That’s good to hear, and in fact most people I know would agree with you. I wasn’t trying to imply that everyone encounters such scenarios, merely acknowledging that they do exist.
I have gotten memos about things I should be aggrieved about, when in fact I am not. 
Yes. There’s actually a term for it - the perpetual foreigner. Not sure my kids will experience it because they don’t look 100% Asian.
Back to the topic. My daughter will be looking at U Mich, Rice, Univ of Texas, Williams, Amherst, and Georgetown with some safeties thrown in. What are our chances given their 1/2 Asian identity??? Unhooked. 100% fully funded.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/20/opinions/asian-american-racism-violence-wellness/index.html
If she has top 6% class rank and is a Texas resident, she should be in at University of Texas at Austin, although not necessarily into the more competitive majors.
The other University of Texas campuses have less difficult automatic admission criteria.
So whether she has to “try harder” for University of Texas depends on her current class rank and which campus she wants, and whether she wants a more competitive major.
Way back in post 161, I showed what the percentages would be under the various models. Model 4, which considered race, resulted in an 18% Asian population, closely matching the 19% actual of the time. Model 3, which did not consider race, predicted a 26% Asian population, closely matching what it is today.
Again, I don’t think it is a coincidence. I believe that the lawsuit forced Harvard to revisit its procedures to see what is defendable even while it asserted publicly that it had done nothing wrong. For example, Harvard explicitly changed the guidance on the personal rating, stating something to the effect that quiet and introverted applicants should be given as much consideration as extroverted applicants.
So even if they were less welcoming at the time, shouldn’t we celebrate the improvement?
Out of state unfortunately. Also, potential business major and McCombs is really tough.
Our best shot may be Rice because wife is legacy.
Not sure how much that helps because unlike some schools, only 4% of Rice students are legacies. Not sure if that’s because Rice alums’ children dont want to attend or they don’t consider legacy as strongly as other schools.
Rice is one of those schools (among many) that kids apply to when they don’t get accepted ED to an Ivy. I think their yield rate is lower than many other Top 20 schools.
Im sure many kids from Lowell apply every year (my best shot at staying on topic)
Note that Michigan is prohibited from considering race in admissions.
Non-Texas residents should consider UT Austin a reach, since most spots are taken up by Texas residents meeting the automatic admission class rank criterion.
Some of these schools are good choices for over represented minorities.
I don’t think the bar is set higher for a full pay domestic child who ticks both white and (East?) Asian boxes at UM or Georgetown or Williams. Based on reading through a great many Reddit reports and real life anecdotes.
Can’t speak for Williams but I looked at schools that were “stingy” for aid because we were able to pay.
I have never been to Texas. Here in the Bay Area, people from Asian descent are not being discriminated against. The best high schools are 50 to 90% Asians – neighborhoods with house prices starting at 2 million dollars. I don’t know exact statistics for the Ivies but Asian kids from our high school get accepted in very high numbers to UC Berkely and UCLA.
I work for a large tech company. The percentage of Asian employees is very high at all levels including upper management. There are whole departments that hire almost exclusively Asians.
My daughter initially wanted to look at California schools (UCLA. Berkeley) but not sure if that’s realistic because Im not sure if our HS has ever sent someone to either schools. I live in New England (I hate New England). Top kids typically will attend Ivy, a lot go to LAC because there are so many in New England and the surrounding areas.
Obviously all the schools are reaches but the top California ones seem even more so. She’s #2 in her class, 4.0 UW, blah blah blah. Similar stats as probably half the kids on this site (and the kids from Lowell)
Good luck to your daughter!
UCB has a business major, but it is competitive secondary admission. Students intending business usually apply for L&S as frosh. Recent frosh admission rates for the highest HS GPA ranges appear to be in the 30-40% range.
UCLA does not have a business major, although it does have a business economics major. That also requires secondary admission. Recent frosh admission rates are probably similar to UCB.
If you’re full pay, and are willing to pay out of state tuition for the CA publics, she should go for it. I don’t know much about business majors but the CA publics love their out of state students and the tuition they bring.
Oh wait! There’s something about new legislation that will limit out of state students starting soon. I’ll let @ucbalumnus or someone else pitch in because I’m foggy on the details right now.
