Harvard's odd quota on Asian-Americans

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is a widespread perception, which may be unfair, that Asian-Americans have an unhealthy fixation with going to prestigious colleges and are are spending an inordinate amount of time and resources prepping their children for standardized tests, doing excessively large numbers of extra curriculars, not for enjoyment or personal growth, but for the purpose of impressing admissions, resulting in unrealistically high entrances stats.

Again, this is the perception, not necessarily the reality, but this has created a situation where admissions are skeptical of scores coming from Asian-Americans.

Unfortunately, this stereotype hurts poorer Asian immigrants, particular ones from countries that don't have super competitive education systems. They get lumped in with the stereotypical "Asian Math Geniuses/Tiger Moms" from middle/upper-middle class backgrounds.

I think a similar issue happens to African Americans. Most colleges will accept AAs with lower stats than other races, with the assumption that they must be from impoverished backgrounds and "didn't have a father in the household," etc. But a disproportionately large proportion of the AAs that benefit from this are the middle-class AAs, or the children of immigrants from Caribbean nations, or from Africa itself -- all of whom tend to be better-off socioeconomically than the average AA. The truly poor AAs, the intended beneficiaries, don't benefit as often, and are far more likely to go to community colleges, where they will typically drop-out after a semester or two.

The point of using diversity as a criteria in admissions and reviewing the whole student ( not just adding up grades and scores) is to create a student body that brings a variety of points of views, experiences abilities, talents, interests and life experiences. In the old days the Ivies and other schools actively discriminated against against jews. They had quotas. I may be naive but I think what is happening now with Asians is somewhat different. Hopefully the admissions office is well aware of the vast differences between individual Asian applicants, and is looking at the whole applicant. Thus a straight A student, high scoring Asian applicant may be denied entrance. And others in the class ( also Asian or AA or white for that matter) may be admitted with lower grades and scores because of other factors. ( And yes a factor can be money or legacy status). I do not think an admissions policies that basis admission of grades and scores only would be beneficial to the learning environment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is a widespread perception, which may be unfair, that Asian-Americans have an unhealthy fixation with going to prestigious colleges and are are spending an inordinate amount of time and resources prepping their children for standardized tests, doing excessively large numbers of extra curriculars, not for enjoyment or personal growth, but for the purpose of impressing admissions, resulting in unrealistically high entrances stats.

Again, this is the perception, not necessarily the reality, but this has created a situation where admissions are skeptical of scores coming from Asian-Americans.

Unfortunately, this stereotype hurts poorer Asian immigrants, particular ones from countries that don't have super competitive education systems. They get lumped in with the stereotypical "Asian Math Geniuses/Tiger Moms" from middle/upper-middle class backgrounds.

I think a similar issue happens to African Americans. Most colleges will accept AAs with lower stats than other races, with the assumption that they must be from impoverished backgrounds and "didn't have a father in the household," etc. But a disproportionately large proportion of the AAs that benefit from this are the middle-class AAs, or the children of immigrants from Caribbean nations, or from Africa itself -- all of whom tend to be better-off socioeconomically than the average AA. The truly poor AAs, the intended beneficiaries, don't benefit as often, and are far more likely to go to community colleges, where they will typically drop-out after a semester or two.

The point of using diversity as a criteria in admissions and reviewing the whole student ( not just adding up grades and scores) is to create a student body that brings a variety of points of views, experiences abilities, talents, interests and life experiences. In the old days the Ivies and other schools actively discriminated against against jews. They had quotas. I may be naive but I think what is happening now with Asians is somewhat different. Hopefully the admissions office is well aware of the vast differences between individual Asian applicants, and is looking at the whole applicant. Thus a straight A student, high scoring Asian applicant may be denied entrance. And others in the class ( also Asian or AA or white for that matter) may be admitted with lower grades and scores because of other factors. ( And yes a factor can be money or legacy status). I do not think an admissions policies that basis admission of grades and scores only would be beneficial to the learning environment.

[Anonymous]

I think high-achieving Asian-Americans are also being hurt by a simultaneous trend of colleges (and the general public) beginning to question the value of test-taking.

In the old days, it was simple. Getting into a decent college meant taking an entrance exam (assuming you were white and male). There is an increasing tendency to look at a whole basket of factors, slightly diminishing the singular value of GPA and test scores. I don't think that this is solely done to marginalize Asian-Americans, but it does have that effect.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think high-achieving Asian-Americans are also being hurt by a simultaneous trend of colleges (and the general public) beginning to question the value of test-taking.

