Some facts about Holistic Admissions Criteria from Stanford Daily

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I imagine that eventually Asians will get involved in running our governments and universities. We might then finally have an end to this affirmative action nonsense.

eh - no. dartmouth has (or had) and asian dean. HBS has an indian dean. There are a number of asians running universities but it hasn't changed anything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Should a school be 100% Asian?

If that's who qualifies, why not. It's not going to happen though. What you will see is more Asians and other groups that put hard work and education first culturally, followed by hard-working other minorities who struggle with education on a cultural level.

"Qualifies" by what standard? The debate seems to be that some think it should be based on he highest test scores, GPA and apparently, the most ECs. Others, myself included, see the value in finding applicants that aren't just checking boxes. I have a child who is passionate (I mean really passionate) about science. She isn't quite ready for college yet, but I suspect her scores will be good (she's very bright and we could certainly coach her). She has several science related ECs because she loves them. She did Latin Club. On the first day of Latin Club, they asked who was there because their parents made them do it and every hand in the room went up except my dd and her friend. I think there is a real differnce between a kid like my DD, who is passionate about education, and the automatons that are merely filling their resume (I'm not singling out Asian students as our school has students of other races that are more concenprned about the college application process than education). I suspect my child will not get into an ivy if she applies because she doesn't do sports ((other than fencing and martial arts) and she doesn't have a million ECs because she likes to have time to write and draw. I'm ok with it if she doesn't get in but I really think a more holistic approach gets kids like my dd who are passionate about learning rather than the kids who are doing it for heir parents' egos. My DD will be fine and probably even excel wherever she goes so we're trying to not get too involved in the college admissions arms race.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They have minimum floors which eliminate some applicants
Then there are a series of buckets and categories. They take the best from each category. Thats how it works
Basically as an Asian person you ARE competing against other Asians plus other people from your school/geographic region, background, etc
You are competing against people that are similar to you and they can't take everyone
Is the top underrepresented minority person first generation college student that went to a terrible high school more deserving than the 100th asian with higher grades/test scores, more extracurriculars, from a high performing school district who knows but chances are the person will get in instead of the 100th asian.

So what you are saying is it's fine to discriminate. Grand.

Grow up. The whole college admissions process is one long exercise in various kinds of discrimination. Schools have all sorts of goals in creating their classes. They eliminate some qualified candidates in favor of other qualified candidates for a whole bunch of reasons.

"Everyone is doing it for all sorts of reasons". Sounds fine to me. Intellectually and morally lazy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Should a school be 100% Asian?

If that's who qualifies, why not. It's not going to happen though. What you will see is more Asians and other groups that put hard work and education first culturally, followed by hard-working other minorities who struggle with education on a cultural level.

"Qualifies" by what standard? The debate seems to be that some think it should be based on he highest test scores, GPA and apparently, the most ECs. Others, myself included, see the value in finding applicants that aren't just checking boxes. I have a child who is passionate (I mean really passionate) about science. She isn't quite ready for college yet, but I suspect her scores will be good (she's very bright and we could certainly coach her). She has several science related ECs because she loves them. She did Latin Club. On the first day of Latin Club, they asked who was there because their parents made them do it and every hand in the room went up except my dd and her friend. I think there is a real differnce between a kid like my DD, who is passionate about education, and the automatons that are merely filling their resume (I'm not singling out Asian students as our school has students of other races that are more concenprned about the college application process than education). I suspect my child will not get into an ivy if she applies because she doesn't do sports ((other than fencing and martial arts) and she doesn't have a million ECs because she likes to have time to write and draw. I'm ok with it if she doesn't get in but I really think a more holistic approach gets kids like my dd who are passionate about learning rather than the kids who are doing it for heir parents' egos. My DD will be fine and probably even excel wherever she goes so we're trying to not get too involved in the college admissions arms race.

If a child is admitted over another because that child helps complete the 'rainbow of diversity' the school so desires, that's flat-out racism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's assinine for admission to college to be based on test scores alone. It is fact the highest SAT scores alone are not true determinants of the highest intelligence, best future scores and productivity is school or later life. Therefore, if I was the Director of Admissions of MIT/Harvard, I would never fill the entering class with the top most SAT scorers. I simply would not capture the cream of the crop.

"For the millionth time, this response will address the same issue so pay attention:

Asian Americans do not argue for test scores or gpas to trump over other factors. In fact, colleges can use all the objective and subjective criteria they want to use. That is fine and dandy.

