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

[Anonymous]

That submersible guy went to Princeton engineering school. Some part of physics was not taught very well.

[Anonymous]

Nobody likes the tryhards, even admission officers

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He wanted to major in computer science. It is hard to get into an Ivy but even harder if you want to major in computer science.

He was rejected from UC Berkeley, which hasn't used race in admission for over 25 years. Cal Tech also which tends to admit more based on GPA and test scores and not on diversity.

He doesn't come across very well in the interview I watched. He spent a lot of time growing up playing golf instead of a participating in a team sport.

Perhaps if he went to a school that was more than 2% black (Florida is 15% black) he would have put more thought into joining the lawsuit.

No one took his spot, chances are he never would have been admitted even if he had applied this year.

THis 1000%! He was rejected from HIGHLY rejective schools. They all have single digit acceptance rates, in general. He wanted CS major. That is even MORE selective so likely 2-3% acceptance rates.
Hint: It's not about your race. It's about the fact that 97% of those who apply will get rejected from that school with that intended major. And in reality, once you get to 1540+ they don't (and shouldn't ) care what your Score is.
So if you were able to look at who was Not accepted, I'm willing to bet there are plenty of people with 1540+ who were rejected, and some 1580/1590/1600. Perhaps it's the entitled attitude as well that makes them not want him as part of freshman class

Sorry we have the Supreme Court decision already.

And the Supreme Court decision is about race. Not that the schools "Must take students with a 1600 first, then those with 1590, etc." Fact is elite schools have a level above which they don't care what your scores are. They then look at everything else. So yes, your 1590 does not make you any more special than a 15XY (or whatever the cut off is for that school). The school can choose to take someone from a "poor zip code" who has only a 1500 and only took 2 APs because that is all their HS offered. They are allowed to "consider that kid highly qualified", no mater what you think. Because fact is people of all races live in those zip codes and live in poor zip codes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The kid did not watch the video from the admissions dean at Brown. The dean said so many kids have the credentials, so they are looking for joy and deep interest in projects and activities. Even with that, they will have to say no to many.

Getting a 1590 is not that special around these parts.

BINGO

It's not discrimination if the acceptance rates are 2-3% (which is the real acceptance rate for CS majors at elite universities). Trust me, they turn away plenty of 1590 students, as well as plenty with a 1540+ Your kid is in good company

[Anonymous]

Around 19,000 people get a 1500 or above on the SAT each year. Those six schools, combined, enroll approximately 14,500 new freshmen each year (6,500 excluding Berkeley). Sounds like a skill issue to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Around 19,000 people get a 1500 or above on the SAT each year. Those six schools, combined, enroll approximately 14,500 new freshmen each year (6,500 excluding Berkeley). Sounds like a skill issue to me.

Ever hear of superscoring?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Around 19,000 people get a 1500 or above on the SAT each year. Those six schools, combined, enroll approximately 14,500 new freshmen each year (6,500 excluding Berkeley). Sounds like a skill issue to me.

Ever hear of superscoring?

So even more people have a 1500+ submitted on their college application. Great, proves my point even more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Georgia Tech better than Princeton, Harvard, and Berkeley for STEM. Much ado about nothing.

Oh be serious. GT is not even the best school in its state.

Go ahead and apply as a stem major then. You will be disappointed and surprised. National Merit Scholar, National Debate Champion, 4.5, athlete, female, engineering applicant from an under represented state: waitlisted then denied. Pre-Covid before admissions got even more crazy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Georgia Tech better than Princeton, Harvard, and Berkeley for STEM. Much ado about nothing.

Princeton and Berkeley crap on any other university for stem. Georgia tech is great if you’re interested in aerospace engineering, but the most rigorous education and best STEM programs/grads come out of Princeton and berkeley

This is untrue. It really depends on specific programs. When I was at VT, it had the top wireless engineering program in the U.S. it really breaks down to fields within STEM. Berkeley had the top systems engineering program at that time. For undergraduate STEM degrees, a student can get an excellent education at any of the top 25 universities, provided they put the effort in.

[Anonymous]

He wasn't anything special. Plenty of other Asians were admitted. Who knows how his letters of recommendations and interview were.

Cal Tech only enrolls around 120 Computer Science majors a year. Since they try to balance male and females, he was competing for around 60 to 70 spots.

The common data set for Cal Tech 22-23 shows that over 11,352 males applied and 211 were admitted. That's an admit rate of 1.85 percent. Meanwhile 5274 women applied and 237 were admitted so an admit rate of 4.5%.

