Admissions Chances

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^^Maybe the Ivy schools would like representation from all groups. 50+ years ago there was one majority ethnic group in all the Ivys. Those days are over, and no one ethnic group will ever be allowed to displace everyone else again. Doesn't matter whose population has increased, doubled, whatever. Or which group scores 2400 on standardized exams every time.

There are many smart, hard working kids in every ethnic group. The smart schools will allot representation from every group since no one group has a monopoly on intelligence.

But Jewish group makes up approximately 30% to 40% of the top universities including Ivy League schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not sure why any of you think that 'unqualified' white kids aren't getting some of the coveted seats also. George W. Bush is a prime example who also candidly admitted that he was a 'C' student and proud of it.

And don't forget your young, white farm hand who's holding a solid 'B' but would never have the opportunity to attend a far reach school.

Some of you are so intent on placing blame on Black kids taking that last coveted seat(s) that you forget there are many non-Black kids that fit into 'special' categories that are highly desirable for 'diversity' and are admitted. But they don't have a visual 'diversity.'

So true!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure why any of you think that 'unqualified' white kids aren't getting some of the coveted seats also. George W. Bush is a prime example who also candidly admitted that he was a 'C' student and proud of it.

And don't forget your young, white farm hand who's holding a solid 'B' but would never have the opportunity to attend a far reach school.

Some of you are so intent on placing blame on Black kids taking that last coveted seat(s) that you forget there are many non-Black kids that fit into 'special' categories that are highly desirable for 'diversity' and are admitted. But they don't have a visual 'diversity.'

So true!

So only the Asians don't get any preferences.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Legacy is HUGE.

Not always. Plenty of selective schools barely consider it. And I know plenty of qualified legacies who didn't get in.

+1. I think it's in Price of Admission where an Ivy admissions officer sniffed to the writer, "If they took our education, became a teacher with it, and so they weren't in a position to donate money, then that doesn't speak well for that gene pool and we probably won't take the kid." Or something like that, in any case I'm paraphrasing. Ouch.

wait, what happened to all the rah rah about how Ivies tell their students to do something noble with their education? Someones lying here - and I'm not saying it's the PP.

Someone's nuts, and I think it's you. Teachers are certainly noble in my book, but I can think of lots of professions that are noble and earn major money. For starters, Zuckerberg, Gates, and anybody who every invented something marketable or was highly successful in one of the arts.

Ummmmm.... Technology=science not the arts.

And noble is noble. What does being a moneymaker have to do with it?

New Poster who finds you to be the one who's nuts

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am so glad my black niece who will be attending an Ivy in the fall was admitted with a 2375 SAT, perfect GPA, plenty of honors/AP courses, ECs, and on and on and on. And for those who would suggest that these are public school scores, she attended one of the so-called Big Three privates in this area.

No one will EVER be able to throw in her face that she got in because of the color of her skin (but there will be those who will allude to that as evidenced in this thread) as she outweighed or equaled academically all of her competitors.

She owes no explanation to anyone how or why she was admitted just as she would not expect that from anyone else she encounters on campus or anywhere else.

You can't even get that score; I'll assume that's a typo. With scores and qualifications that high none of the previous conversation relates to her; she's clearly qualified. The only reason that people will assume she got in because of the color of her skin is because many do. If it was a open meritocracy then there wouldn't be anybody suggesting she didn't earn her way in. That's one of the biggest problems I see in affirmative action; it casts doubts on the talents of the kids who legitimately qualified. I feel the same way about athletic recruits; I don't assume that they're as talented as non-recruited students.

So the problem with affirmative action is that idiots make assumptions???? Ha! How about you working on being less stereotypical and judgmental?

So I guess the issue with black people is that some people automatically think they're criminals ? Ummm no, the issue is that some people stereotype. See how that works? There is nothing inherently wrong with the person being black. It's the racist who has the problem. And there's nothing wrong with a student being black or an athlete.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Naviance and talking to your student's guidance counselor can yield the best information. That said, the top top colleges are a crap shoot unless you have a hook (won state science fair, nationally top ten ranked in his/her sport, grandfather just gave $2M, won a Nobel or Pulitzer Prize, discovered a treatment for Ebola....). It doesn't mean not to take the crap shoot if you think you may be one of the lucky ones, but make sure you have a backup.

you forgot URM. the score gap between asian and black at a place like princeton is insane. A black kid with 2100 boards and decent grades will get into multiple top 10 schools.