The problem is, pay attention now, the various criteria are APPLIED DIFFERENTLY based on race. Again Asians DO NOT complain about the factors used in college admissions at all. Asians only want them APPLIED CONSISTENTLY without illegal racial discrimination where one race has to show higher test scores, higher gpas, more club activities, more awards, more officer positions, more volunteer hours etc. That is the problem, not that colleges use test scores or gpas. I am sure this will have to be repeated over and over since someone will come back and say exactly the same thing: Why should we only look at SAT scores?, SAT doesn't show creativity, SAT doesn't predict college success, we don't want rote memorization, higher income will boost SAT scores etc. "

Hello, not that PP, but you're missing a big part of the argument yourself. "Holistic" is a big umbrella word. Yes, "holistic" includes ECs and awards. But it also involves putting together a balanced entering class, a class that brings together different perspectives and life experiences and talents. An orchestra with only oboe players is going to lack that creative, dynamic, and inspirational spark. Even the oboe players are going to be uninspired by each other. Similarly, a class that's chock full of upper-middle-class strivers with engaged parents -- and these come in all skin colors, in fact I count our family among them -- is going to lack dynamism and creativity and interest.

As a mom of a straight-A white girl, however, I hear you about the within-group competition. Unlike you, however, I'm not out there demanding that colleges give most of their slots to girls.

Oboe players and race are two separate things. A 'balanced entry class' is racism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“I got into medical school because I said I was black,” Chokal-Ingam writes at his blog Almost Black. “The funny thing is I’m not. . . . My plan actually worked. Lucky for you, I never became a doctor.”

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/416473/smash-bamboo-ceiling-racial-quotas-john-fund

OMG. Not this again. He got into ONE medical school as a Black man, a school to which he didn't apply the first time around and in a totally different admissions cycle.

He says as an Indian, his chances of admission were about 17%. As a black man, those odds jumped to 79%

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“I got into medical school because I said I was black,” Chokal-Ingam writes at his blog Almost Black. “The funny thing is I’m not. . . . My plan actually worked. Lucky for you, I never became a doctor.”

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/416473/smash-bamboo-ceiling-racial-quotas-john-fund

OMG. Not this again. He got into ONE medical school as a Black man, a school to which he didn't apply the first time around and in a totally different admissions cycle.

He says as an Indian, his chances of admission were about 17%. As a black man, those odds jumped to 79%

Here's the relevant piece:

"He soon won interviews at Harvard and Columbia and a spot on waiting lists at the University of Pennsylvania, Washington University, and Mt. Sinai. He eventually went to Saint Louis University Medical School but dropped out after two years."

He got waitlisted at some good schools but didn't get in. So, yes, maybe being "Black" got him an interview that he wouldn't have gotten as an Indian. But it didn't win him acceptance.

But even if it were true that it's easier to get into medical school as a Black man, I'm 100% fine with that. Black men and women have some of the lowest life expectancies in the country, much of that due to untreated chronic conditions. In addition to healthcare reform, we also need more African American doctors to work in Black communities, and Latino doctors in Latino communities.

In fact, medical school is one of the professional programs in which I think affirmative action is the most defensible, given the realities of where people choose to work and the degree to which marginalized communities are more likely to seek medical care from people who share their cultural/racial background. Right now, about 4% of US doctors identify as Black, compared to 13% of the US population. On the other hand, about 18% of doctors are Asian, compared to about 5% of the US population.

This is a great paper by the AAMC about the issue of racial diversity in medicine and the positive impact of having more African American and Latino doctors: https://www.aamc.org/download/87306/data/physiciandiversityfacts.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“I got into medical school because I said I was black,” Chokal-Ingam writes at his blog Almost Black. “The funny thing is I’m not. . . . My plan actually worked. Lucky for you, I never became a doctor.”

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/416473/smash-bamboo-ceiling-racial-quotas-john-fund

OMG. Not this again. He got into ONE medical school as a Black man, a school to which he didn't apply the first time around and in a totally different admissions cycle.

He says as an Indian, his chances of admission were about 17%. As a black man, those odds jumped to 79%

Here's the relevant piece:

"He soon won interviews at Harvard and Columbia and a spot on waiting lists at the University of Pennsylvania, Washington University, and Mt. Sinai. He eventually went to Saint Louis University Medical School but dropped out after two years."

He got waitlisted at some good schools but didn't get in. So, yes, maybe being "Black" got him an interview that he wouldn't have gotten as an Indian. But it didn't win him acceptance.

But even if it were true that it's easier to get into medical school as a Black man, I'm 100% fine with that. Black men and women have some of the lowest life expectancies in the country, much of that due to untreated chronic conditions. In addition to healthcare reform, we also need more African American doctors to work in Black communities, and Latino doctors in Latino communities.

