I agree 100%.
4 Likes
In the Bay Area, parents I know push their kids to take APs outside of school solely for the sake of taking “as many APs as possible”. I try to tell them that they are going about it all wrong, and that simply taking more APs does not demonstrate intellectual vitality. How about using the time to get involved in actual scholarship (eg, research with a professor at a local university). They blow that off and say, “well they can do that too”. I argue, no way, not enough hours in the day to be an excellent student (maximizing the HS resources) + APs at other locations + demonstrate significant impact outside of school… Where do I go wrong here?
Should expand the notion of success as beyond the Top 100. How about to happiness? The idea that success is limited to 100 colleges/universities is crazy to me. I know too many young people outside that institution list who are successful to limit what it means to be successful. To me, you give people as much info as you can about opportunities, paths, success stories, happiness, and the opposite as you can and let people make their own decisions. Some people always seem to find the negative.
3 Likes
Im just telling you that this is probably true for many (not all) Asian families and their kids.
You can say it’s a toxic atmosphere and it oftentimes it is (which is why I used the term “crack”) as there are numerous suicides from teenagers who just can’t cope under the immense stress of having to “be the best”. However, you also have to understand that Asians experience very nuanced and subtle racism that non-Asians either don’t understand or dismiss as immaterial.
The term “underrepresented minority” literally means minorities that aren’t Asian.
Why eliminate standardized testing? Limit the amount of Asians at high performing schools and universities (see Lowell, Thomas Jefferson, Stuyvesant, Cal system). “Holistic” policies - limit objective standards because of too many Asians. Bamboo ceiling? Check.
Is mental health important? Yes. Should it play a more prominent role in the Asian community? Yes.
Should Asians bear the brunt of diversity and exclusion standards that are intentionally and purposefully trying to limit their opportunities? According to many people, the answer is also “yes”. But they won’t openly admit that. Instead they try to stress how Asians would also “benefit” from diversity and exclusion. Except the only difference is it usually impacts Asians more in a zero-sum game than everyone other than whites without the white privilege.
Basically the message to Asians is - just be a good person and accept the crumbs you can get. - Until the Supreme Court strikes down Harvard.
9 Likes
You seem very set in your views that discrimination still happens to unhooked Asians in a way that’s different from other unhooked candidates.
Why do you think that is still true, and what would it take to convince you that’s no longer the case?
1 Like
Im not sure what you mean.
Ok, let’s play this game. Who are hooked candidates? Legacy (any race, but usually white). Athletes (any race but predominantly non-Asian). Underrepresented minority (any minority other than Asian). The only category that Asians fits is first generation students.
Who are unhooked candidates? Black and Latino? No. Theyre hooked candidates. Unhooked candidates? White and Asian. Asians are literally lumped in with whites. And we all know Asians aren’t really “students of color” because they face the same privileges as being white??? Really???
The perfect example is this presentation by the president at the University of Maryland. We’re sorry. Ooops. if this had happened to any other ethnic group, there would be demonstrations, sit ins, calls for resignations, etc.
But because it was a mistake only affecting Asians, a simple apology would do. Thanks for playing.
4 Likes
Likewise it doesn’t mean that Stanford has a quota. Thus my question. Apparently some here believe that 25% isn’t as high as it should be, and I am wondering how they reached that conclusion? In other words, what would the percentage be if Stanford didn’t have a quota (soft or hard) and how, exactly, is this number determined? What evidence is there that Harvard and Stanford are intentionally trying to keep the percentage of Asian students down? Is it possible that the stereotype that Asian students are inherently more “qualified" is driving this belief rather than actual facts?
Is it clear? It is not obvious to me that immediately prior to the lawsuit there was a quota (soft or hard) the purpose of which was to limit Asian enrollment. Looking back at Harvard’s CDS forms, starting with the oldest I could find (2007-2008):
- In 2007-2008 (15 years ago) 15.5% of Harvard undergrads were Asian-American.
- In 2012-2013 (10 years ago) 18.9% of Harvard undergrads were Asian-American.
- In 2017-2018) (5 years ago) 20.7% of Harvard undergrads were Asian-American.
- CDS is not available for 2022-23, but last year’s CDS shows 22.8% of Harvard undergrads were Asian-American.
- Over the past two years, when Harvard became test optional and saw a 50% increase in applications, the Asian-American representation of those admitted has increased to over 27%. (According to the argument here, shouldn’t a more holistic admissions policy repress the percentage of Asian-Americans?)
This is also true of unhooked non-Asian students from competitive areas/schools.
I agree with most of the ideas in this post, but think the final comment is worth a discussion.
This comment seems to paint the current admission process as fair and put the burden on those kids. This is a bit overdone. Using the same idea, you can argue that even the significantly underrepresented should not complain unless there’s no one like person admitted. Doesn’t make a lot of sense.
1 Like
Earlier I stated my position that I am against affirmative action and other hooks such as legacy. The only proper admission bump IMO is one based upon low SES, because people should be judged based upon the opportunities they have. I also believe that applicants represent only themselves and should be judged on their individual merits and not things they cannot control (such as legacy or race).
With that out of the way, there’s an important difference between policies intended to discriminate against a specific group, and policies that are not intentionally discriminatory against a group but end up having a disparate impact against the group.
For example, do you believe that colleges should be allowed to recruit for sports? Some of them, such as lacrosse, are played by mostly white applicants. Overall, athletics favors wealthy white families and therefore has a disparate impact against other groups. Likewise, legacy also tends to favor wealthy white applicants.
So even though those two policies tend to favor wealthy white applicants, that’s of no help to the numerous unhooked white applicants. And given tens of thousands of unhooked applicants and less than a thousand spots for unhooked students at an Ivy like Harvard, the odds for unhooked white students are dismal. If you are feeling worse because you are Asian, how exactly are those unhooked white applicants supposed to feel better?