I was reading an analysis of this for UVA; being Black gives a massive boost; being Hispanic gives a significantly smaller advantage. In another article the average Black student at UVA has a ~1050 on the SATs and the average white student had a ~1350.

Here: http://www.nas.org/images/documents/report_affirmative_action_at_three_universities.pdf

Some interesting stats:

The odds ratio for blacks compared to whites at NCS is 13 to 1, but at UVA it is 106 to 1 and at William &Mary 267 to 1. In other words, at UVA the odds of a black student being admitted is more than 100 times the odds of admission of a white student with the same qualifications. The odds of admitting a black applicant at William & Mary is more than 250 times the odds of admitting an equally-qualified white applicant. The odds ratios for Asians at all three schools are less than one, meaning that Asians are less likely to be admitted than equally-qualified whites (the odds ratio for Asians at UVA is not statistically significant). The odds ratios for Hispanics are 2.8 and 1.9 at UVA and NCS, respectively, but less than one at W&M.

The cited report looks like it was from ten years ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Naviance and talking to your student's guidance counselor can yield the best information. That said, the top top colleges are a crap shoot unless you have a hook (won state science fair, nationally top ten ranked in his/her sport, grandfather just gave $2M, won a Nobel or Pulitzer Prize, discovered a treatment for Ebola....). It doesn't mean not to take the crap shoot if you think you may be one of the lucky ones, but make sure you have a backup.

you forgot URM. the score gap between asian and black at a place like princeton is insane. A black kid with 2100 boards and decent grades will get into multiple top 10 schools.

I was reading an analysis of this for UVA; being Black gives a massive boost; being Hispanic gives a significantly smaller advantage. In another article the average Black student at UVA has a ~1050 on the SATs and the average white student had a ~1350.

Here: http://www.nas.org/images/documents/report_affirmative_action_at_three_universities.pdf

Some interesting stats:

The odds ratio for blacks compared to whites at NCS is 13 to 1, but at UVA it is 106 to 1 and at William &Mary 267 to 1. In other words, at UVA the odds of a black student being admitted is more than 100 times the odds of admission of a white student with the same qualifications. The odds of admitting a black applicant at William & Mary is more than 250 times the odds of admitting an equally-qualified white applicant. The odds ratios for Asians at all three schools are less than one, meaning that Asians are less likely to be admitted than equally-qualified whites (the odds ratio for Asians at UVA is not statistically significant). The odds ratios for Hispanics are 2.8 and 1.9 at UVA and NCS, respectively, but less than one at W&M.

The cited report looks like it was from ten years ago.

Do you really think there have been significant changes in the last decade? The average SAT was 1330 in 2004 and was 1349 in 2013.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Naviance and talking to your student's guidance counselor can yield the best information. That said, the top top colleges are a crap shoot unless you have a hook (won state science fair, nationally top ten ranked in his/her sport, grandfather just gave $2M, won a Nobel or Pulitzer Prize, discovered a treatment for Ebola....). It doesn't mean not to take the crap shoot if you think you may be one of the lucky ones, but make sure you have a backup.

you forgot URM. the score gap between asian and black at a place like princeton is insane. A black kid with 2100 boards and decent grades will get into multiple top 10 schools.

I was reading an analysis of this for UVA; being Black gives a massive boost; being Hispanic gives a significantly smaller advantage. In another article the average Black student at UVA has a ~1050 on the SATs and the average white student had a ~1350.

