<p>"sn’t it currently illegal to do that? "</p>
<p>I don’t know. I do know that what is legal and what is right don’t always mesh though.</p>
<p>Please read this entire paragraph, it’s not as empty as the next sentence will make it seem. Florida says that it uses many factors to admit applicants. Your data shows the the average URM applicant scores lower than the average Asian applicant. It also shows that the average admitted student of each race scores higher than the average rejected student of the same race. If the average applicant of all races does comparably well in the other factors influencing admission, you would expect that a wide range of applicants from each racial group would be accepted. The SAT factor, when combined with the other factors, would result in both (a) a larger gap between the accepted and rejected SAT scores within the lower-scoring group and (b) a higher overall acceptance rate for the higher-scoring group.</p>
<p>Both of these are shown to be true in your data. Of course, it’s possible that AA is happening. It’s also possible that it’s not.</p>
<p>
You might do a bit better on the GMAT if you knew what “mutually exclusive” meant.</p>
<p>Ok finally you are starting to show me some other information other than those scores in a vacuum. Now that wasn’t so hard was it?</p>
<p>Now as to your thread, look at how many people complain that it was their GPAs and not being in the top 10% that hurt them. Oh yea, that was most of them (also lots of out of staters). A kid with 1020 who was val, who wasn’t a minority got admitted. Isn’t that lower than the SAT average for URMs? For obvious reasons, URMs who went to more disadvantaged schools could get higher rank with lower SAT scores. If you don’t like UF treating rank as so important. Email them, but don’t blame it on AA. My state school claims to have holistic admissions as well, somehow almost everyone with over a 1800/2400 at my high school manages to be admitted…funny how that works right? </p>
<p>With all these variables that you can’t account for it’s ludicrous to assume a 137 point gap on the SATs is due to AA, alone or in part.</p>
<p>Find me a case of a Florida resident with above a 1400 and good grades (top 10%) who gets rejected. You still didn’t do that.</p>
<p>
Let me see if I understand this correctly. </p>
<p>Recruited athletes in major sports at DI schools (like UF) often lack strong academic qualifications, and would not qualify for admission on the basis of test scores or GPAs alone.</p>
<p>Yet it’s not unfair and unjust to give recruited athletes free tuition and “a good salary” – when they don’t even deserve admission ?</p>
<p>^^
Well, yes you’re right. Even schools like Harvard offer free tuition to employees and don’t force them to go through admissions. If you are contributing value to a college, then free tuition should be part of the total compesation package. The athaletes contribute more value at a school like UF than nearly ALL employees, o I say based on THAT cruteria, they desearve to go to class if they choose.</p>
<p>Morsmordre: A white girl at my school with a 2100 SAT I (1400 CR/M), 4.1 UF GPA, and two or three leads in theater productions was rejected, while an African American girl with around a 1700 SAT and 3.8 GPA was admitted.</p>
<p>Tom you’re getting mostly personal attacks because A)we’re not debating the merits of AA even though you think we are, B) you can’t rigorously prove anything.</p>
<p>Your link underscores my point not yours. 12.5% of those with over a 2100 got rejected as well as 15% with over a 4.0 weighted. That seems very stats based to me. Remember that some kids with 2100+'s did not get good grades and those that got good grades could have gotten poor SAT’s. Remember that many of those rejected were OOS who applied too late. When you take that into consideration it seems that it would take something exceptional (in a bad way) for an academically qualified in state student to get rejected.</p>
<p>noreally look at the link tom provided. Your friend was really, really unlucky if shes IS. 12.5% of people get rejected with over a 2100 and only 15% get rejected with over a 4.0 weighted. To be in the intersection of that group as an in stater is bad news bears (barring bad recs of course) The African American girl had at least a 35% chance of getting in as per the charts, which is pretty good. Furthermore, most UF students who get admitted have SAT scores in her range as per the charts.</p>
<p>About 1550 students with a 2100/2400 (~1400/1600) students, or about 12.5% in this category were flat out rejected for the current freshman class. I will try to get the data on who these are, but I am concluding from the data that NONE of them are URM’s. </p>
<p>[University</a> of Florida - Admissions](<a href=“http://www.admissions.ufl.edu/ugrad/frprofile.html]University”>Freshman - How To Apply - University of Florida)
The funny thing is that since I started making this my “pet project” last year, I’ve contacted the president, the PR rep and the head of UF admissions. This year, the SAT score jumped over 30 points mostly due to removing from the bottom and adding to the top. It might be coincadence, it prob. is, but I am still left wondering why the sudden shift in admissions policy.</p>
<p>tomslawsky: My guess would be a desire to move up in the rankings.</p>
<p>Im not debating the merits of AA in general, I am talking specifically about AA as practiced or not practiced by UF.</p>
<p>Paying athletes would be legal but they wouldn’t be allowed to play in the NCAA which makes it defacto illegal as long as they remain college athletics “governing” body.</p>
<p>"You might do a bit better on the GMAT if you knew what “mutually exclusive” meant. "</p>
<p>I stand corrcted- thank you. That may actually help my verbal score. I should say just plane old independant of one and other :)</p>
<p>Looking at the data that you posted the average SAT score of a Black admit is 1187 roughly 1800/2400. Right? And this was a few years ago and since then Florida has become more selective. Kids with SAT scores from 1600-1950 have an admit rate of 37.7% in 2009. Seeing as the 1800 is closer to the 1950 than to the 1600 the admit rate of kids with these scores should easily be well over 50% especially from 2004-2006. Right? When you take into account worse socioeconomic status this goes up even higher. That was easy. Sorry to debunk your pet project in a day :/</p>