In fact, medical school is one of the professional programs in which I think affirmative action is the most defensible, given the realities of where people choose to work and the degree to which marginalized communities are more likely to seek medical care from people who share their cultural/racial background. Right now, about 4% of US doctors identify as Black, compared to 13% of the US population. On the other hand, about 18% of doctors are Asian, compared to about 5% of the US population.

This is a great paper by the AAMC about the issue of racial diversity in medicine and the positive impact of having more African American and Latino doctors: https://www.aamc.org/download/87306/data/physiciandiversityfacts.pdf

+100

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“I got into medical school because I said I was black,” Chokal-Ingam writes at his blog Almost Black. “The funny thing is I’m not. . . . My plan actually worked. Lucky for you, I never became a doctor.”

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/416473/smash-bamboo-ceiling-racial-quotas-john-fund

OMG. Not this again. He got into ONE medical school as a Black man, a school to which he didn't apply the first time around and in a totally different admissions cycle.

He says as an Indian, his chances of admission were about 17%. As a black man, those odds jumped to 79%

Here's the relevant piece:

"He soon won interviews at Harvard and Columbia and a spot on waiting lists at the University of Pennsylvania, Washington University, and Mt. Sinai. He eventually went to Saint Louis University Medical School but dropped out after two years."

He got waitlisted at some good schools but didn't get in. So, yes, maybe being "Black" got him an interview that he wouldn't have gotten as an Indian. But it didn't win him acceptance.

But even if it were true that it's easier to get into medical school as a Black man, I'm 100% fine with that. Black men and women have some of the lowest life expectancies in the country, much of that due to untreated chronic conditions. In addition to healthcare reform, we also need more African American doctors to work in Black communities, and Latino doctors in Latino communities.

In fact, medical school is one of the professional programs in which I think affirmative action is the most defensible, given the realities of where people choose to work and the degree to which marginalized communities are more likely to seek medical care from people who share their cultural/racial background. Right now, about 4% of US doctors identify as Black, compared to 13% of the US population. On the other hand, about 18% of doctors are Asian, compared to about 5% of the US population.

This is a great paper by the AAMC about the issue of racial diversity in medicine and the positive impact of having more African American and Latino doctors: https://www.aamc.org/download/87306/data/physiciandiversityfacts.pdf

So you are all for lowering the standards so those Affirmative Action doctors can work on you? Sounds good to me! I want a doctor who was able to coast due to race

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They have minimum floors which eliminate some applicants
Then there are a series of buckets and categories. They take the best from each category. Thats how it works
Basically as an Asian person you ARE competing against other Asians plus other people from your school/geographic region, background, etc
You are competing against people that are similar to you and they can't take everyone
Is the top underrepresented minority person first generation college student that went to a terrible high school more deserving than the 100th asian with higher grades/test scores, more extracurriculars, from a high performing school district who knows but chances are the person will get in instead of the 100th asian.

So what you are saying is it's fine to discriminate. Grand.

Grow up. The whole college admissions process is one long exercise in various kinds of discrimination. Schools have all sorts of goals in creating their classes. They eliminate some qualified candidates in favor of other qualified candidates for a whole bunch of reasons.

"Everyone is doing it for all sorts of reasons". Sounds fine to me. Intellectually and morally lazy.

I don't think you understand what "discrimination" means.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“I got into medical school because I said I was black,” Chokal-Ingam writes at his blog Almost Black. “The funny thing is I’m not. . . . My plan actually worked. Lucky for you, I never became a doctor.”

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/416473/smash-bamboo-ceiling-racial-quotas-john-fund

OMG. Not this again. He got into ONE medical school as a Black man, a school to which he didn't apply the first time around and in a totally different admissions cycle.

He says as an Indian, his chances of admission were about 17%. As a black man, those odds jumped to 79%

Here's the relevant piece:

"He soon won interviews at Harvard and Columbia and a spot on waiting lists at the University of Pennsylvania, Washington University, and Mt. Sinai. He eventually went to Saint Louis University Medical School but dropped out after two years."

He got waitlisted at some good schools but didn't get in. So, yes, maybe being "Black" got him an interview that he wouldn't have gotten as an Indian. But it didn't win him acceptance.

But even if it were true that it's easier to get into medical school as a Black man, I'm 100% fine with that. Black men and women have some of the lowest life expectancies in the country, much of that due to untreated chronic conditions. In addition to healthcare reform, we also need more African American doctors to work in Black communities, and Latino doctors in Latino communities.

