<p>I’m all for diversity, but then you should just find a college which is diverse. AA is just… unfair. nil’s analogy shows it well.
and anyways, it’s stereotyping. you’re labeling different people to have certain aspects because they’re part of a race. isn’t that what dicrimination is? you treat people differently because you assume they have certain traits due to their race</p>
<p>No one is being treated differently. AA in every aspect is evaluating someone based on their circumstances. AA has many problems, but economic and race based AA have some merit. Honestly, if we were able to get all the stats, we’ll find that race based AA is totally insignificant in terms of legacies and economic based AA.</p>
<p>^economic- based AA makes total sense. it’s just the race- based AA that’s the problem</p>
<p>Economic based AA is nearly always a part of race based AA.
And as others have said, AA has greatly narrowed the gender gap since the late '60s. It can work with stark racial differences as well.</p>
<p>Race should never EVER have to play a role in admissions.
I don’t see how anybody could even argue against this.</p>
<p>“No one is being treated differently.”</p>
<p>I think people are treated differently in college admission process. It is a lot more difficult for certain group of people.</p>
<p>^^Have you ever tried to research affirmative action? All of these colleges and businesses are doing it for a reason.</p>
<p>[Princeton</a> University - Ending affirmative action would devastate most minority college enrollment](<a href=“Ending affirmative action would devastate most minority college enrollment”>Ending affirmative action would devastate most minority college enrollment)</p>
<p>This is what Princeton University thinks about affirmative action:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>@Frumens</p>
<p>Are you talking to me?</p>
<p>I meant Geometrizer.</p>
<p>I’ll offer another link that explains ten common misconceptions about affirmative action. One fact that I think the people in this thread need to learn is that affirmative action does not allow unqualified candidates acceptance:</p>
<p>[UnderstandingPrejudice.org:</a> Ten Myths About Affirmative Action](<a href=“http://www.understandingprejudice.org/readroom/articles/affirm.htm]UnderstandingPrejudice.org:”>http://www.understandingprejudice.org/readroom/articles/affirm.htm)</p>
<p>Affirmative action is not really about diversity, but I’ll also give a link that explains why colleges want diversity:</p>
<p>[Why</a> Does Diversity Matter at College Anyway? - Professors’ Guide (usnews.com)](<a href=“http://www.usnews.com/education/blogs/professors-guide/2009/08/12/why-does-diversity-matter-at-college-anyway]Why”>http://www.usnews.com/education/blogs/professors-guide/2009/08/12/why-does-diversity-matter-at-college-anyway)</p>
<p>You would think no white or Asian people ever get into these schools. URMs are still the minority of students at these schools, and by a long shot. </p>
<p>The analogy of the movie theater line is absurd. An elite education is in no way comparable to a movie theater ticket. Just as an example, for any other product in the world, the ability to pay for it is the significant determinant of whether you will be able to acquire it. At a movie theater, people pay for admission. Most people attending these elite schools expect significant financial aid. - I suspect very few pay full freight. Carry the analogy to its extreme and unless you can pay for the education you can’t attend. But no, not only are the schools expected to accept your definition of merit, they are expected to waive significant portions of your cost of attending. Nobody complains about this financial affirmative action. It is now just expected that the elite schools will deliver their product regardless of your ability to pay (and that is a fantastic development BTW). If the schools took ability to pay into account people whould howl about that as well. So let’s stop comparing this to some other random item of merchandise.</p>
<p>The skies did not open up and declare standardized test scores or grades as the official determinant of who “merits” admission. The sole arbiter of “merit” is the university and its admission committee. They could decide to consider only unweighted grades, they could decide to give an extra leg up to kids from this high school or that high school, or this state or that state. THey decide whether to take ability to pay into account, whether to give a boost to legacies or athletes, and whether to consider race in their decision. Applicants know all about this (or should know), and plan their applications accordingly. Get over it.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>In other words, out of every 77 rejected applicants of Asian descent, only 5 have any reason, however dubious, to attribute their rejections to affirmative action.</p>
