Asian American student with 1590 SAT score blames affirmative action for rejections from 6 colleges

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Looks very much like racial discrimination against Asian students.

We'll see the outcome from the US Supreme Court.

If I was part of admissions committee and received the aggregate feedback of 2 LORs and guidance counselor ( from kid's own school!) and alumni interviewer about a given applicant, I'm not surprised that the personality score was low.

As the lower courts have ruled, this doesn't prove discrimination.

And...what in the heck does this have to do with affirmative action? Whites are being compared to Asians in the chart, not URMs.

?? why? Asian students are on par on LORs and have higher score on interview.

They were being nice, so only compared it to Whites.
Imagine comparing it to Blacks/Hispanics

Are you assuming black or Hispanic students would be less likable than white or Asian students?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Looks very much like racial discrimination against Asian students.

We'll see the outcome from the US Supreme Court.

If I was part of admissions committee and received the aggregate feedback of 2 LORs and guidance counselor ( from kid's own school!) and alumni interviewer about a given applicant, I'm not surprised that the personality score was low.

As the lower courts have ruled, this doesn't prove discrimination.

And...what in the heck does this have to do with affirmative action? Whites are being compared to Asians in the chart, not URMs.

?? why? Asian students are on par on LORs and have higher score on interview.

They were being nice, so only compared it to Whites.
Imagine comparing it to Blacks/Hispanics

The lower scores came from the applicant's own teachers and guidance counselor!

The alumni interviewer's score was low.

THREE relatively low scores from three different sources.

The admissions committee reviews thousands of applications: they are not going to meet most applications in person. Their scoring is based on the data received.

No discrimination.

Weak "evidence" and probably cherry picked.

[Anonymous]

Why is it that when immigrants come to America they expect the red carpet whereas everywhere else in the world they’re treated like crap and they accept it? Have these people who take a test and expect admissions to Harvard ever considered what they have given to America or Harvard? It’s unbelievable the entitlement they feel for having scored well on a test.

[Anonymous]

I am for race and geography blind admissions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why is it that when immigrants come to America they expect the red carpet whereas everywhere else in the world they’re treated like crap and they accept it? Have these people who take a test and expect admissions to Harvard ever considered what they have given to America or Harvard? It’s unbelievable the entitlement they feel for having scored well on a test.

14th Amendment

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This case is going nowhere. Those stats are run of the mill at those schools, regardless of ethnicity.

However 1450 kids get accepted with certain skin color or rich parents over 1590 kid because.... courage, kindness, and likability?

1450 is still 99th percentile. There's essentially no difference in their test-taking ability from someone with 1590. If all else was equal and the 1450 was significantly more courageous, kind and likeable, I'm not sure why you wouldn't choose them regardless of skin color.

I think the difference is big between 1450 and 1590. 1450 might be 99th percentile, but it's not good enough especially for those elite schools.
Now 1590 is what? like 99.99 percentile? Now we are talking.
We all know that courage, kindness, and likability score is bullshit.

There is no significant difference between these scores and the abilities of the students who get them or their relative abilities to succeed at any university.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This case is going nowhere. Those stats are run of the mill at those schools, regardless of ethnicity.

However 1450 kids get accepted with certain skin color or rich parents over 1590 kid because.... courage, kindness, and likability?

1450 is still 99th percentile. There's essentially no difference in their test-taking ability from someone with 1590. If all else was equal and the 1450 was significantly more courageous, kind and likeable, I'm not sure why you wouldn't choose them regardless of skin color.

I think the difference is big between 1450 and 1590. 1450 might be 99th percentile, but it's not good enough especially for those elite schools.
Now 1590 is what? like 99.99 percentile? Now we are talking.
We all know that courage, kindness, and likability score is bullshit.

They keep admitting them. They keep graduating. How is that even possible?

It's because the real threshold is 1400. Anything over that is perfectly fine. They can pull names from hats at that point.

that's the problem.
why pull names from hats when they can admit the 1590 kid who deserves more than the 1400 kid.

