This Process Has Made Me Racist

College Confidential Community
21

<p>"Diligence should be rewarded, not merit (albeit you would need a minimum)."</p>

<p>Not all URMs are poor, underprivileged victims of fate. And anyway, why should someone be given a place at a top school when they don't meet the usual standards of that school? How are they going to keep up with the qualified students who actually deserve a place there? </p>

<p>I'm an international student so positive discrimination didn't play a role in my rejection from the elite schools. But I do know that if I were an intelligent, qualified and dedicated American student who had been rejected from these schools, while other less qualified candidates (who <em>happen</em> to be URMs) were getting in, I would feel pretty sore about it. Before looking to have a 'diverse' class, adcoms should select those students who meet or exceed the typical standards of the school. From these students, select those who will contribute to the diversity of the student body. And when I say diversity, I'm not just talking about racial diversity. How about diversity of ideas? Of interests? Of talents? Aren't those things more important than something as superficial as the colour of one's skin / one's ethnic origins?</p>

<p>And by the way, I'm not white - my origins are Indian, Portuguese and African.</p>

22

<p>Guyomar: The fact is that the top schools have 1000s upon 1000s of applicants which exceed the school requirements, who add to diversity in terms beyond ethinicity (ideas, interests, leadership, musical accomplishment, athletic accomplishment, scientific achievement). Due to the multiple applicants of each category, the adcoms can really carve the student body they want. Since that happens already, then it would seem that you agree with my point.</p>

<p>I'm just bothered by the OPs point to only look at URMs and blame them. My alma mater accepted the gold medalist in Olympic singles skating a few years back. She had also been accepted at our biggest rival school too. She wasn't a URM and I don't know her "stats" -- was she a legitimate admit? Does her white skin make the OP less suspicious of her qualifications or whether her slot should have gone to another kid? I wonder. I think she adds quite a bit to campus life and I only can assume she's academically qualified.</p>

23

<p>I also find that some people try to downplay academic achievement. They say that a 'good' student is so much more than a stellar academic record, excellent test scores, etc. I don't understand this reasoning.</p>

<p>A person doesn't build a fine academic record by lazing around. Excellent grades indicate determination, dedication and at least moderate intelligence. I think that people who have done extremely well in their courses deserve recognition. I see no sense in admitting someone who has average grades, hasn't shown any sign of progress or commitment, and rejecting another applicant who always strives to better himself and does very well. You can say what you like - we're looking for personality, character, something 'intangible'....yeah, very good. Look for that once you've selected the students who meet the level of a typical student at your school. But no... reserve places for the URMs (whether they are qualified or not) to promote yor image, for the famous to boost your reputation, and for the wealthy to line your pockets.</p>

<p>There's nothing wrong with encouraging and promoting excellence in music, sports, the arts, etc as well as academic achievement. There's nothing wrong with wanting a mix of cultures and racial groups on campus. As long as these students have demonstrated they will be able to cope with the academic rigor of the institution and are dedicated/perseverant. Well, that's what I think. That's what a truly great university is to me. That's my ideal.</p>

<p>I used to think an elite university was a place for the brightest students to get together, be taught by fine professors and develop their talents inside and outside the classroom. I believed it was an instituion with the #1 priority being academic excellence. Obviously it isn't. There are very clever people in the elite schools BUT....not all intelligent people will go to an elite school and not all people who went to an elite school are intelligent. I will always remember that.</p>

24

<p>T26E4, I don't think that anyone is saying that every URM is not deserving of his/her place. But some of us think that giving preference to less than qualified URMs is unfair. That's all. I'm sure there are plenty of people who also think that letting in athletic superstars who aren't strong academically or legacies is unfair too.</p>

<p>Having said that, it's also true that we shouldn't generalize...Not every URM/legacy/athlete is underqualified. I've met and spoken to people who fall into one or more of these categories and have been to elite universities, but whom I admire because they also happen to be very bright people. Sure, they had an advantage in the selection process because of these factors, but since they're smart, I don't find it unfair at all. Like you said, there are a great many talented people applying to these schools and therefore there has to be something to differentiate between them other than their academic transcripts. And I really admire people who are intelligent, do well in their field of study, AND a sport / other activity. That certainly is most impressive. In fact, I find it exemplary.</p>

<p>Once again - what I find unjust and infuriating is seeing a wonderful applicant being turned down in favour of someone who is NOT academically talented but has a 'hook'.</p>

