Should people still hide/lie about their race on college applications?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think 99% of schools will opt out of receiving that data point. Too much risk.

I also think what this guy said about recruiting from different high schools will become a big deal.

To clarify, colleges will continue to receive the data. The data that admissions officers see is filtered and will not include the data point (too risky, as you point out).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jeff Selingo wrote this in his most recent newsletter re: the end of Affirmative Action:

While we wait to see the downstream effects play out over the next year, here are more immediate developments I’m watching for:

1. Test optional here to stay? The rapid expansion of test-optional admissions during the pandemic brought more applicants—and more applicants of color—to selective colleges. Plus, when institutions don’t have a test score for every applicant, it’s a piece of evidence those claiming discrimination don’t have at their disposal to use in their case.

2. When colleges ‘see’ checkbox data. The Common App will still give students an option to identify as Hispanic, Black, Asian, white, etc. But colleges can have the Common App withhold that information when applications are transmitted to the institution or receive it but mask the data from their admissions teams. The question, as one college official told me earlier this week, is when does the admissions dean look at the data? Do they wait until students commit in May, or do they look weeks earlier during yield season before accepted students have deposited?

3. Shifts in recruitment and yield strategies. If colleges know the racial and ethnic makeup of their accepted pool in April—after acceptances have gone out but before deposits are in—admissions deans I talked with recently believe they can still race as a factor in how they yield students. That might include improved financial aid packages, campus visits where colleges fly-in accepted students, and other tactics colleges have long used to make their class.

At the other end of the admissions funnel, expect selective colleges to focus more recruiting time and resources on high schools with large proportions of students of color.
•
o The University of Virginia, for instance, announced last month a plan to target 40 high schools in the state that have sent few applications to the flagship campus.
o But even those approaches might come under fire in some states. After the chancellor of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill announced an expansion of free tuition for families making less than $80,000 a year following the Supreme Court decision, some members of the system’s Board of Board of Governors and Chapel Hill’s Board of Trustees pushed back, questioning why the university never presented the idea to them before releasing it publicly.

Really? Source? That sounds bizarre given SC decision.

Demographic data will continue to be collected. From the threads here, this is something everyone is interested in, even if it plays no role in admissions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With the latest Supreme Court ruling, it looks like there will no longer be an advantage for white kids who lie and claim Hispanic or black.

Hispanic/Latino is the ethnicity question, which is a separate question from race. Many, perhaps even most, Hispanic students in the US check the white box when asked for race. There is no Mestizo option. (The "American Indian or Alaska Native" box pulls up questions asking for federal tribe identification info.) This is entirely the result of federal reporting requirements.

There is "Other" , right? And "2 or more"?

So there are alternatives at least as accurate as White.
In US the race box is used for a crude measure of systemic oppression.
(White = Other but not systemically oppressed.
Other, 2 or More = systemically oppressed)

https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2014/06/16/321819185/on-the-census-who-checks-hispanic-who-checks-white-and-why

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jeff Selingo wrote this in his most recent newsletter re: the end of Affirmative Action:

While we wait to see the downstream effects play out over the next year, here are more immediate developments I’m watching for:

1. Test optional here to stay? The rapid expansion of test-optional admissions during the pandemic brought more applicants—and more applicants of color—to selective colleges. Plus, when institutions don’t have a test score for every applicant, it’s a piece of evidence those claiming discrimination don’t have at their disposal to use in their case.

2. When colleges ‘see’ checkbox data. The Common App will still give students an option to identify as Hispanic, Black, Asian, white, etc. But colleges can have the Common App withhold that information when applications are transmitted to the institution or receive it but mask the data from their admissions teams. The question, as one college official told me earlier this week, is when does the admissions dean look at the data? Do they wait until students commit in May, or do they look weeks earlier during yield season before accepted students have deposited?

3. Shifts in recruitment and yield strategies. If colleges know the racial and ethnic makeup of their accepted pool in April—after acceptances have gone out but before deposits are in—admissions deans I talked with recently believe they can still race as a factor in how they yield students. That might include improved financial aid packages, campus visits where colleges fly-in accepted students, and other tactics colleges have long used to make their class.

At the other end of the admissions funnel, expect selective colleges to focus more recruiting time and resources on high schools with large proportions of students of color.
•
o The University of Virginia, for instance, announced last month a plan to target 40 high schools in the state that have sent few applications to the flagship campus.
o But even those approaches might come under fire in some states. After the chancellor of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill announced an expansion of free tuition for families making less than $80,000 a year following the Supreme Court decision, some members of the system’s Board of Board of Governors and Chapel Hill’s Board of Trustees pushed back, questioning why the university never presented the idea to them before releasing it publicly.