You are completely wrong and misunderstand this test and how it is used. It isn't "best score wins." It's "does the result show that this kid can handle college?" You aren't ranked by score. You get over the threshold, and it is enough for that small part of the application process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This case is going nowhere. Those stats are run of the mill at those schools, regardless of ethnicity.

However 1450 kids get accepted with certain skin color or rich parents over 1590 kid because.... courage, kindness, and likability?

You are overestimating the importance of and the difference between those scores. 1450 is the 96th percentile, which is certainly worthy of Harvard. You cross the 1400 threshold, and then it's "what else ya got?" Scores are a tiny part of the equation, and they are not viewed in a force-rank fashion: high enough is enough; higher than enough isn't better.

Non-ALDC Harvard admits are 99+%ile in something, not merely 96%ile. That tier is <40K admits out of 4million high school graduates.

1450 and majoring in art or music performance?

1450 and majoring in STEM? No way.

Yes way. Completely unrelated to this lawsuit, I just don't get these people who are so hung up on these numbers and this one test. You just dont' get it. Learn something.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I’m so sick and tired of Asians complaining about unfairness in America. When I look around my UMC neighborhood, Asians seem to be doing quite well. I wonder how well American students would fare in Asian schools or American workers in Asian corporations. Something tells me that it would be FAR worse for Americans in Asia than it is for Asians in America.

Americans are treated very well in Asians countries.

I’m a white American and experienced overt racism in Asia.

White Americans are usually treated very well in Asian countries.
Maybe you didn't respect the local culture or something.

Asian countries like Korea/Japan/China tend to discriminate South East Asians.

I’m the person you were asking if I respected the culture. Very much so as learning the culture was the reason I went on the trip. In one instance, we merely went into a restaurant and were told it was “not for people like us” and we had to leave.

Discrimination in South Korea/Japan/India/wherever else in the world has no relevance here at all. The issue being discussed is about Americans being discriminated in America.

Agreed but the quote in in response to a poster claiming that Americans would not be discriminated against in Asia. It’s responsive to the post but the whole line of discussion is irrelevant to the issue (like so much on DCUM).

It is kinda relevant. Though American treatment abroad doesn’t have anything to do with how American laws treat people in America, it does raise a cultural issue. Namely, immigrants to America expect to be treated better here than anywhere else in the world. Sometimes, this includes how they would be treated in their own country. As a point of personal reflection, it’s healthy for such people to consider the entitlement of their request. Literally, they are asking for their new country to treat them better than their country would treat them or their country would treat Americans. Pretty incredible when you think about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why is it that when immigrants come to America they expect the red carpet whereas everywhere else in the world they’re treated like crap and they accept it? Have these people who take a test and expect admissions to Harvard ever considered what they have given to America or Harvard? It’s unbelievable the entitlement they feel for having scored well on a test.

We are talking about American citizens.

In fact, Asians Americans don't expect the red carpet, they work really hard.

They just don't want to be discriminated anymore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I’m so sick and tired of Asians complaining about unfairness in America. When I look around my UMC neighborhood, Asians seem to be doing quite well. I wonder how well American students would fare in Asian schools or American workers in Asian corporations. Something tells me that it would be FAR worse for Americans in Asia than it is for Asians in America.

Americans are treated very well in Asians countries.

I’m a white American and experienced overt racism in Asia.

White Americans are usually treated very well in Asian countries.
Maybe you didn't respect the local culture or something.

Asian countries like Korea/Japan/China tend to discriminate South East Asians.

I’m the person you were asking if I respected the culture. Very much so as learning the culture was the reason I went on the trip. In one instance, we merely went into a restaurant and were told it was “not for people like us” and we had to leave.

Discrimination in South Korea/Japan/India/wherever else in the world has no relevance here at all. The issue being discussed is about Americans being discriminated in America.

Agreed but the quote in in response to a poster claiming that Americans would not be discriminated against in Asia. It’s responsive to the post but the whole line of discussion is irrelevant to the issue (like so much on DCUM).