In the old days, it was simple. Getting into a decent college meant taking an entrance exam (assuming you were white and male). There is an increasing tendency to look at a whole basket of factors, slightly diminishing the singular value of GPA and test scores. I don't think that this is solely done to marginalize Asian-Americans, but it does have that effect.

It's not just higher test scores and GPAs. Asian Americans are rejected despite having excellent ECs, leadership potential, volunteering, awards/recognition in addition to high SAT score and GPA. Asians generally excel in these other areas compared to other groups and still get rejected year in and year out hence the discrimination claim.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think high-achieving Asian-Americans are also being hurt by a simultaneous trend of colleges (and the general public) beginning to question the value of test-taking.

In the old days, it was simple. Getting into a decent college meant taking an entrance exam (assuming you were white and male). There is an increasing tendency to look at a whole basket of factors, slightly diminishing the singular value of GPA and test scores. I don't think that this is solely done to marginalize Asian-Americans, but it does have that effect.

It's not just higher test scores and GPAs. Asian Americans are rejected despite having excellent ECs, leadership potential, volunteering, awards/recognition in addition to high SAT score and GPA. Asians generally excel in these other areas compared to other groups and still get rejected year in and year out hence the discrimination claim.

What's more, a lot of high-achieving Asian kids come from families with nothing. Their parents came to the US literally with the clothing on their backs. It's interesting to look back 40 years later on the fall of South Vietnam and recall the families who arrived in refugee camps with nothing. They couldn't speak English. They faced discrimination in many areas where they were settled. Many lived in poverty. (Not just in places like Louisiana, even the liberal then--and-now-Gov. Jerry Brown of California said that the Vietnamese "should stay in Vietnam.").

Yet today, their children (or in some cases grandchildren) not only are ineligible for affirmative action, but they actually face quotas on university admissions. Meanwhile, universities extend preferential treatment to the sons and daughters of African-American professionals, among others. If that isn't blatantly unconstitutional racial discrimination, I don't know what is.

[Anonymous]

This whole thread is about the academic martyrdom of Asians in America. Just as no one should assume that every Asian has an IQ of 200, the same goes about the PP's grandiose assumption stance that all African Americans are substandard academically and all are admitted having sub par scores and grades. Their hard work and equal footing is meaningless because PP espouses the superiority of Asians against everyone else.

No one race deserves every college seat....Asians and no one else. Period.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think high-achieving Asian-Americans are also being hurt by a simultaneous trend of colleges (and the general public) beginning to question the value of test-taking.

In the old days, it was simple. Getting into a decent college meant taking an entrance exam (assuming you were white and male). There is an increasing tendency to look at a whole basket of factors, slightly diminishing the singular value of GPA and test scores. I don't think that this is solely done to marginalize Asian-Americans, but it does have that effect.

It's not just higher test scores and GPAs. Asian Americans are rejected despite having excellent ECs, leadership potential, volunteering, awards/recognition in addition to high SAT score and GPA. Asians generally excel in these other areas compared to other groups and still get rejected year in and year out hence the discrimination claim.

Cry me a (Charles) river.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Prepping is NOT cheating.
Some posts have come close to making that equivalency so I want to comment on that.

Preparation for tests is hard work.
The reason some Asians score better on tests is because they work harder and put in more time than others. Whether you think that this is a waste of their time, when they could have been doing different extra-curriculars such as sports or writing a book, etc, does not take away from the fact that these students work and sacrifice for their goal. They deserve respect.

It is absolutely undeniably that right now many universities discriminate actively against Asian Americans, by restricting their numbers and thus holding them to a higher standard.
That is wrong.

And the kids who put in the time to master their EC (music, art, writing, a sport, etc, have also sacrificed for their goal(s). And they definitely deserve respect. The universities recognize that sacrifice and it's importance whether it appeals to you or not.

I'm sorry, you haven't understood correctly the gravity of the situation.

I'm talking about well-documented cases where Asian-Americans (last names that are unmistakably Asian) has been refused admission with a perfect SAT score and stellar extra-curriculars (concertmaster in a national-acclaimed orchestra, for ex), whereas others of different races in the same-year cohort have gotten in with no hooks of any kind, lower GPAs, lower SATs, and no particularly astounding extra-curricular achievements.
A handful of cases have been picked up by the press over the years, and occasionally universities have reversed their decision.

We are talking about egregious cases, not grey-zone cases. The scandal is that there are many, many egregious cases, and that most of them are swept under the rug by the non-transparent admission practices of most universities. Plus, the Asian-American population is not a unified whole, there are various countries and cultures represented, which impedes their capacity to unite and put media/lega pressure. Also the Asian mindset is not of a complaining sort, and standing up to point fingers is definitely not an ingrained practice.