25

<p>There's absolutely no evidence that unqualified minorities are getting into top colleges. Indeed, the graduation rates of URMs from top schools are virtually the same as are the graduation rates of whites and Asians from top colleges. If you want to see the data, check "The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education," and you can find on-line articles showing the graduation rates.</p>

<p>Virtually all top U.S. universities use more than grades and scores to select students to admit. They are able to do this because the overwhelming majority of their applicants qualify for admission. Consequently, places like HPYS are able to choose from among an exemplary group of applicants the ones that would create the most well rounded campus possible.</p>

<p>"Well rounded' means having the most diverse class possible including race, ethnicity, religion, country of origion, state and region of origin, socio economic classes, sexual identification, political leanings, and extracurricular and academic interests and talents.</p>

<p>It's just as ridiculous and probably wrong to say that unqualified URMs are getting into top colleges as it is to say that unqualified athletes, bassonists, farmers' kids or millionaire legacies are getting into top colleges. The overwhelming majority of students of any race who enter top colleges graduate from the college that they entered. Those who do not typically transferred to another top college.</p>

26

<p>I am a TA at a very good school. Asians, Whites and URM are represented at all spectrum on the grade scale. I have found a lot of White and Asians at the bottom of the class(% wise). The top students in my classes have significantly being white females.</p>

27

<p>"Indeed, the graduation rates of URMs from top schools are virtually the same as are the graduation rates of whites and Asians from top colleges. If you want to see the data, check "The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education," and you can find on-line articles showing the graduation rates."</p>

<p>Only at grade-inflated colleges. As we all know, grade-inflation tends to mask distinctions between students. If the median of a class is curved to an A-, you'd have to score 2 std. dev's below the median (roughly in the bottom 3%) to actually fail the class. But I think we can all agree that a student who is scoring consistently in the bottom 2-3% of his class is not learning very much. But, hey, he gets to graduate from Harvard anyway. What we need is for colleges to release average GPA's by race. </p>

<p>BTW: What are the URM vs. ORM graduation rates at Michigan, Berkeley, and Cornell?</p>

28

<p>If you can graduate from Harvard, i'm guessing you're learning a heck of a lot and are significantly smarter than an overwhelming majority of people, regardless of your race or anything else. </p>

<p>When you deal with top schools, particularly HYPS, they're so prestigious that they can select the class from a gigantic pool of students more than qualified to handle the work load, and at that point any choice they make is a good one. Part of what makes them so prestigious and "top colleges", what makes everybody aim to go there is their diverse learning environment. </p>

<p>If you're using the fact that you feel that you were entitled to go to a college over a URM and that the system is "promoting racist thoughts", then you were already racist to begin with. By recruiting the best and brightest URMs, perhaps colleges hope to expose students who have probably never met a URM as complex or extraordinary because many other students come from elite prep school with a very low proportion of URMs. If somebody feels superior to URM students and uses that to justify their racist ideas, then they probably aren't the kind of students a top college wants.</p>

<p>No, not all URMs are poor or underprivileged, but obviously that's not the only defense or else colleges would consider only socioeconomic status instead. They seek high-achieving URMs because it adds an element of diversity desirable to them and it helps advance them in society together. This is important because society places a huge emphasis on race as an element of identity; maybe not you who go to private school notice it as much, but i go to a public school where you can really see the views of the other 99% of america. </p>

<p>What are you trying to prove norcal? that Blacks or Hispanics aren't as able to handle college as ORMs? The graduation rates of URMs vs ORMs at top colleges is virtually identical. If you wan't to compare where URMs fall in a class, then exclude all those underprivileged who didn't have the opportunity to load up on APs and college courses in high school. Then separate all those who went to private and prep schools from those who went to public school. Their probably won't be much of a difference in performance as far as grades are concerned. </p>

<p>But besides that grades aren't the only measure of college success. What you add to the environment, how you contribute, and how well you take advantage of the amazing resources provided and build life skills essential for a successful future. Those are true measures of college success. So just because one student gets better grades or test scores doesn't mean they would have been a better student. And because these things are all impossible to determine w/o meeting a student, a top colleges best bet is to seek diversity and what is best for the college environment and society as a whole.</p>

29

<p>Boo hoo poor victim.</p>

30

<p>yawn.
you bore me.
this post is presumptuous especially coming from someone w/ a username like yours.</p>

<p>
[quote]
So, do you feel the same anger at white or Asian legacies, athletes or offspring or large donors who were accepted at top colleges? What about white or Asians who got a tip for having a strong background in a major that needs students? What about males of any race who got tips into LACs because LACs are desperate to find males willing to attend them?</p>

<p>You need to face facts: The college process didn't make you racist. You always have been racist, but are using college applications as a reason to find your racism acceptable.