In fact, medical school is one of the professional programs in which I think affirmative action is the most defensible, given the realities of where people choose to work and the degree to which marginalized communities are more likely to seek medical care from people who share their cultural/racial background. Right now, about 4% of US doctors identify as Black, compared to 13% of the US population. On the other hand, about 18% of doctors are Asian, compared to about 5% of the US population.

This is a great paper by the AAMC about the issue of racial diversity in medicine and the positive impact of having more African American and Latino doctors: https://www.aamc.org/download/87306/data/physiciandiversityfacts.pdf

So you are all for lowering the standards so those Affirmative Action doctors can work on you? Sounds good to me! I want a doctor who was able to coast due to race

Your racism and ignorance are showing.

1) AA doesn't mean unqualified people are accepted. It means that once a person has qualified, other factors, including race, are considered more heavily than test scores.

2) Test scores underpredict the performance of certain ethnic groups in school. They should be adjusted to refect the group's actual performance in school .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“I got into medical school because I said I was black,” Chokal-Ingam writes at his blog Almost Black. “The funny thing is I’m not. . . . My plan actually worked. Lucky for you, I never became a doctor.”

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/416473/smash-bamboo-ceiling-racial-quotas-john-fund

OMG. Not this again. He got into ONE medical school as a Black man, a school to which he didn't apply the first time around and in a totally different admissions cycle.

He says as an Indian, his chances of admission were about 17%. As a black man, those odds jumped to 79%

Here's the relevant piece:

"He soon won interviews at Harvard and Columbia and a spot on waiting lists at the University of Pennsylvania, Washington University, and Mt. Sinai. He eventually went to Saint Louis University Medical School but dropped out after two years."

He got waitlisted at some good schools but didn't get in. So, yes, maybe being "Black" got him an interview that he wouldn't have gotten as an Indian. But it didn't win him acceptance.

But even if it were true that it's easier to get into medical school as a Black man, I'm 100% fine with that. Black men and women have some of the lowest life expectancies in the country, much of that due to untreated chronic conditions. In addition to healthcare reform, we also need more African American doctors to work in Black communities, and Latino doctors in Latino communities.

In fact, medical school is one of the professional programs in which I think affirmative action is the most defensible, given the realities of where people choose to work and the degree to which marginalized communities are more likely to seek medical care from people who share their cultural/racial background. Right now, about 4% of US doctors identify as Black, compared to 13% of the US population. On the other hand, about 18% of doctors are Asian, compared to about 5% of the US population.

This is a great paper by the AAMC about the issue of racial diversity in medicine and the positive impact of having more African American and Latino doctors: https://www.aamc.org/download/87306/data/physiciandiversityfacts.pdf

So you are all for lowering the standards so those Affirmative Action doctors can work on you? Sounds good to me! I want a doctor who was able to coast due to race

Your racism and ignorance are showing.

1) AA doesn't mean unqualified people are accepted. It means that once a person has qualified, other factors, including race, are considered more heavily than test scores.

2) Test scores underpredict the performance of certain ethnic groups in school. They should be adjusted to refect the group's actual performance in school .

No it doesn't mean they are all under qualified. But it does mean the standards to get in had to be lowered in order for them TO qualify. Same thing has been proven re: firefighters, etc. Why should RACE be considered more than how someone tests?

You want to take the chance that test scores under predict performance when someone has you open on the table? Or when your unconscious body is lying in a burning building?

This isn't a question of someone performing really well in school and testing poorly. This is about a completely different sent of standards for one race than there is for another.

[Anonymous]

African Americans have to work twice as hard just to be equal. So, go in and keep getting your panties in a twist about how "race shouldn't be a factor" when it has been very much a factor in this country for 400 years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“I got into medical school because I said I was black,” Chokal-Ingam writes at his blog Almost Black. “The funny thing is I’m not. . . . My plan actually worked. Lucky for you, I never became a doctor.”

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/416473/smash-bamboo-ceiling-racial-quotas-john-fund

OMG. Not this again. He got into ONE medical school as a Black man, a school to which he didn't apply the first time around and in a totally different admissions cycle.

He says as an Indian, his chances of admission were about 17%. As a black man, those odds jumped to 79%

Here's the relevant piece:

"He soon won interviews at Harvard and Columbia and a spot on waiting lists at the University of Pennsylvania, Washington University, and Mt. Sinai. He eventually went to Saint Louis University Medical School but dropped out after two years."

