<p>I kind of understand it but not fully. Does it even exist? Is the scale sliding? Is it higher for AA males than females? Is it higher for AA's over hispanics? Does anyone know anything definite about it? I just wanna know how much it helps.</p>
<p>No one knows exactly. Its like a mystery. different at different schools and stuff!</p>
<p>According to a study by Princeton Sociology Professor Thomas Espenshade:</p>
<p>“African-Americans who achieved 1150 scores on the two original SAT tests had the same chances of getting accepted to top private colleges in 1997 as whites who scored 1460s and Asians who scored perfect 1600s.”</p>
<p>“Whites were three times as likely to get fat envelopes as Asians.
Hispanics were twice as likely to win admission as whites.
African-Americans were at least five times as likely to be accepted as whites.”</p>
<p>While the data does come from the late 1990s and early 2000s I think that it shows the bonus that we get for being black.</p>
<p>Thanks, That really puts it in perspective for me. Im feeling alot better about my chances as anywhere. Of course the bonus isnt a total substitute for grades I realize, but a boost</p>
<p>The general AA scale, as most people will tell you it, goes as follows, from most positive to most negative outcome:</p>
<p>Native American
Black
Hispanic
White
Asian</p>
<p>That makes sense</p>
<p>I also think it has to do with being ‘rare.’ Since Native Americans are rare to come by, smart Native Americans are ‘even more rare’. Top colleges look for unique students. There are numerous asian students (for whatever reason) with amazing scores, extracurriculars,etc. but not as common among the black community. So an African American with great scores, but maybe not as high as an Asian/white person, would get accepted because the African American is more unique and uncommon. Just my opinion.</p>
<p>^^^^ Yea. Ive been strating to figure that out as ive been doing more research.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is NOT true. There are many smart Native Americans around you but you never notice just because they are not wearing suit or holding calculus book!
You can NOT always tell how smart some one is by only looking their dress, their job, etc. A Native American hunter can be way smarter than Harvard professor.</p>
<p>I think what you where trying to say is that most Native Americans don’t have the motivation to go to college?</p>
<p>^What jj43912 stated is undoubtedly true. Smart people are more rare than people in general. I believe you’ll accept that. Smart Native Americans are thus more rare than Native Americans in general. This holds true for every race, every nationality, every gender. If you put a modifier in front of a group of people, the group with the modifier is almost always more rare than the group in general. It’s pretty simple.</p>
<p>What you stated sort of has nothing to do with what jj43912 said. jj43912 never said that there are no smart NA’s that they have no motivation, or compared them to Harvard professors. jj43912 never said anything that even remotely implied the ideas on which your statements were based. What s/he wrote was a rather obvious fact. You seemed to rush into an activist’s assumptions about what s/he meant.</p>
<p>^ May be I misunderstood his/her statement.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is true but I don’t see how it relates to the URM bonus.
I thought jj43912 was talking about smart-population ratio.
I made some assumptions based on the title of the thread. </p>
<p>I was thinking about ratio of smart Natives to Native population.
This ratio should be equal or approximately equal to any other SMART to POPULATION RATIO from any other race.
So, it is true that “Natives in college to Native population ratio” is much smaller than “Whites in college to White population ratio”
But Smart-Population ratio should be equal in all races.</p>
<p>@jj43912 I apologize if I made some bad assumptions. I did not mean it.</p>