However, this may change...

I'd like to see evidence of these "egregious cases". I have known Asians who do extra-ordinary, 1 in a million type things, like getting first author on a published research project in a respected journals or successfully driving a political campaign to pay teachers in their school district a liveable wage or something. Not a single one of them hasn't gotten a choice between different elite schools when the dust settles.

And yes, that is what it takes to be guaranteed a spot into an elite school these days. Anything less than that and it is a crap-shoot, no matter what race you are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Prepping is NOT cheating.
Some posts have come close to making that equivalency so I want to comment on that.

Preparation for tests is hard work.
The reason some Asians score better on tests is because they work harder and put in more time than others. Whether you think that this is a waste of their time, when they could have been doing different extra-curriculars such as sports or writing a book, etc, does not take away from the fact that these students work and sacrifice for their goal. They deserve respect.

It is absolutely undeniably that right now many universities discriminate actively against Asian Americans, by restricting their numbers and thus holding them to a higher standard.
That is wrong.

And the kids who put in the time to master their EC (music, art, writing, a sport, etc, have also sacrificed for their goal(s). And they definitely deserve respect. The universities recognize that sacrifice and it's importance whether it appeals to you or not.

I'm sorry, you haven't understood correctly the gravity of the situation.

I'm talking about well-documented cases where Asian-Americans (last names that are unmistakably Asian) has been refused admission with a perfect SAT score and stellar extra-curriculars (concertmaster in a national-acclaimed orchestra, for ex), whereas others of different races in the same-year cohort have gotten in with no hooks of any kind, lower GPAs, lower SATs, and no particularly astounding extra-curricular achievements.
A handful of cases have been picked up by the press over the years, and occasionally universities have reversed their decision.

We are talking about egregious cases, not grey-zone cases. The scandal is that there are many, many egregious cases, and that most of them are swept under the rug by the non-transparent admission practices of most universities. Plus, the Asian-American population is not a unified whole, there are various countries and cultures represented, which impedes their capacity to unite and put media/lega pressure. Also the Asian mindset is not of a complaining sort, and standing up to point fingers is definitely not an ingrained practice.

However, this may change...

I'd like to see evidence of these "egregious cases". I have known Asians who do extra-ordinary, 1 in a million type things, like getting first author on a published research project in a respected journals or successfully driving a political campaign to pay teachers in their school district a liveable wage or something. Not a single one of them hasn't gotten a choice between different elite schools when the dust settles.

And yes, that is what it takes to be guaranteed a spot into an elite school these days. Anything less than that and it is a crap-shoot, no matter what race you are.

Unless the applicant is URM or legacy.

[Anonymous]

You are over-estimating the impact of being a URM or legacy to a ridiculous degree.

The acceptance rate for URMs is the same for Asians or Whites. It's no "easier" to get in as a Black applicant as for an Asian applicant. You still have a 95% chance of being rejected. The percent accepted of each race is the same as the percent applied.

As for legacies, Harvard has come out and said that the acceptance rate for Harvard legacies is the same as the acceptance rate for Yale or Princeton legacies. In other words, the boost isn't because they're giving legacies a leg up, it's because legacies tend to be more accomplished than the application pool as a whole.

Most people complaining about how Asians are unfairly penalized seem to have no idea how the admission process at elite schools actually works.

SAT scores and grades are used as a gateway. An applicant with a 2200 and a 3.8 gets through the gate just as easily as an applicant with a 2400 and a 4.0. No one, no matter the race, is allowed through this gate if admissions doesn't think they are academically qualified for the school. After this point, admissions doesn't care about your grades and scores, and that 2400 you spent hours in cram schools working towards means nothing.

After this step, admissions looks at the rest of the application. Essays, extra-curriculars, etc. At this point, some people, who have absolutely amazing accomplishments, like the kind I mentioned earlier, are shoe ins. These people will get into nearly every school they apply to, usually with likely letters. Everyone else has to hope for the best. Admissions tries to build a class that represents many diverse interests, majors, and backgrounds (including race), but the choice as to who to admit comes down to completely intangible factors.

If you aren't a shoe in, it's luck. Black, Asian, White, whatever. You have to hope that the Admission Committee likes your application. The Asian who was rejected with a perfect SAT score and was a concertmaster in a national-acclaimed orchestra was probably rejected for some other applicant who was a concertmaster in a national-acclaimed orchestra but who had a better essay. Every niche competes within itself, Harvard only needs so many oboe players.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You are over-estimating the impact of being a URM or legacy to a ridiculous degree.

