies averaged 3.43, so a 0.04 difference. URMs averaged ~0.2 lower (lower is worse in Duke ratings), with Black students at 3.24 and Hispanic at 3.25 . This 0.2 ratings difference between URMs and non-URMs, was roughly 0.4 SDs.
Considering character/personal qualities as displayed in LORs, essays, interviews, and the rest of the applications means the college is holistic. It does not mean the college is racist. The fact that different races averaged slightly different ratings by readers is also not inherently racist. The important question is whether the students were deserving of the ratings they received. The lawsuit claims that White students’ average rating in the “personal” category was 0.13 higher than Asian students on the 1-6 scale, with 21% of White students scoring 1-2 compared to 18% of Asian students. It’s not clear from the lawsuit whether the students LORs, essays, and interviews warranted 3% more White students receiving 1-2 than Asian students, but this degree of differences does not scream “racism” to me. What is more suspicious is the lawsuit’s claim about larger differences in specific academic deciles. That is if you look at students of all races who are in the lower academic deciles instead of the full population, then a much smaller portion of these lower academic performing Asian students receive 1-2 than other races. Of course it’s also possible that there Asian students are very under-represented among the lower academic decile applicants, leading to sample group issues. The lawsuit’s data has a lot of missing key numbers, such as the number of students in the key groups, SD of the ratings, how many received other ratings besides 1-2, etc. This makes in difficult to say how significant the difference is.
Its so racist when people ask how many smart Asians can a school take? Its such a racist notion that all Asians are from same race and same ethnicity or have same extracurriculars, religion or aspirations. Amazing Asian American applicants are either waitlisted or rejected no matter if their parents originated from China or India, he likes biology or french, she wants to be a doctor or politician, plays soccer or does musical theater, spends days at tuition center or at local shelter. All are snubbed with same indifference, no matter how different they are,strict quota is enforced at these schools.
I don’t see how its any different than calling all whites racists, all blacks thugs, all Mexicans rapists, all NRA supporters heartless, all republicans homophobics or all Asians tech supports. What’s even more surprising is this not being a new phenomenon,its a fact that jewish Americans were treated the same by these colleges, not so long ago.