Here: http://www.nas.org/images/documents/report_affirmative_action_at_three_universities.pdf

Some interesting stats:

The odds ratio for blacks compared to whites at NCS is 13 to 1, but at UVA it is 106 to 1 and at William &Mary 267 to 1. In other words, at UVA the odds of a black student being admitted is more than 100 times the odds of admission of a white student with the same qualifications. The odds of admitting a black applicant at William & Mary is more than 250 times the odds of admitting an equally-qualified white applicant. The odds ratios for Asians at all three schools are less than one, meaning that Asians are less likely to be admitted than equally-qualified whites (the odds ratio for Asians at UVA is not statistically significant). The odds ratios for Hispanics are 2.8 and 1.9 at UVA and NCS, respectively, but less than one at W&M.

The cited report looks like it was from ten years ago.

Do you really think there have been significant changes in the last decade? The average SAT was 1330 in 2004 and was 1349 in 2013.

How would I know? Schools can't use outright quotas, and the Supreme Court has toughened ip its review of the diversity rationale.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^Maybe the Ivy schools would like representation from all groups. 50+ years ago there was one majority ethnic group in all the Ivys. Those days are over, and no one ethnic group will ever be allowed to displace everyone else again. Doesn't matter whose population has increased, doubled, whatever. Or which group scores 2400 on standardized exams every time.

There are many smart, hard working kids in every ethnic group. The smart schools will allot representation from every group since no one group has a monopoly on intelligence.

But Jewish group makes up approximately 30% to 40% of the top universities including Ivy League schools.

No. Not at DC's Ivy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Legacy is HUGE.

Not always. Plenty of selective schools barely consider it. And I know plenty of qualified legacies who didn't get in.

+1. I think it's in Price of Admission where an Ivy admissions officer sniffed to the writer, "If they took our education, became a teacher with it, and so they weren't in a position to donate money, then that doesn't speak well for that gene pool and we probably won't take the kid." Or something like that, in any case I'm paraphrasing. Ouch.

wait, what happened to all the rah rah about how Ivies tell their students to do something noble with their education? Someones lying here - and I'm not saying it's the PP.

Someone's nuts, and I think it's you. Teachers are certainly noble in my book, but I can think of lots of professions that are noble and earn major money. For starters, Zuckerberg, Gates, and anybody who every invented something marketable or was highly successful in one of the arts.

Ummmmm.... Technology=science not the arts.

And noble is noble. What does being a moneymaker have to do with it?

New Poster who finds you to be the one who's nuts

Ummmmm........ Stop using stupid expressions like "ummmmmm......" because you sound inarticulate. It doesn't help our impression of you, that you missed the point about these guys making *inventions* not STEM per se. And you conflated Zuckerberg and the point about the arts because you missed that little word "or", as in "or... in one of the arts."

Otherwise, you're doing great!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am so glad my black niece who will be attending an Ivy in the fall was admitted with a 2375 SAT, perfect GPA, plenty of honors/AP courses, ECs, and on and on and on. And for those who would suggest that these are public school scores, she attended one of the so-called Big Three privates in this area.

No one will EVER be able to throw in her face that she got in because of the color of her skin (but there will be those who will allude to that as evidenced in this thread) as she outweighed or equaled academically all of her competitors.

She owes no explanation to anyone how or why she was admitted just as she would not expect that from anyone else she encounters on campus or anywhere else.

You can't even get that score; I'll assume that's a typo. With scores and qualifications that high none of the previous conversation relates to her; she's clearly qualified. The only reason that people will assume she got in because of the color of her skin is because many do. If it was a open meritocracy then there wouldn't be anybody suggesting she didn't earn her way in. That's one of the biggest problems I see in affirmative action; it casts doubts on the talents of the kids who legitimately qualified. I feel the same way about athletic recruits; I don't assume that they're as talented as non-recruited students.

Yes, yes, you can get a 2400 on the new SAT. Or rather, *you* probably can't get a 2400, but the smartest kids can.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am so glad my black niece who will be attending an Ivy in the fall was admitted with a 2375 SAT, perfect GPA, plenty of honors/AP courses, ECs, and on and on and on. And for those who would suggest that these are public school scores, she attended one of the so-called Big Three privates in this area.

No one will EVER be able to throw in her face that she got in because of the color of her skin (but there will be those who will allude to that as evidenced in this thread) as she outweighed or equaled academically all of her competitors.