<p>
Are you sure? Have you checked the Tuition Assistance Program (TAP) [url=<a href=“http://www.employment.harvard.edu/benefits/pdf/tapbooklet.pdf]booklet[/url”>http://www.employment.harvard.edu/benefits/pdf/tapbooklet.pdf]booklet[/url</a>] for Harvard employees? </p>
<p>In fact, Harvard does offer steep (90%) discounts to employees who take Harvard courses – but there’s a huge caveat: in general, they only allow employees to do so on a non-degree basis. For example, the TAP booklet states the following for employees who might want to take courses in the undergraduate program at Harvard College:</p>
<p>
I think you’ll find that other private schools have similar policies. </p>
<p>
So a basketball team “contributes value” to a college, but racial diversity (in a racially diverse state) does not?</p>
<p>“Your link underscores my point not yours. 12.5% of those with over a 2100 got rejected as well as 15% with over a 4.0 weighted. That seems very stats based to me. Remember that some kids with 2100+'s did not get good grades and those that got good grades could have gotten poor SAT’s. Remember that many of those rejected were OOS who applied too late. When you take that into consideration it seems that it would take something exceptional (in a bad way) for an academically qualified in state student to get rejected.”</p>
<p>Ypu’re making a lot of assumptions here that you can’t prove and that I just don’t agree with. But, I don’t have the data to prove it either. This seems the sticking point between us, so I will just leave it alone for now. I do highly doubt that ANY ONE applicant of the 1500+, 12.5% was an URM though.</p>
<p>“So a basketball team “contributes value” to a college, but racial diversity (in a racially diverse state) does not?”</p>
<p>Ugh, that statement is correct. I define adding value as adding “economic value” ie- revenue. That can be quantified.</p>
<p>Oh I doubt many of them were URMs either. I’d bet there were a few Hispanics, probably no Blacks seeing as not even 1500 Blacks score that high on the SATs. That I agree with, which is to be expected. URMs with scores that high are easily in the running for admissions at tippy-top schools so they likely wouldn’t be that concerned with Florida. </p>
<p>I’m just saying that some of those kids with high SAT scores who were rejected didn’t get high grades-look at your thread for real life proof. Obviously some of the applicants were OOS, you can’t disagree there. And probably a few of those applicants had personal attributes that would make them undesirable on any competitive universities college campus such as cheating, trouble, bad essays, bad recs, not doing anything else in school, etc. So that 1500+ really isn’t that large in the grand scope of things. I would be surprised if it were less!</p>
<p>You have to ask yourself this, how many of the kids admitted with below 2100s were white and asian. I’d argue most of the kids below 2100were white and asian. So these kids with stellar SATs got defeated in spite of it, not because of it.</p>
<p>
But defining “added value” solely as “revenue” is not necessarily appropriate for a non-profit institution, such as UF. A non-profit institution – by definition – has goals other than maximizing economic value. </p>
<p>Granted, your definition might be appropriate for other schools, such as the University of Phoenix.</p>
<p>This is not the place for this discussion. Moderators need to move this.</p>
<p>"Looking at the data that you posted the average SAT score of a Black admit is 1187 roughly 1800/2400. Right? And this was a few years ago and since then Florida has become more selective. Kids with SAT scores from 1600-1950 have an admit rate of 37.7% in 2009. Seeing as the 1800 is closer to the 1950 than to the 1600 the admit rate of kids with these scores should easily be well over 50% especially from 2004-2006. Right? "</p>
<p>That’s OK, but there was no debunking going on here. I am comparing SAT scores across different groups at a snapshot in time. The fact is this:</p>
<p>At the time of this data, there was over a 200 point differential in SAT scores of admitted Black students and Asians, with other groups lining up nicely in neat bundles. For apples to apples here, one needs to compare the snapshots.</p>
<p>"When you take into account worse socioeconomic status this goes up even higher. That was easy. Sorry to debunk your pet project in a day 
"</p>
<p>We disagree again, bacause when I see the term "socioeconomic status ", I see another term for Affirmative Acion. It is just less inflamatory. Who do you think most benefits from this policy. I’ve said it before and I will say it again, if a person, whether white, black, asian or whatever wants to do better on their SAT’s then they can go to the FREE library and take out a book. I scored an 810 on my SAT’s, but guess what? I simply set my sights on the best college I could get into. I didn’t feel like a victim and feel like I was owed Cornell when I desearved SUNY Oswego, even though I know I am more than smart enough for Cornell. I also learned that some of the smartest people can be found wandering the “B” colleges, even though in the aggregate, the higher the SAT (GRE, LSAT, GMAT, MCAT) score, the smarter the student body. You can also get a great education from many of the colleges regullarly bashed in this board.</p>
<p>Fast Forward to grad school-I WANTED higher GRE score and GMAT scores, so I borrowed books from the library over and over and studied my butt off to break the 1250 GRE and 700+ GMAT barriers. I bought USED books for under 10 bucks and disected the problems. On the GRE , I scored good enough for a Masters degree in chemistry at South Florida, so I went there and studied hard. For my MBA, I wanted a better school, so I studied even harder for the GMAT. Scoring high on the SAT can be done by those with the ability and drive. If I had got into business or grad school on anything other than my merits, it would have felt kind of shallow. </p>
<p>I don’t think the “race” box has any place on a college application. Just the fact that it is there is at minimum, fodder for somwonw somewhere along the way to exercize racial discrimination. If a college wants to ask, for statistical reasons, then they should ask the question AFTER the admissions cycle has ended.</p>
<p>Off soap box now :)</p>