The acceptance rate for URMs is the same for Asians or Whites. It's no "easier" to get in as a Black applicant as for an Asian applicant. You still have a 95% chance of being rejected. The percent accepted of each race is the same as the percent applied.

As for legacies, Harvard has come out and said that the acceptance rate for Harvard legacies is the same as the acceptance rate for Yale or Princeton legacies. In other words, the boost isn't because they're giving legacies a leg up, it's because legacies tend to be more accomplished than the application pool as a whole.

Most people complaining about how Asians are unfairly penalized seem to have no idea how the admission process at elite schools actually works.

SAT scores and grades are used as a gateway. An applicant with a 2200 and a 3.8 gets through the gate just as easily as an applicant with a 2400 and a 4.0. No one, no matter the race, is allowed through this gate if admissions doesn't think they are academically qualified for the school. After this point, admissions doesn't care about your grades and scores, and that 2400 you spent hours in cram schools working towards means nothing.

After this step, admissions looks at the rest of the application. Essays, extra-curriculars, etc. At this point, some people, who have absolutely amazing accomplishments, like the kind I mentioned earlier, are shoe ins. These people will get into nearly every school they apply to, usually with likely letters. Everyone else has to hope for the best. Admissions tries to build a class that represents many diverse interests, majors, and backgrounds (including race), but the choice as to who to admit comes down to completely intangible factors.

If you aren't a shoe in, it's luck. Black, Asian, White, whatever. You have to hope that the Admission Committee likes your application. The Asian who was rejected with a perfect SAT score and was a concertmaster in a national-acclaimed orchestra was probably rejected for some other applicant who was a concertmaster in a national-acclaimed orchestra but who had a better essay. Every niche competes within itself, Harvard only needs so many oboe players.

Excellent point. There are just so many 5.0 GPA, 2400 SAT or 36 ACT, concertmaster, cancer discoverers, mathematical genius, etc, that a college class needs regardless of your ethnicity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
If these colleges didn't put such a high burden on Asian Amer. students, then maybe they wouldn't prep as much. I don't know. Seems to me that people who judge others for wanting to work hard and get ahead are either hypocritical or jealous.

It's the parents, not colleges.
Parents view a top college as end-all, be all. They punish kids for grades below A, yell and beat them, and not just abroad, but in this country also.

[Anonymous]

It's really sickening how people on this thread deny what's going on right in front of their nose.

Asians are discriminated against at selective universities, period. The most well-rounded Asian will be judged to a higher standard than his or her white counterpart (or AA, or hispanic, etc). This has been proven.

Noone does anything about it, just as decades ago, no one did anything about anti-Jewish admissions to top colleges.

Result: Jews worked harder and got in anyway and now dominate certain academic and intellectual circles.
The same will happen to Asians.

It's just sickening how these populations have to strive so far beyond the rest to get equal recognition.

[Anonymous]

Since the SAT was dumbed down, Harvard has more applicants with perfect scores than spots in its freshman class.

Some are going to be rejected and will do just fine elsewhere.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
It's really sickening how people on this thread deny what's going on right in front of their nose.

Asians are discriminated against at selective universities, period. The most well-rounded Asian will be judged to a higher standard than his or her white counterpart (or AA, or hispanic, etc). This has been proven.

Noone does anything about it, just as decades ago, no one did anything about anti-Jewish admissions to top colleges.

Result: Jews worked harder and got in anyway and now dominate certain academic and intellectual circles.
The same will happen to Asians.

It's just sickening how these populations have to strive so far beyond the rest to get equal recognition.

What is sickening is your continued victimization of Asians who are well represented in colleges especially CalTech, Stanford, Berkeley, etc. What you really want is to take the seats awarded to AA, white females, the Midwestern farm kid who wouldn't normally have a HYP shot.

For arguments sake, although Asians were the largest minority admitted (20%) for Harvard class of 2018 followed by Hispanic, AA, and Native American, let's grant your wish and take all their seats (27% total) and award them to Asians.

So now, you have 47% of Harvard 2018 seats and a significantly sizable number of Asian 2400 SAT scorers, 5.0 GPA, concertmasters remaining who state that their scores are significantly better (let's just throw essays out the window) and demand the remaining seats from white applicants who had 2250 vs Asian 2400.

2,048 Harvard seats for 2018. Let's see how you divvy up those seats among thousands of perfect scoring Asians since you opine that the rest of us are academically incapable of reaching your falsely perceived standard.