Black enrollment falls below 8% for every top 20 ranked liberal arts college in the country

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The discrimination is so obvious it’s a bit depressing. Pomona class of 2027 is 14.1% black. How the hell did they discriminate against other students so much that that number plummeted to 5%? Amherst went from 11 to 3%?! It’s bizarre we allowed AA to last as long as we did.

The numbers show discrimination - just not in the way that you think.

How is it discrimination that schools aren’t giving black people unnecessary boosts in admission? California is about 5% black and Pomona draws heavily from California. Why was it ever 14% black?

And Harvey Mudd now has 3% black students.

Both are national LACs and draw students from all across the country, which is 12% black.

How on earth is that acceptable?

Black students face discrimination in the admissions process, leading to their diminished representation.

Harvey mudd is a top stem school that demands students come in with a strong background. If you look at how poor black students do on standardized exams compared to other students, 3% is pretty great!

+1, Harvey mudd actually over-represents black students. It should be less than 1% black.

How do you know that?

The poster saying Harvey Mudd is over represented with too many Black students at 1% is just entertaining themselves with their racism on this anonymous board.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:wow. Wesleyan was more like 12 percent black when I attended.

Wesleyan class of 2028 is 12% black. https://www.wesleyan.edu/admission/class-profile.html

By "Federal Reporting Guidelines" the figure is 6%, however.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The discrimination is so obvious it’s a bit depressing. Pomona class of 2027 is 14.1% black. How the hell did they discriminate against other students so much that that number plummeted to 5%? Amherst went from 11 to 3%?! It’s bizarre we allowed AA to last as long as we did.

Because they should be allowed to choose the cohorts and communities they want?

You discriminate against the side salad when you choose French Fries. Doesn’t make it wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To interpret the "Asian" statistics, you should definitely look at the population demographics of the geography where the school is located not just the ranking.

The multiracial category also tends to be majority Asian…

But that’s the crux of the problem. The republicans have dismantled DEI on every level, allowing the massive increase of Asians into our universities.

I don’t see what the problem is.

The problem is we need DEIA restored to stop the increasing percentage of Asian/Indian students gaining admission to the T50 universities.

Absolutely. That is extremely undesirable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The discrimination is so obvious it’s a bit depressing. Pomona class of 2027 is 14.1% black. How the hell did they discriminate against other students so much that that number plummeted to 5%? Amherst went from 11 to 3%?! It’s bizarre we allowed AA to last as long as we did.

The numbers show discrimination - just not in the way that you think.

How is it discrimination that schools aren’t giving black people unnecessary boosts in admission? California is about 5% black and Pomona draws heavily from California. Why was it ever 14% black?

And Harvey Mudd now has 3% black students.

Both are national LACs and draw students from all across the country, which is 12% black.

How on earth is that acceptable?

Black students face discrimination in the admissions process, leading to their diminished representation.

Harvey mudd is a top stem school that demands students come in with a strong background. If you look at how poor black students do on standardized exams compared to other students, 3% is pretty great!

Don't look at poor Black students. Look across income levels. Poorer students of all races have lower scores. Wealthier students who receive significant SAT prep (and whose schools get them the right math courses earlier), score higher on the SATs. It's a simple formula: more prep = better standardized scores, no matter who you are.

And across the US, there are now substantially more than 3% of Black students blowing tests out of the water. Legacy kids and recruited athletes are also taking up spots with sub-optimal stats.

SAT prep is only one small piece of the puzzle. Wealthier kids go to better schools so are better prepped from Day 1. SAT prep is just supplemental to that.

Wealthier kids also tend to have better educated parents. On a daily basis they are having more intelligent conversations and exposed to more. And, more importantly, better educated people tend to emphasize education more. There are obviously many, many great stories of poor uneducated people (often immigrants) who are innately smart enough to recognize the importance of education for their kids and devote their time and resources to providing this for their kids. Stuyvesant is full of these kids and this is the American dream. But this is the exception, not the rule.

I wish at the birth of their child every parent was required to sign a document about whether or not they cared about education. If you discounted the unfortunately huge number of families who basically don't care from the calculations, these analyses would look a lot different.

