UC Berkeley vs Stanford Asian Americans

Colleges & Universities A-Z University of California - Berkeley
41

<p>

</p>

<p>It’s possible, but unlikely considering that racial quotas are illegal and since colleges must be able to defend their policies to departments like the DoE, it’s pretty unlikely.</p>

<p>No overwhelming evidence has been provided towards Asian discrimination in particular instances or by institutions as a whole. In the background of a lot of these arguments is a racial superiority complex (“If an Asian applicant was beat out by a black one, it’s because of anti-Asian discrimination, since no black student could be more qualified than an Asian one.”) or poor analogies that don’t take into account the fact that these schools are extremely competitive, as are their applicants, or the fact that these schools also utilize criteria that can’t be quantified.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>It’s possible, but this statement has no basis. Again, it’s prima facie racist to claim that those 40% whites who are admitted didn’t earn it through their own merit. Sure, some of them may be legacies and come from some of the richest families in the U.S; others however, may have grown up in trailer parks and become valedictorians of their high schools, and so on.</p>

<p>Another extremely important thing to note is that the U.S. is 63.7% (197 million) non-hispanic white. </p>

<p>[Demographics</a> of the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“Demographics of the United States - Wikipedia”>Demographics of the United States - Wikipedia)</p>

<p>Is it really that surprising that, in a country where the majority race is nearly 200 million, that they, on average, constitute 40% of the undergraduate student population at top universities? Especially when you consider that whites do the second best, behind Asians, in standardized tests/grades? It’s perfectly plausible, reasonable, and in my opinion likely. The 40% at most universities is likely compromised of a mix of legacies and middle/upper-middle class over-achieving students.</p>

<p>Furthermore, even if top universities did something racially neutral, like place quotas on the number of students that can be accepted from a particular state, Asians would still be at a disadvantage since they’re largely localized in the East and West coasts. And guess what race comprises the majority of the states in between these coasts? Whites. Again, this policy, when combined with high test scores, could easily explain why white students are more representative than Asians at top universities. The scenarios can go on and on.</p>

42

<p>

</p>

<p>However, the opposite is not generally provable either, in cases where opaque holistic admissions processes ensure that outsiders can never know for sure.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>The high school and college age population in the US is not as white as the overall US population.</p>

43

<p>"This article reveals something counterintuitive if it’s indeed true:
The Myth of American Meritocracy | The American Conservative "</p>

<p>So “diversity” is the name of the game. It’s a nicer way of saying “we don’t want to see too many Asians (not more than 20%) on our campuses.”</p>

44

<p>Oh and, Caltech is not an exception.</p>

45

<p>Thank you, muckdogs07 for your clarification.</p>

<p>In answer to HYPSMClessHY, I don’t want to say too much because I don’t want readers to start guessing my daughter’s school!</p>

<p>But I will say that the school does not rank. It would be terribly unfair to do so, because some classes that are very demanding are not designated as “weighted” classes, particularly the college level math classes.</p>

<p>The school is a large school with a superb student body. The number of students in each class varies quite a bit from year to year. I’ll give you some data from Naviance. I think the best approach is to compare admission to the top schools with admission to Berkeley. I would say that in a typical year, 80 students are accepted to Berkeley. Maybe 10-15 more students each year are accepted to UCLA than to Berkeley. Many/all of these students are competitive for Ivies and Ivy equivalent schools. Most (but not all) students who apply to the Ivies also apply to Berkeley. Between 3 and 5 are typically admitted to Harvard and Yale. Princeton, MIT, Dartmouth, Cal Tech, and Columbia tend to accept, on average, maybe, one more than Harvard accepts. Johns Hopkins tends to accept a few more students each year than a school like Columbia. Stanford, which recruits a lot of athletes, accepts quite a few more, and is a top destination for many students. Acceptances from the U of Chicago, which seems to like my daughter’s high school very much, have skyrocketed in recent years. Some students, up to 5 or 6, typically apply to any given top 10 or 15 LAC each year, but often times, no one enrolls if accepted and the next year, the LAC accepts fewer numbers of students. But the top LACs seem willing most of the time to take 1 or 2 applicants. Wellesley accepts quite a few more.</p>