<p>Most admitted students receive an advantage in admissions for things they do not deserve credit for: Their parents are rich or they are poor; they went to an excellent high school or they went to a terrible inner-city high school; they live in Texas or they live in Singapore; their parents were alums or their parents never went to college; their parents forced them to play piano 6 hours a day, or their parents forced them to work to support the family. Race is no different in this regard, so get over it.</p>
<p>The whole purpose of creating a racially diverse student body is to benefit you, the student. It is not to benefit the applicants. Top colleges have determined that you will receive the best education possible if surrounded by diverse (including race) classmates, so they use race as one of many diversity factors in admissions. This practice and reasoning has been reviewed by the US Supreme Court and has been affirmed. So get over it.</p>
<p>^Great post. Thanks.</p>
<p>this is a pretty lame thread! First of all there is barely a significant difference between a 2250 and a 2350. Did Harvard actually post somewhere that they care about the 100 points? A 3.8 vs a 4.0? Really? Everything else is exactly the same? Are these two students twins (maybe adopted?) who were raised by the same parents and went to the same schools? Did these two students have equal access to everything?</p>
<p>The reason the post is Soooo lame is that it assumes admittance to Harvard is based purely on numbers without context. Did you read this somewhere? Is this explicitly what Harvard says you need to get in–the highest test scores? Try doing a little more homework on this topic. </p>
<p>This is just a thread to start more AA bashing and how affirmative action is ruining your life. If student #1 wrote this I would say he will not get into Harvard–he has too much time on his hands to whine.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Oh, if only.</p>
<p>The ones who are benefiting the most from race-based AA are very clearly middle- to upper-class URMs. I don’t think that’s even arguable.</p>
<p>EDIT: Keep in mind that I’m not saying this is a bad thing, per se, and all the students admitted to top universities are undoubtedly qualified. But it’s really not what AA is meant to do. I mean, look at it this way: Does admitting a few URM students to a top university really do anything to advance social justice? What AA does instead is increase racial stratification and economic stratification (within the URM group), while completely shafting lower-class ORMs (who often do not even have the same opportunities as the middle- to upper-class URMs). So, no. It’s really not based on one’s socioeconomic status; if it were, they’d ask for your socioeconomic background not simply to determine your FA.</p>
<p>^I have to disagree. I have a lot of rich black/latino friends, all upper class, and despite near perfect scores and GPAs, only a few got in to the top Ivies. My URM friends that are middle-lower class had about the same stats but higher acceptances.
Upper class URMs are not given any great advantage. If you could give me a study, I may be inclined to agree.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Beatles, all one needs to do is to look at the hundreds of pages of accepted/rejected stats threads in the individual Ivy League sections to see that URMs with $100k+ incomes regularly get in with significantly lower stats that their Asian or white counterparts.</p>
<p>Listen, i heavily doubt anyone here is racist. In a perfect world everyone would get into a top 5 school, but it’s not utopia. As a middle-class Caucasian or White, it is easier to seize opportunities than a lower-class minority. This is undeniable, especially if you look at the demographics in dilapidated cities and prisons. Personally, I find it honorable that these schools open their doors to a wide range of students in order to attempt reversing this trend. OP and liv4phyics, I’m sure you were accepted to an excellent school, even if Harvard passed on you. Be excited and grateful for your opportunities and learn to appreciate the goals these great colleges have, especially when they try to fix disappointing social trends.</p>
<p>BTW, I’m indian and had a 2260. I genuinely pursued ECs and explored my intended field for myself, not for a college.</p>
<p>2260 and Indian - You fit the URM profile outlined except you are not an URM!</p>
<p>People dont seem to get that perfect SAT scores are not a big deal at Ivies.</p>
<p>Bay - Excellent contrasts btw.</p>
<p>As a previous contributor hinted, economic (rather than explicitly racial) AA in pursuit of economic diversity would seem and indeed be fairer and would inevitably produce increased racial diversity as a corollary rather than primary effect. Win-Win imho. It would lessen the possibility of (e.g.) an impoverished white student from Appalachia or Arkansas losing out to the son or daughter or a wealthy black celebrity from Chicago or Los Angeles.</p>