Really? Source? That sounds bizarre given SC decision.

The government isn't going to stop requiring colleges to report that data.

It's interesting that US Dept of Ed has not come up with any other way of getting at this data. The college reporting requirement is likely a large part of what drove colleges to have been so lazy as to rely on the checkbox for diversity enrollment rather than that last point mentioned in Selingo's article above about recruiting at high schools with large URM populations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jeff Selingo wrote this in his most recent newsletter re: the end of Affirmative Action:

While we wait to see the downstream effects play out over the next year, here are more immediate developments I’m watching for:

1. Test optional here to stay? The rapid expansion of test-optional admissions during the pandemic brought more applicants—and more applicants of color—to selective colleges. Plus, when institutions don’t have a test score for every applicant, it’s a piece of evidence those claiming discrimination don’t have at their disposal to use in their case.

2. When colleges ‘see’ checkbox data. The Common App will still give students an option to identify as Hispanic, Black, Asian, white, etc. But colleges can have the Common App withhold that information when applications are transmitted to the institution or receive it but mask the data from their admissions teams. The question, as one college official told me earlier this week, is when does the admissions dean look at the data? Do they wait until students commit in May, or do they look weeks earlier during yield season before accepted students have deposited?

3. Shifts in recruitment and yield strategies. If colleges know the racial and ethnic makeup of their accepted pool in April—after acceptances have gone out but before deposits are in—admissions deans I talked with recently believe they can still race as a factor in how they yield students. That might include improved financial aid packages, campus visits where colleges fly-in accepted students, and other tactics colleges have long used to make their class.

At the other end of the admissions funnel, expect selective colleges to focus more recruiting time and resources on high schools with large proportions of students of color.
•
o The University of Virginia, for instance, announced last month a plan to target 40 high schools in the state that have sent few applications to the flagship campus.
o But even those approaches might come under fire in some states. After the chancellor of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill announced an expansion of free tuition for families making less than $80,000 a year following the Supreme Court decision, some members of the system’s Board of Board of Governors and Chapel Hill’s Board of Trustees pushed back, questioning why the university never presented the idea to them before releasing it publicly.

Really? Source? That sounds bizarre given SC decision.

The government isn't going to stop requiring colleges to report that data.

It's interesting that US Dept of Ed has not come up with any other way of getting at this data. The college reporting requirement is likely a large part of what drove colleges to have been so lazy as to rely on the checkbox for diversity enrollment rather than that last point mentioned in Selingo's article above about recruiting at high schools with large URM populations.

How else would the government get the data if the colleges didn’t track admissions and enrollment demographics? Ironically, the data is necessary to prove racial discrimination.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With the latest Supreme Court ruling, it looks like there will no longer be an advantage for white kids who lie and claim Hispanic or black.

Hispanic/Latino is the ethnicity question, which is a separate question from race. Many, perhaps even most, Hispanic students in the US check the white box when asked for race. There is no Mestizo option. (The "American Indian or Alaska Native" box pulls up questions asking for federal tribe identification info.) This is entirely the result of federal reporting requirements.

There is "Other" , right? And "2 or more"?

So there are alternatives at least as accurate as White.
In US the race box is used for a crude measure of systemic oppression.
(White = Other but not systemically oppressed.
Other, 2 or More = systemically oppressed)

https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2014/06/16/321819185/on-the-census-who-checks-hispanic-who-checks-white-and-why

There is "one or more."

However, there is no "other" among the 5 race choices. If one first chooses "white", there is an "other" that leads to an open box to asking "Specify other White background."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think 99% of schools will opt out of receiving that data point. Too much risk.

I also think what this guy said about recruiting from different high schools will become a big deal.

I’m happy that colleges might focus more on outreach to diverse high-schools. I teach at a high school that is majority low and middle income. Many students are not incredibly high performing but some students are amazing. They have the whole package - smart, hardworking, nice, gritty and resilient. They do very well with limited resources and guidance. I try to help them as much as I can but they mostly get shut out of the top 30 colleges. They always need a lot of financial aid on top of everything else. They also don’t excel at the SAT. More active outreach from colleges and universities would be helpful. I live in an upscale neighborhood and the differences in resources available to high income kids with educated parents takes my breath away

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With the latest Supreme Court ruling, it looks like there will no longer be an advantage for white kids who lie and claim Hispanic or black.