It is kinda relevant. Though American treatment abroad doesn’t have anything to do with how American laws treat people in America, it does raise a cultural issue. Namely, immigrants to America expect to be treated better here than anywhere else in the world. Sometimes, this includes how they would be treated in their own country. As a point of personal reflection, it’s healthy for such people to consider the entitlement of their request. Literally, they are asking for their new country to treat them better than their country would treat them or their country would treat Americans. Pretty incredible when you think about it.

x100000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Looks very much like racial discrimination against Asian students.

We'll see the outcome from the US Supreme Court.

If I was part of admissions committee and received the aggregate feedback of 2 LORs and guidance counselor ( from kid's own school!) and alumni interviewer about a given applicant, I'm not surprised that the personality score was low.

As the lower courts have ruled, this doesn't prove discrimination.

And...what in the heck does this have to do with affirmative action? Whites are being compared to Asians in the chart, not URMs.

?? why? Asian students are on par on LORs and have higher score on interview.

They were being nice, so only compared it to Whites.
Imagine comparing it to Blacks/Hispanics

The lower scores came from the applicant's own teachers and guidance counselor!

The alumni interviewer's score was low.

THREE relatively low scores from three different sources.

The admissions committee reviews thousands of applications: they are not going to meet most applications in person. Their scoring is based on the data received.

No discrimination.

Weak "evidence" and probably cherry picked.

WTF are you talking about?????

Those Three scores(LORs and such) are on par with White students.

They have higher scores on others like ECs, Interview, Test/GPA

Check your brain.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is it that when immigrants come to America they expect the red carpet whereas everywhere else in the world they’re treated like crap and they accept it? Have these people who take a test and expect admissions to Harvard ever considered what they have given to America or Harvard? It’s unbelievable the entitlement they feel for having scored well on a test.

14th Amendment

Again, wrong interpretation. You guys are really reaching, and letting your racism against blacks and latina/os known.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Looks very much like racial discrimination against Asian students.

We'll see the outcome from the US Supreme Court.

If I was part of admissions committee and received the aggregate feedback of 2 LORs and guidance counselor ( from kid's own school!) and alumni interviewer about a given applicant, I'm not surprised that the personality score was low.

As the lower courts have ruled, this doesn't prove discrimination.

And...what in the heck does this have to do with affirmative action? Whites are being compared to Asians in the chart, not URMs.

?? why? Asian students are on par on LORs and have higher score on interview.

They were being nice, so only compared it to Whites.
Imagine comparing it to Blacks/Hispanics

The lower scores came from the applicant's own teachers and guidance counselor!

The alumni interviewer's score was low.

THREE relatively low scores from three different sources.

The admissions committee reviews thousands of applications: they are not going to meet most applications in person. Their scoring is based on the data received.

No discrimination.

Weak "evidence" and probably cherry picked.

WTF are you talking about?????

Those Three scores(LORs and such) are on par with White students.

They have higher scores on others like ECs, Interview, Test/GPA

Check your brain.

Point is, no one cares, and you don't want to accept that. You were given bad information, and now want to blame other groups for the information you were given.

Check your sources.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Looks very much like racial discrimination against Asian students.

We'll see the outcome from the US Supreme Court.

If I was part of admissions committee and received the aggregate feedback of 2 LORs and guidance counselor ( from kid's own school!) and alumni interviewer about a given applicant, I'm not surprised that the personality score was low.

As the lower courts have ruled, this doesn't prove discrimination.

And...what in the heck does this have to do with affirmative action? Whites are being compared to Asians in the chart, not URMs.

?? why? Asian students are on par on LORs and have higher score on interview.

They were being nice, so only compared it to Whites.
Imagine comparing it to Blacks/Hispanics

Are you assuming black or Hispanic students would be less likable than white or Asian students?

No it's the opposite.
Asian students would have even higher sores in SAT/GPA, Interview, ECs
Even lower score only on likability.