He got waitlisted at some good schools but didn't get in. So, yes, maybe being "Black" got him an interview that he wouldn't have gotten as an Indian. But it didn't win him acceptance.

But even if it were true that it's easier to get into medical school as a Black man, I'm 100% fine with that. Black men and women have some of the lowest life expectancies in the country, much of that due to untreated chronic conditions. In addition to healthcare reform, we also need more African American doctors to work in Black communities, and Latino doctors in Latino communities.

In fact, medical school is one of the professional programs in which I think affirmative action is the most defensible, given the realities of where people choose to work and the degree to which marginalized communities are more likely to seek medical care from people who share their cultural/racial background. Right now, about 4% of US doctors identify as Black, compared to 13% of the US population. On the other hand, about 18% of doctors are Asian, compared to about 5% of the US population.

This is a great paper by the AAMC about the issue of racial diversity in medicine and the positive impact of having more African American and Latino doctors: https://www.aamc.org/download/87306/data/physiciandiversityfacts.pdf

So you are all for lowering the standards so those Affirmative Action doctors can work on you? Sounds good to me! I want a doctor who was able to coast due to race

Your racism and ignorance are showing.

1) AA doesn't mean unqualified people are accepted. It means that once a person has qualified, other factors, including race, are considered more heavily than test scores.

2) Test scores underpredict the performance of certain ethnic groups in school. They should be adjusted to refect the group's actual performance in school .

No it doesn't mean they are all under qualified. But it does mean the standards to get in had to be lowered in order for them TO qualify. Same thing has been proven re: firefighters, etc. Why should RACE be considered more than how someone tests?

You want to take the chance that test scores under predict performance when someone has you open on the table? Or when your unconscious body is lying in a burning building?

This isn't a question of someone performing really well in school and testing poorly. This is about a completely different sent of standards for one race than there is for another.

This is not true. The standards are not lowered to allow non-white candidates to qualify. You are 100% factually wrong on this. Thanks for playing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no evidence that Asian-American students have more and better extra-curriculars and leadership experience and other factors that go into a holistic admissions review. The only basis anyone claims that Asian-American students are more qualified is because of test scores. By definition, a non-holistic admissions process relies exclusively on grades and test scores. So if you argue that a holistic review is unfair, then you are demanding a numbers based process. And as I wrote earlier, every Asian education ministry says their test-based process is screwed up and unfair and produces bad results for learning.

We don't have the evidence because colleges refuse to release the information and actively block release of any information that will shed light on this issue. Harvard is even refusing to comply with the discovery requests made in the legal action brought by Asian Americans alleging racial discrimination using every trick not to release any relevant information.

Refusing to release relevant information and then saying there is no evidence for such allegation is self serving. There are plenty of anecdotal evidence of Asian Americans with "better extra-curriculars and leadership experience and other factors that go into a holistic admissions" compared to AA and Hispanics getting unfavorable assessments.

Blah, blah, blah. These colleges are private (and stop the public funds nonsense -- most of the schools we're talking about could stop taking fed money tomorrow and make it up from the private sector). The more info they release, the more it is subject to misinterpretation would be my guess. For example, how would you quantify a "gut feel" about a particular candidate vs. another? This is common in hiring decisions all the time.

The bottom line is a supply and demand issue. There are more people who want to go to to private elite schools than seats available. For status reasons, Asians (6 % of the U.S. population, 60 % of the world population) disproportionately want to go to the same big name private U.S. universities. You could fill the freshman classes of each of them entirely with qualified Asians and Asian Americans and there would still be unhappy people who felt they were cheated. Everyone acknowledges Ivy league admission is a crapshoot. By design, these universities choose a cross-selection of high achieving or high potential students. It's beyond competitive. Any one individual - regardless of race/ethnicity - is lucky to get in. No one individual - regardless of race or ethnicity - is guaranteed or entitled to get in. Lots of the griping comes down to people wanting to adhere to a formula and get in. (top test scores, top ECs, top grades). But the top universities want individuals, who don't necessarily come across in a seemingly "perfect" application. They want someone confident enough to say, "you'd be lucky to get me and if you turn me down, F.U., I'll take my talent + success elsewhere. Not someone who says, "stop giving under-represented minorities and talented athletes and other bright kids who bring something different a shot, so more of my race or type of student can get in."

I am curious among the elite schools how the military academies rank in terms of Asian admissions? Maybe our Asian friends should be pushing their students in that direction too. After all, you get a free education at among the top schools in America and guaranteed employment afterward and an alumni network that will tie you into the top ranks in politics and business in America.

It's a generalization, but military service is not big with the Asian families I've known.