Good luck to your daughter! What an exciting time (please don’t be stressed 
)
Congratulations on your daughters achievements and wishing her good luck. While this isn’t a chance thread I would caution you that Williams and Amherst are probably the “reachiest” on your list if she doesn’t apply ED. As you know at the tier of schools you are talking about it won’t be a matter of her grades or scores but her ability to stand out amongst kids with similar grades and stats.
Once again good luck.
There is a way to get into UCB Haas as a freshman through the Global Management Program. Students receive a B. Sc. in Business Administration. Acceptance rate is 7-8% but probably priority is given to in-state
The GMP is a freshman-admit program with a mandatory study abroad component during the Fall of freshman year, additional project-based travel opportunities and a cohorted class experience. Students in the GMP will be part of a cohort experience focused primarily on business from a global perspective and building foundational knowledge and experience to become a global leader. The GMP is unique in that it encourages students to adopt new ways of thinking about what it means to be a global citizen and leader through study abroad and additional language and cultural fluency requirements.
I agree. That’s why I want to visit Michigan in the summer, Rice next spring and Williams/Amherst in the winter.
My biggest concern is she’ll fall in love with those LAC schools when they are super reaches for everyone. My niece and nephew go to Amherst (my Brother in law is a legacy) - got in just under the wire before they cut off legacies.
I really wanted my nephew to get an autograph from Harrison Ford since his son and my nephew are classmates at Amherst but he said no.
Rice is also a reach for most people as well but we can apply ED, she is a legacy, so chances may be slightly higher.
The other schools are reaches but maybe not as much.
Your daughter wants to look at BBA programs? I missed it if you said that. If so, business related ECs add a lot to her app and with her rank and presumably high SAT, I would apply to (all direct admit) - Wharton, Cornell, gtown, notre dame, mich Ross, IU Kelley, UNC, Miami. EA wherever possible. USC.
And ones with non direct admit, UVA, Emory.
Altering admissions requirements isn’t necessarily lowering the bar, and an increase the number of applicants is not necessarily an indication that the “bar” has been lowered. Rather, more applicants can be an indication that a wider net has been cast to pull in a larger number of qualified applicants from which to choose. If anything, more qualified applicants for the same number of spots would tend to raise the bar, not lower the bar (whatever that means). If this is what is happening, it may be why we are seeing so much disappointment and frustration from those (including Asians) who think they are qualified for elite schools based on past patterns, yet fail to gain admission.
For example, the following study (previously linked by @Data10) documents (among other things) that many or most of low-income high achieving high school students do not apply to elite colleges. A change in admissions requirements/approach that reaches this (or any other) untapped pool of highly qualified students would mean that there would be more highly qualified applicants from which colleges could choose and more students from existing pools would be squeezed out. Yes, there would be more applicants and the admissions rates would further decrease, but so long as the total number of highly qualified applicants increases for the same number of spots, then market forces would suggest that if anything the be would be raised, not lowered.
The study also documents other patterns relevant to this thread, such as the concentration of highly qualified students (low and high income) who do apply to elite schools in certain geographic regions and schools, and the over-qualification of these students relative to the mean. While the study doesn’t get into it, this (and not necessarily race) may be driving the relative higher scores from Asian students who are overrepresented in such areas.
How do you reconcile the following statistics with your insistence that the the UK system is more “merit based” than the US system. Are Briitsh-Asian students woefully lacking compared to their American counterparts? Or is there something else going on here?
Harvard Class of 2017 (from lawsuit data)
Oxford (2017)
@CFP – as recently as this admissions cycle, I know Asian American kids (not FGLI) who applied for, and received, invitations for diversity fly-ins at the more Northern NESCACS. And were admitted without having anything stellar in their records. Your chikd might want to explore that if LACs are truly of interest. It will mean staying in loathesome New England, however! 
I usually feel a lot of sympathy for students who go above and beyond in high school only to have the college admissions process end in disappointment.
However, this documentary left me feeling more puzzled than sympathetic.
All of the featured students were accepted to top schools.
There are a number of schools that likely would have rolled out the red carpet for these students, yet the students chose to focus on a narrow set of schools where the odds for admission are extremely low.
It seems to me that a great deal of this pain is self-inflicted due to the students’ belief that only handful of schools (that reject the vast majority of applicants) are good enough.
Why is it so difficult to understand that a school with a 4% acceptance rate rejects the vast majority (96%) of applicants?
IMO, the strategy of applying to mostly reaches with a few unlikeable safeties thrown in defies common sense.