Now the Supreme Court has decided to take the case, and they may decide that disparate impact is illegal. The next year will be interesting.
1 Like
Wrong, they ask us all the time where we are from. And when we tell them that we are from CA, they ask yes, but where are you really from? My kids are white and blue-eyed.
It’s based on accent and other subtle clues. I choose not to interpret those questions as racist, and I find people pretty open minded towards immigrants. I also don’t agree that we are left with the ‘crumbs’. Define ‘crumbs’ - getting in your flagship and not Harvard? Not being competitive for a posiiton on the supreme court?
PS. Both my kids got into T10 universities including several Ivies. They had some natural talents that helped but they also worked hard in HS.
I am not denying your experience, but my experience as an Asian does not seem to match yours and therefore I see this country differently from you (although the direction is worrying).
Also, nobody asks where I am from, despite my appearance, as I have an American accent. People do ask my wife where she is from, as she does not have an American accent.
So they ask your blue eyed white kids where are they from and it’s the same context as when white people ask Asians where are they from?
You say Im wrong based on some anecdotal stories that you and your white kids experience. Ill share the same.
Ive traveled to 45 states and have spoken at numerous regional and national conferences for over 20 years. The number one question I would get was “Where are you from?” When I tell people Im from Texas, they ask me where Im really from?
I say Texas. They say, no, like where are you REALLY from? I tell them an acceptable answer: Im from the same village as Mulan.
2 Likes
I’m actually quite familiar with college admissions in Asia. A few of these countries have a system that’s based on a single entrance exam. Theirs, and the US “holistic” system, are the two opposite extremes. I don’t favor either one. That’s the reason why I prefer the UK system. BTW, the Asian system, despite its reputation, isn’t as stressful as the US system, IMO (I have had first hand knowledge in both).
1 Like
Jchiu, I think you and I can relate on many levels. It is not easy to be an immigrant. We did not have support net, family, friends. We did not understand people around us, their jokes and cultural references, and they did not understand our English. Our college degrees and work experience did not count. Immigration officers looked at us suspiciously when they handed us the visas. This happens to all immigrants.
I just do not think that this is due to race.
Quote from the article:
Wait, what? My wife never got the memo that she was supposed to cringe.
2 Likes
The stressfulness probably has a lot to do with sizes of the most desired universities versus the sizes of the number of high school students who desire those universities. China and India have huge populations, but their most desired universities are not that big (e.g. IITs have only 4,000 to 7,000 undergraduates each). The US population is not as large, but is still large compared to most other countries, and the most desired universities are not that big. Compare to Canada, with 1/9 the population of the US, but whose most desired universities are huge.
With their huge populations (relative to the sizes of their “elite” universities), if China or India were to adopt a US-style “holistic” system, it would unquestionably be even more (and much, much more) stressful than the systems they have now. Think about that.
1 Like
There is a very real difference between blonde-haired blue-eyed immigrants and immigrants of color. Close to half of our country is ideologically aligned with this statement:
“According to the aide, when the group came to discussing immigration from Africa, Trump asked why America would want immigrants from “all these ■■■■■■■■ countries” and that the U.S. should have more people coming in from places like Norway.”
5 Likes
Asian Americans are not the only ones who’ve gone through life being asked that question. It’s a common enough question when meeting someone new.
Where I grew up, the vast majority of white people were second or third generation immigrants. The routine question “where are you from?” actually meant “which European country did your grandparents immigrate from?”, and would be answered that way.
I didn’t realize this until I lived in a part of the country with large numbers of immigrants from not only abroad, but from other parts of the US. When asked where I was from, I’d start to explain my ethnic heritage. Took me a while to figure out they were asking where I myself was born or moved there from.
1 Like
I will be the first to admit that I know very little about college admissions beyond my own child’s recent experience, but about five years ago, I worked in the admissions office at an elite private school (one of the names that I see described as desirable in the college confidential prep school forums).
Perhaps, it will be interesting and helpful to know that certain Asian-American groups were absolutely considered underrepresented minorities by the admissions office for the purposes of trying to increase their numbers at the school. Thus extra consideration was given to the applications of Vietnamese-American, Cambodian-American, Thai-American, Bengali-American, Pakastani-American, and probably other Asian-American groups that I am forgetting. Extra consideration in the application process was also given to all Asian-American applicants of any ethnic group if they were from a low or moderate income family because those families were also underrepresented among our student population.
As I understand it, the admissions office did not consider upper-middle-class and wealthy Chinese, Korean and Indian applicants to be underrepresented because the numbers of such applicants and accepted students was relatively large compared to other Asian-American groups as well as Black and Latino students and low/middle income students of all ethnicities. Still, Chinese, Korean and Indian were considered students of color. They were active participants in various affinity groups and received support services on campus to help them including strong alliances with the other affinity groups given most shared the first generation in private school status as well as the experience of being a minority within a predominantly white and wealthy institution.
It strikes me, reading this conversation that despite all of the above, the (almost entirely white) children of alumni probably had the greatest advantage in the admissions process followed by wealthy and upper-middle-class students of any ethnicity. However, where Chinese, Korean, and Indian students may have felt penalized was becuase we had almost no wealthy and upper-middle-class Black and Latino applicants while we did have quite a few wealthy and upper-middle-class Asian-American applicants. Yet those Asian-Americans mostly did not have the legacy status (though my impression is that has begun to change in the last decade as more Asian graduates have their own children applying to the school where I worked).
How much any of this applies to college process, I am not sure. But it does seem at least somewhat relevant among these broad generalizations that posters are making. And it makes me wonder how many posters really know what goes on in admissions offices.
3 Likes