Hispanic/Latino is the ethnicity question, which is a separate question from race. Many, perhaps even most, Hispanic students in the US check the white box when asked for race. There is no Mestizo option. (The "American Indian or Alaska Native" box pulls up questions asking for federal tribe identification info.) This is entirely the result of federal reporting requirements.

There is "Other" , right? And "2 or more"?

So there are alternatives at least as accurate as White.
In US the race box is used for a crude measure of systemic oppression.
(White = Other but not systemically oppressed.
Other, 2 or More = systemically oppressed)

https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2014/06/16/321819185/on-the-census-who-checks-hispanic-who-checks-white-and-why

There is no "other" to choose for race. "Other" only shows up as sub-questions for race choices. Here is one example of how a Hispanic student might answer the questions in the Common App:

Are you Hispanic or Latino/a/x?
_X_ Yes
___ No

Which best describes your Hispanic or Latino/a/x background? (You may select one or more)
___ Central America
___ Cuba
_X_ Mexico
___ Puerto Rico
___ South America
___ Spain
___ Other

Regardless of your answer to the prior question, please indicate how you identify yourself. (You may select one or more)
___ American Indian or Alaska Native
___ Asian
___ Black or African American
___ Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
_X_ White

Which best describes your White background? (You may select one or more)
___ Europe
___ Middle East
_X_ Other

Specify other White background __________________

The clarifying sub-questions add context, though I don't know whether that is reported to Dept of Ed. (It certainly isn't in the Common Data Set.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jeff Selingo wrote this in his most recent newsletter re: the end of Affirmative Action:

While we wait to see the downstream effects play out over the next year, here are more immediate developments I’m watching for:

1. Test optional here to stay? The rapid expansion of test-optional admissions during the pandemic brought more applicants—and more applicants of color—to selective colleges. Plus, when institutions don’t have a test score for every applicant, it’s a piece of evidence those claiming discrimination don’t have at their disposal to use in their case.

2. When colleges ‘see’ checkbox data. The Common App will still give students an option to identify as Hispanic, Black, Asian, white, etc. But colleges can have the Common App withhold that information when applications are transmitted to the institution or receive it but mask the data from their admissions teams. The question, as one college official told me earlier this week, is when does the admissions dean look at the data? Do they wait until students commit in May, or do they look weeks earlier during yield season before accepted students have deposited?

3. Shifts in recruitment and yield strategies. If colleges know the racial and ethnic makeup of their accepted pool in April—after acceptances have gone out but before deposits are in—admissions deans I talked with recently believe they can still race as a factor in how they yield students. That might include improved financial aid packages, campus visits where colleges fly-in accepted students, and other tactics colleges have long used to make their class.

At the other end of the admissions funnel, expect selective colleges to focus more recruiting time and resources on high schools with large proportions of students of color.
•
o The University of Virginia, for instance, announced last month a plan to target 40 high schools in the state that have sent few applications to the flagship campus.
o But even those approaches might come under fire in some states. After the chancellor of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill announced an expansion of free tuition for families making less than $80,000 a year following the Supreme Court decision, some members of the system’s Board of Board of Governors and Chapel Hill’s Board of Trustees pushed back, questioning why the university never presented the idea to them before releasing it publicly.

Really? Source? That sounds bizarre given SC decision.

The government isn't going to stop requiring colleges to report that data.

Is “prefer not to answer” a choice?

[Anonymous]

Hispanic/Latino is an ethnicity. It is not a race. This is a crucial point often overlooked, both in this forum and in the way aggregate diversity stats are reported.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jeff Selingo wrote this in his most recent newsletter re: the end of Affirmative Action:

While we wait to see the downstream effects play out over the next year, here are more immediate developments I’m watching for:

1. Test optional here to stay? The rapid expansion of test-optional admissions during the pandemic brought more applicants—and more applicants of color—to selective colleges. Plus, when institutions don’t have a test score for every applicant, it’s a piece of evidence those claiming discrimination don’t have at their disposal to use in their case.

2. When colleges ‘see’ checkbox data. The Common App will still give students an option to identify as Hispanic, Black, Asian, white, etc. But colleges can have the Common App withhold that information when applications are transmitted to the institution or receive it but mask the data from their admissions teams. The question, as one college official told me earlier this week, is when does the admissions dean look at the data? Do they wait until students commit in May, or do they look weeks earlier during yield season before accepted students have deposited?