[/quote]

Haha, so true. You just got shut down.</p>

31

<p>From the Journal of Blacks in Higher Education"
"For many years Harvard University, traditionally one of the nation’s strongest supporters of affirmative action, has produced the highest black student graduation rate of any college or university in the nation. But for some unexplained and possibly immaterial reason, Harvard slipped to second place in 2004. But now the 2006 data shows Harvard’s black student graduation rate has increased to 95 percent, once again the highest among U.S. colleges and universities.</p>

<p>Amherst College, the small liberal arts college in western Massachusetts, now has a black student graduation rate of 94 percent, the second highest in the nation. Williams College, Wellesley College, and Princeton University also post a black student graduation rate of 94 percent. Four other highly ranked colleges and universities in the United States posted a black student graduation rate of 90 percent or above. They are Brown University, Washington University, Stanford University, and Yale University.</p>

<p>Twelve other high-ranking institutions have a black student graduation of 86 percent or above. They are Dartmouth College, Columbia University, Duke University, Hamilton College, Northwestern University, Rice University, Smith College, Swarthmore College, the University of Virginia, the University of Pennsylvania,Wake Forest University, and Wesleyan University."</p>

<p>At Macalester, Smith, Pomona, Wellesley and Mount Holyoke, the black student graduation rate is higher than is the white student graduation rate.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.jbhe.com/preview/winter07preview.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.jbhe.com/preview/winter07preview.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

32

<p>
[quote]
You may have worked hard and have gotten better results. But can you think of them? What are some of the things that they've gone through? Probably an education is worth very little to what they've experienced in life. Some of them defied expectations, pushed the limits, and worked possibly harder than you. Have you ever thought of that? Diligence should be rewarded, not merit (albeit you would need a minimum).

[/quote]

Many URMs that get into college arent the ones that struggled through inner city school but rather blacks from rich families who got a lucky 1-up.</p>

33

<p>AA should be based on socioeconomics. Every state should folllow Michigan and ban racially based AA.</p>

34

<p>The real question is, if these schools have such horrible admissions standards and practices, leading to an "inferior" class, why do people continue to apply and then whine afterward? Sorry, but I wouldn't be interested in a school with no method for maintain some sort of diversity. Obviously this is working for them if their application numbers continue to rise. </p>

<p>It's difficult for me to believe statements about what "many" or "most" of these URM admits may have faced. There is really no way to say that and we don't know what their life is like or what they've had to overcome, or what made them stand out. Not every URM is admitted. Some people seem to have some crazy idea that this is the case. </p>

<p>
[quote]
But I do know that if I were an intelligent, qualified and dedicated American student who had been rejected from these schools, while other less qualified candidates (who <em>happen</em> to be URMs) were getting in, I would feel pretty sore about it.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I suppose I could say I have tried my best at dedication, and I am fairly intelligent. I do not, however, perceive myself as inherently more "qualified" than anyone else was. If I didn't get in, and they did, it's pretty obvious they were the more "qualified" ones in this particular game, no? The truth is, there is no use in feeling sore about anything. Tens of thousands of kids got rejected from these schools. This is not personal. This is not really unfair either. There's no fairness involved because no one is really owed anything here. They admit who they want. If they didn't want me, well, that's the way it is.</p>

35

<p>First of all, most definitions of racism focus on the belief that one racism is inherently superior than another. I'm not sure the poster has even indicated as such. </p>

<p>Secondly, the worst part of AA, in my eyes is the lack of respect given to the people who could have gotten into the college even without the AA benefit.</p>

36

<p>
[quote]
From the Journal of Blacks in Higher Education"
"For many years Harvard University, traditionally one of the nation’s strongest supporters of affirmative action, has produced the highest black student graduation rate of any college or university in the nation. But for some unexplained and possibly immaterial reason, Harvard slipped to second place in 2004. But now the 2006 data shows Harvard’s black student graduation rate has increased to 95 percent, once again the highest among U.S. colleges and universities.</p>

<p>Amherst College, the small liberal arts college in western Massachusetts, now has a black student graduation rate of 94 percent, the second highest in the nation. Williams College, Wellesley College, and Princeton University also post a black student graduation rate of 94 percent. Four other highly ranked colleges and universities in the United States posted a black student graduation rate of 90 percent or above. They are Brown University, Washington University, Stanford University, and Yale University.</p>

