Race not really a factor?

<p>Race really not a factor???
Now, I read on the UC website that when you apply, race is not considered for admission. I believe this sort of affirmative action was banned by California voters in a proposition some years ago. However, in light of recent decisions, I cant see how race did not play a factor. Let me begin…
A good friend of mine, who is white, applied to UCSB and was rejected. He had a 1860 SAT score, passed 2 or 3 AP’s with scores of 3’s and 4’s, had some extra curriculars, though I must admit not that many, in all honors classes throughout high school, and has a 3.6 uc- weighted gpa. Now I know this is not what it takes to automatically be accepted to UCSB or even to call it a safety, but when I found out about other students who got in, I was genuinely surprised. Now there are two girls in my school who did get into UCSB, and they are both Mexican. One of the girls had a 3.7 weighted GPA, a 1420 SAT, only 3 honors/ap classes throughout her high school career, a 520 and a 570 SAT II, and several extra curriculars. Another girl who got in, who is also Mexican, got in with a 1400 SAT, a 3.5 GPA, NO honors/ap classes ever, and sub 500 sat II scores. Now, I’m not a racist, but I can not see how race did not play a factor in the acceptance of the two girls I have mentioned. I know UC’s rely heavily on SAt/GPa, and I believe a difference of 400 is very big. I dont know, I just wanted to see what other people think on the matter. Has anything like this happened to people you know, especially in the UC system? I’m just wondering.</p>

<p>And just for the record, I got into UCSB and will most likely be going there next year.</p>

<p>Yup, Proposition</a> 209.</p>

<p>There's a lot more to admissions than just GPA and SATs. Things like income, family size, ECs, work experience, and especially essays can make a big difference when combined. Each student's level of achievement is judged relative to their environment.</p>

<p>I have to agree with sagaygay's theory on the subject. One can assume if some has "1400 SAT, a 3.5 GPA, NO honors/ap classes ever," that the essay and ec's that accompany that would also be sub par. I feel uc's are hurting themselves by excpeting people who are 'unquie' by things not in their control. Not to say people who had a hard life shouldn't be reward, jjust that examples like this are go against the idea of college being for the "smart"</p>

<p>For the most part no, race really does not matter. That's why UCs have Asians in the 40-50% while only about 12% are Asians in California. However, the "wholistic admissioins" looks suspicious to me. UCLA gets criticized severely for having record-low % of blacks, and next year they adopt "wholistic admissions"? Seems like it could be a loophole for proposition 209. But on the whole I don't believe it plays a role.</p>

<p>Race doesn't matter when being admitted, however, it matters for a whole host of other issues. Being black or "Mexican" will not guarantee you admissions into any schools based on that alone. An African American or Hispanic individual living in a middle class neighborhood and attending a fairly decent school cannot possibly expect to pull the race card as a reason for low test scores/GPA. </p>

<p>However, as one would imagine, the term African American or Hispanic tends to lead one to think of more working class families, since a disproportionate amount of the population of these races is in that situation. With that status, an African American or Hispanic applicant will be able to have into play low income status, first to go to college status, 4th/5th quintile school quality status, minor life-changing event status (more than likely able to be played out), and certain amount of those small points that normal people can't take when the UC's do comprehensive review.</p>

<p>I agree, vicissitudes. I think the new holistic admissions approach is a direct response to the criticism UCLA has been receiving.</p>