[Anonymous]

Project 2025/Republcians/The Heritage Foundation are heading towards DD's no longer being accepted at any University in this country along with all minorities and certain religions. That includes you Catholics and Orthodox Jews that voted for this shit.

They wrote it down and said it out loud.

Listen when they spew you morons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The discrimination is so obvious it’s a bit depressing. Pomona class of 2027 is 14.1% black. How the hell did they discriminate against other students so much that that number plummeted to 5%? Amherst went from 11 to 3%?! It’s bizarre we allowed AA to last as long as we did.

Because they should be allowed to choose the cohorts and communities they want?

You discriminate against the side salad when you choose French Fries. Doesn’t make it wrong.

Yes but I hope you don’t treat your children like a bag of saggy fries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Project 2025/Republcians/The Heritage Foundation are heading towards DD's no longer being accepted at any University in this country along with all minorities and certain religions. That includes you Catholics and Orthodox Jews that voted for this shit.

They wrote it down and said it out loud.

Listen when they spew you morons.

Fearmongering nonsense.

[Anonymous]

3% black enrollment at Amherst, Vassar, Hamilton, Colgate and Middlebury is inexcusable. Those schools need to do better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:3% black enrollment at Amherst, Vassar, Hamilton, Colgate and Middlebury is inexcusable. Those schools need to do better.

Tell qualified black kids to go to these schools instead of HBCUs. You can't have it both ways. Schools should accept the kids they want regardless of race. Make those kids feel welcome but they shouldn't be treating them any differently. If they don't want to come, there is no more they can do. Perhaps they can do a little more outreach but special scholarships, lower standards, etc. are bogus. Same with athletes before you jump all over me. Though ironically I'm guessing a bunch of the blacks are also athletes so they are twofers.

[Anonymous]

These statistics drive me nuts. These schools are really small. So a change of 5-10 kids moves the numbers. It isn't like Michigan or Texas. Not something to get all worked up about. Many of them leaned way too far into DEI and are now coming back to reality. They should be actively recruiting QUALIFIED minority applicants, in terms of race, socioeconomic, etc. And if those kids don't want to come, so be it. The schools should not be crucified for it.

They shouldn't be spending a fortune and further jacking up tuition so they can hire dozens of people to comb the country for these kids. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.

[Anonymous]

Great points at some of those small LACs with a freshman class of 450-500 at 3% translates into 13-15 kids. How many of those 15 kids are recruited athletes ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:3% black enrollment at Amherst, Vassar, Hamilton, Colgate and Middlebury is inexcusable. Those schools need to do better.

Tell qualified black kids to go to these schools instead of HBCUs. You can't have it both ways. Schools should accept the kids they want regardless of race. Make those kids feel welcome but they shouldn't be treating them any differently. If they don't want to come, there is no more they can do. Perhaps they can do a little more outreach but special scholarships, lower standards, etc. are bogus. Same with athletes before you jump all over me. Though ironically I'm guessing a bunch of the blacks are also athletes so they are twofers.

These aren’t the same cohort of students

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:These statistics drive me nuts. These schools are really small. So a change of 5-10 kids moves the numbers. It isn't like Michigan or Texas. Not something to get all worked up about. Many of them leaned way too far into DEI and are now coming back to reality. They should be actively recruiting QUALIFIED minority applicants, in terms of race, socioeconomic, etc. And if those kids don't want to come, so be it. The schools should not be crucified for it.

They shouldn't be spending a fortune and further jacking up tuition so they can hire dozens of people to comb the country for these kids. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.

What if the kids were qualified? If the college wants an excellent tuba player and they have a slightly lower gpa than the class, they’ll receive admission even if they’re slightly less convincing stats wise.

A lot of this debate is people assuming they know who is and is not qualified, and most of these time that judgement is purely from stats, which isn’t how our admissions process works.

[Anonymous]

Williams doesn’t get enough credit for being effectively race neutral since the beginning, instead of chasing under qualified students!!! And now, they’re more diverse than all the other colleges.