<p>Fewer than half of the students accepted to Berkeley wind up attending. Considering that some students choose UCLA or UCSD and less frequently, Davis, over Berkeley, I would guess that about 30 or 40 students each year attend an Ivy, Ivy equivalent, or top 10 or top 15 LAC. Most of the remaining top students go to UCLA or Berkeley.</p>

<p>I keep telling my daughter that she should pay more attention to what graduates of the schools she is considering do after graduation. That’s why I keep pushing LACs, even the ones that rank considerably below the top 10, that she is using as safety schools.</p>

<p>I hope that answers your question.</p>

46

<p>

</p>

<p>True, but if they weren’t opaque, they’d certainly be gamed. That would also give colleges a lot less flexibility in determining their incoming classes, a freedom they no doubt believe they should be entitled to.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>The same point could be made towards Asians. If only 1 or 2% of Asians in the United States are college age, it would further support their heavy overrepresentation at universities, especially at the top ones. In light of that, Asians, not surprisingly, do extremely well in college admissions. Could they do better? Perhaps, but the fact that they could do better doesn’t mean that there’s active discrimination against them. (a claim which requires heavy evidence)</p>

47

<p>

</p>

<p>However, the evidence is also insufficient to prove the opposite claim that there is not such discrimination against them.</p>

48

<p>@nosering, thanks! Very useful info.</p>

<p>What’s the total number of students in the graduating class? Just a ballpark number to put the whole thing in perspective. 200? 300? 400?</p>

49

<p>@nosering. I’m not allowed to PM yet but I got yours. Thanks.</p>

<p>My situation is here: </p>

<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/massachusetts-institute-technology/1424058-hs-choice-mit-wanna.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/massachusetts-institute-technology/1424058-hs-choice-mit-wanna.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>Trying to select a HS. There is one public HS in our district. You can see how their students went last year from a class of 50 gifted students. I’d say very impressive and pretty close to the best Ivy feeder private school out there, if not better.</p>

50

Beyphy. You are too dismissive on this issue. 1. I’d like to know what % of 2400s are Asian before you just dismissively move on. 2. “Random and tailored” is ironic and an oxymoron. How can something be random and hand tailored? Just shows how much bullshit you are spewing. 3. NO. SAT and high grades aren’t just “a game.” Most people work hard and take hard classes to get them. If it was like a video game then white people would just beat Asian people or be on par and we wouldn’t be talking about this. 4. The richer or poorer argument is completely irrelevant because the Berkeley nulls the argument anyway. 5. Your nationalism argument is complete bullshit. Why should supposedly liberal schools hide behind the term “holistic admissions” instead of just admitting they are racist to Asians? Do white people only like promoting progressiveness when it’s transparent or gains a lot of public perception? All questions of privilege are countered with white people having a SUBSTANTIALLY easier time than Asians with exactly the same shit. Asians aren’t just good at school and grades (a stereotype you are perpetuating). Most of them applying to these ivies are pretty well integrated into society and are extremely aware of this prejudice and try to overcompensate with plenty of extracurricular shit. Besides, ask any Asian if they would rather be white and have good grades or Asian and have good grades. Something so completely out of their control and you’re still hating. At the end of the day, most Asians, regardless if South/East Asian or on a random poor fucking island, don’t want to be ghost-discriminated upon, and all had parents that were 1st or 2nd generation. The least we ask for is transparency. I’m sick of people patronizing the shit out of us. If we are better than you in every conceivable way besides skin color, don’t throw me a lazy stereotype infested response. The least we deserve is to be judged the same as white people. Why CAN’T Asians be just like whites in institutions that are supposedly “Not-racist.” #Murica