<p>Twelve other high-ranking institutions have a black student graduation of 86 percent or above. They are Dartmouth College, Columbia University, Duke University, Hamilton College, Northwestern University, Rice University, Smith College, Swarthmore College, the University of Virginia, the University of Pennsylvania,Wake Forest University, and Wesleyan University."</p>

<p>At Macalester, Smith, Pomona, Wellesley and Mount Holyoke, the black student graduation rate is higher than is the white student graduation rate.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.jbhe.com/preview/winter07preview.html%5B/url%5D%5B/quote%5DAll"&gt;http://www.jbhe.com/preview/winter07preview.html

[/quote]
All</a> this indicates is that black graduation rate is, on average, less than white graduation rates. </p>

<p>Asians have higher graduation rates than whites, who have higher graduation rates than blacks. These are called facts.</p>

37

<p>edited for douple post</p>

38

<p>"Aren't those things more important than something as superficial as the colour of one's skin / one's ethnic origins?"</p>

<p>Guyomar, skin and ethnicity still matters however sad this may be, and you and I both know it even though you choose to casually gloss over it.</p>

<p>Several good points have already been made, but I just wanted to throw this in as well: URM status is correlated to lower socioeconomic strata. What this means concretely is -</p>

<ol>
<li><p>Less time for homework, EC's, etc.
Weaker economic safety net for a family equals more burden for high-school aged children to contribute, be it in the form of part-time jobs, domestic chores, or baby-sitting. This leaves less room to focus on academia.</p></li>
<li><p>Less money for prep.
No tutors; no prep classes; no money for the kind of equipment (ranging from basic utensils to an internet connection) most middle- to upperclass students take for granted using to succeed.</p></li>
<li><p>Less cultural capital.
If your parents lack familiarity with academia or the system in general, they will NOT be able to advise you; help you out with homework; elbow their way through the admissions process for you. This might be one of the primary reasons some URM groups are very, very underrepresented in higher education overall, while others aren't - education may seem a lost dream for many groups who never got a chance to, collectively, feel comfortable navigating the educational system to begin with.</p></li>
<li><p>Less prestigeous elementaries and high schools don't help.
It's a fact that the most prestigeous universities take less metric values into account, which is exactly what the OP is complaining about when assuming his high scores entitles him to a spot -- yet, these same institutions STILL accept extremely high rates of students from private, predominantly affluent white, prep schools. If someone could find and post the precise numbers here, that'd be great.</p></li>
<li><p>Higher education is still to this day shaped by, and for, the white affluent elite. The older generation of academia still suffer from white manosis; Eurocentrism still remains rampant; preferred EC's at elite colleges still reflect upper-class sports. In numerous indirect and institutionalized ways, higher education is still to this day set up for URM's to adapt to the white academic culture or fail. In some ways, AA makes up for this - but then again, to give some spots, you have to take some. Spots which, I may add, have unfairly been biased towards privileging NON-URM's for a very, very long time.</p></li>
</ol>

39

<p>This thread bring up one of my big problems with AA policies.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Several good points have already been made, but I just wanted to throw this in as well: URM status is correlated to lower socioeconomic strata. What this means concretely is -

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Ok, the idea is that people that are socioeconomically disadvantaged have less opportunities. I completely agree, but why shift to a secondary indicator of this. I fully support admissions taking students accomplishments into the context of what was available at their school and in their community. They have this information. I understand that statistics show that a URM might be more likely to be disadvantaged, but this is not always the case. AA policies are racist in my mind because they make sweeping generalizations. "Black and hispanics are poor and never have the same opportunities." Some are but some caucasian and asian students have additional hurdles also. Some URM come from wealthy, private high schools. Sweeping generalizations based on skin color are racist, regardless of whether they have negative or positive short term consequences for the race in question. </p>

<p>The other point this brings up is that such policies sometimes put the accomplishments of URM students into doubt. People (such as the OP) see URM students and believe that they are less qualified to be there. In all honesty, he/she has every right to do so as long as there are lower admissions standards based on race.</p>

<p>Let's not give people reasons to be racist. I honestly feel that the only way to stop racism in this country is to truely treat people the same regardless of skin color. If socioeconomic disadvantage needs to be taken into account then take it into account, but don't take the easy way out by making sweeping generalizations based on skin color.</p>

40

<p>I agree with frrrph. Also, unless you have access to another family's FAFSA you really don't know what their economic situation may be. They can dress like you, wear the same shoes and still be struggling in ways you would never know about. Try discussing whether Imus should have been fired with a black school mate and then tell me race doesn't matter.</p>