3. Shifts in recruitment and yield strategies. If colleges know the racial and ethnic makeup of their accepted pool in April—after acceptances have gone out but before deposits are in—admissions deans I talked with recently believe they can still race as a factor in how they yield students. That might include improved financial aid packages, campus visits where colleges fly-in accepted students, and other tactics colleges have long used to make their class.

At the other end of the admissions funnel, expect selective colleges to focus more recruiting time and resources on high schools with large proportions of students of color.
•
o The University of Virginia, for instance, announced last month a plan to target 40 high schools in the state that have sent few applications to the flagship campus.
o But even those approaches might come under fire in some states. After the chancellor of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill announced an expansion of free tuition for families making less than $80,000 a year following the Supreme Court decision, some members of the system’s Board of Board of Governors and Chapel Hill’s Board of Trustees pushed back, questioning why the university never presented the idea to them before releasing it publicly.

Really? Source? That sounds bizarre given SC decision.

The government isn't going to stop requiring colleges to report that data.

Is “prefer not to answer” a choice?

The question in the Common App is optional. A student does not need to select anything. Presumably the number of students who did not respond to the question is also reported to Dept of Ed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think 99% of schools will opt out of receiving that data point. Too much risk.

I also think what this guy said about recruiting from different high schools will become a big deal.

I’m happy that colleges might focus more on outreach to diverse high-schools. I teach at a high school that is majority low and middle income. Many students are not incredibly high performing but some students are amazing. They have the whole package - smart, hardworking, nice, gritty and resilient. They do very well with limited resources and guidance. I try to help them as much as I can but they mostly get shut out of the top 30 colleges. They always need a lot of financial aid on top of everything else. They also don’t excel at the SAT. More active outreach from colleges and universities would be helpful. I live in an upscale neighborhood and the differences in resources available to high income kids with educated parents takes my breath away

If they don't excel at the SAT then they're not all that smart.

And no, rich parents can't just test prep their kids into excelling at the SAT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With the latest Supreme Court ruling, it looks like there will no longer be an advantage for white kids who lie and claim Hispanic or black.

Hispanic/Latino is the ethnicity question, which is a separate question from race. Many, perhaps even most, Hispanic students in the US check the white box when asked for race. There is no Mestizo option. (The "American Indian or Alaska Native" box pulls up questions asking for federal tribe identification info.) This is entirely the result of federal reporting requirements.

What will happen with the National Hispanic Recognition Program? I have read different things, some suggesting its demise but others saying that yes, of course students should report that academic honor in their applications.

On the one hand, academic awards can be considered. Whether an academic award that is race- or ethnicity-based can be considered seems to run close to the line of considering race. Yet, there it is in the app. Maybe admissions can't track it, but admissions will see it when reading the file.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think 99% of schools will opt out of receiving that data point. Too much risk.

I also think what this guy said about recruiting from different high schools will become a big deal.

I’m happy that colleges might focus more on outreach to diverse high-schools. I teach at a high school that is majority low and middle income. Many students are not incredibly high performing but some students are amazing. They have the whole package - smart, hardworking, nice, gritty and resilient. They do very well with limited resources and guidance. I try to help them as much as I can but they mostly get shut out of the top 30 colleges. They always need a lot of financial aid on top of everything else. They also don’t excel at the SAT. More active outreach from colleges and universities would be helpful. I live in an upscale neighborhood and the differences in resources available to high income kids with educated parents takes my breath away

If they don't excel at the SAT then they're not all that smart.

And no, rich parents can't just test prep their kids into excelling at the SAT.

You posting something does not make it true.

The SAT was never designed to measure IQ.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think 99% of schools will opt out of receiving that data point. Too much risk.

I also think what this guy said about recruiting from different high schools will become a big deal.

I’m happy that colleges might focus more on outreach to diverse high-schools. I teach at a high school that is majority low and middle income. Many students are not incredibly high performing but some students are amazing. They have the whole package - smart, hardworking, nice, gritty and resilient. They do very well with limited resources and guidance. I try to help them as much as I can but they mostly get shut out of the top 30 colleges. They always need a lot of financial aid on top of everything else. They also don’t excel at the SAT. More active outreach from colleges and universities would be helpful. I live in an upscale neighborhood and the differences in resources available to high income kids with educated parents takes my breath away

If they don't excel at the SAT then they're not all that smart.

And no, rich parents can't just test prep their kids into excelling at the SAT.

While you may want to believe that the SAT is a magical measurement of “merit,” PP, it simply isn’t true. There are so many factors that come into play that can affect the score that it has just ceased to be a useful data point. It is entirely possible for a very smart student to not excel on the SAT and colleges are well aware of this fact.