So why isn't he angry that it is easier for women to get in? Only 11 black students enrolled so less than 5% while Asians are over 36%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:eh. my white kid had higher stats than that kid, and he got rejected to all those schools, too, including GA Tech.

There is no dispute: The college admission system is totally rigged against white and Asian applicants.

There are not enough black people and URMs at universities for college admissions to have any real bias against white applicants. The top 20 universities accept less than 10% of applicants and of which less than single digits go to "unqualified black students."

Yes, Asian students are being discriminated by less qualified whites getting in--- not black students. People keep ignoring this. This is why people think this whole thing is racist. Going after the less than 10% of blacks and saying you didn't get in because of them is transparent.

Noone is going after blacks. They are going after the racial discrimination. There was an explicit racial preference for blacks and hispanics, yes. But there was also discrimination against asians, they wanted diversity and there were too many asians so they limited it..

The preference is for diversity, not for or against any one subgroup of humans.

And they are not allowed to consider an applicant's race so they can have a preference for racial diversity but they can't really act on that preference.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most astute observers believe that the SC decision will not ultimately change college admissions much. If the schools overtly disengage from racial proxies, studies show that blacks and Hispanics will lose out to whites and Asians. But, schools are likely to develop more ambiguous criteria that allow them to maintain the status quo or whatever profile they choose.

Yes, if they simply use SES as a proxy, they can easily keep the diversity. And I think most people are fine with SES affirmative action, but not by race.

Why is SES affirmative action okay, but not race?

Because the law does not protect the wealthy from being discriminated against. Not all discrimination is illegal, nor even “bad”. Attractive/tall people get lifelong benefits from those traits, irrespective of whether they are relevant to what they do. Entirely legally. In fact, we all discriminate every day. That’s what preferences are. It’s only when a state actor (or private actor using state resources) discriminates ON THE BASIS of a protected status (eg race, nationality, religion, gender to a lesser extent) that it becomes illegal. But any college is perfectly free and welcome to accept a 1250 SAT/3.5 GPA from a terrible rural or urban HS over a 1500/4.0 from BCC or Langley as long as race per se wasn’t a factor.

Race cannot be a factor, directly or indirectly.

Things correlated with race can be a factor.

Not if its an artifice for selecting for race.

The SAT is correlated with race and that can be a factor. Intended major is correlated with race and that can be a factor.

The SFFA position seems to be that factors that tend to increase Asian admission rates are mandatory, while factors that tend to decrease Asian admission rates are illegal. That is not the law.

Once again, you cannot select for race directly or indirectly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most astute observers believe that the SC decision will not ultimately change college admissions much. If the schools overtly disengage from racial proxies, studies show that blacks and Hispanics will lose out to whites and Asians. But, schools are likely to develop more ambiguous criteria that allow them to maintain the status quo or whatever profile they choose.

Yes, if they simply use SES as a proxy, they can easily keep the diversity. And I think most people are fine with SES affirmative action, but not by race.

Why is SES affirmative action okay, but not race?

Because the law does not protect the wealthy from being discriminated against. Not all discrimination is illegal, nor even “bad”. Attractive/tall people get lifelong benefits from those traits, irrespective of whether they are relevant to what they do. Entirely legally. In fact, we all discriminate every day. That’s what preferences are. It’s only when a state actor (or private actor using state resources) discriminates ON THE BASIS of a protected status (eg race, nationality, religion, gender to a lesser extent) that it becomes illegal. But any college is perfectly free and welcome to accept a 1250 SAT/3.5 GPA from a terrible rural or urban HS over a 1500/4.0 from BCC or Langley as long as race per se wasn’t a factor.

Race cannot be a factor, directly or indirectly.

Of course it can. You clearly didn't read the Supreme Court's decision carefully.

I read it very carefully. I think you might have read something taken out of context and thought that they weren't prohibiting racial discrimination but they did.

You can talk about how your race affected your life but your race cannot be a factor in admissions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Exactly. There's nothing wrong or impermissible about a college admitting someone with a 1500 but brings certain types of diversity that's lacking in the overall class over someone with a 1590 who doesn't add anything unique.

As long as that diversity isn't skin color, that's fine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Georgia Tech better than Princeton, Harvard, and Berkeley for STEM. Much ado about nothing.

Princeton and Berkeley crap on any other university for stem. Georgia tech is great if you’re interested in aerospace engineering, but the most rigorous education and best STEM programs/grads come out of Princeton and berkeley

I vote MIT, Cal tech, U of Colorado, Georgia tech, and Rensselaer

Berkeley is actually pretty good despite all the wokeness
Carnegie mellon should be somewhere on that list.