She owes no explanation to anyone how or why she was admitted just as she would not expect that from anyone else she encounters on campus or anywhere else.

You can't even get that score; I'll assume that's a typo. With scores and qualifications that high none of the previous conversation relates to her; she's clearly qualified. The only reason that people will assume she got in because of the color of her skin is because many do. If it was a open meritocracy then there wouldn't be anybody suggesting she didn't earn her way in. That's one of the biggest problems I see in affirmative action; it casts doubts on the talents of the kids who legitimately qualified. I feel the same way about athletic recruits; I don't assume that they're as talented as non-recruited students.

Yes, yes, you can get a 2400 on the new SAT. Or rather, *you* probably can't get a 2400, but the smartest kids can.

You can get a score of 2370 or 2380 but NOT 2375 on SAT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Legacy is HUGE.

Not always. Plenty of selective schools barely consider it. And I know plenty of qualified legacies who didn't get in.

+1. I think it's in Price of Admission where an Ivy admissions officer sniffed to the writer, "If they took our education, became a teacher with it, and so they weren't in a position to donate money, then that doesn't speak well for that gene pool and we probably won't take the kid." Or something like that, in any case I'm paraphrasing. Ouch.

wait, what happened to all the rah rah about how Ivies tell their students to do something noble with their education? Someones lying here - and I'm not saying it's the PP.

Someone's nuts, and I think it's you. Teachers are certainly noble in my book, but I can think of lots of professions that are noble and earn major money. For starters, Zuckerberg, Gates, and anybody who every invented something marketable or was highly successful in one of the arts.

Ummmmm.... Technology=science not the arts.

And noble is noble. What does being a moneymaker have to do with it?

New Poster who finds you to be the one who's nuts

Ummmmm........ Stop using stupid expressions like "ummmmmm......" because you sound inarticulate. It doesn't help our impression of you, that you missed the point about these guys making *inventions* not STEM per se. And you conflated Zuckerberg and the point about the arts because you missed that little word "or", as in "or... in one of the arts."

Otherwise, you're doing great!

You continue to sound like an idiot.

A noble profession is a noble profession, but it's clear you have nothing of substance to add to this thread so you should really just leave.

Go play. Adults are conversing here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Legacy is HUGE.

Not always. Plenty of selective schools barely consider it. And I know plenty of qualified legacies who didn't get in.

+1. I think it's in Price of Admission where an Ivy admissions officer sniffed to the writer, "If they took our education, became a teacher with it, and so they weren't in a position to donate money, then that doesn't speak well for that gene pool and we probably won't take the kid." Or something like that, in any case I'm paraphrasing. Ouch.

wait, what happened to all the rah rah about how Ivies tell their students to do something noble with their education? Someones lying here - and I'm not saying it's the PP.

Someone's nuts, and I think it's you. Teachers are certainly noble in my book, but I can think of lots of professions that are noble and earn major money. For starters, Zuckerberg, Gates, and anybody who every invented something marketable or was highly successful in one of the arts.

Ummmmm.... Technology=science not the arts.

And noble is noble. What does being a moneymaker have to do with it?

New Poster who finds you to be the one who's nuts

Ummmmm........ Stop using stupid expressions like "ummmmmm......" because you sound inarticulate. It doesn't help our impression of you, that you missed the point about these guys making *inventions* not STEM per se. And you conflated Zuckerberg and the point about the arts because you missed that little word "or", as in "or... in one of the arts."

Otherwise, you're doing great!

You continue to sound like an idiot.

A noble profession is a noble profession, but it's clear you have nothing of substance to add to this thread so you should really just leave.

Go play. Adults are conversing here.

Look in the mirror. Your racist BS is definitely the worst thing about your posts, but other your problems include your pathetic reading comprehension and your condescension that clearly comes from a place of insecurity. Please, go the F*** away, and take your racism and childesh snottiness with you.

(And, inventing new technologies that have changed our world isn't "noble" in your book?)

[Anonymous]

^^^ childish, obviously.