For all the parents complaining that the admissions process is rigged against their kids--

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nobody is disputing that blacks were historically discriminated against in college admissions. Jews were previously "over-represented" and discriminated against too. Now it is Asians.
Many of us are arguing for race-blind admissions over racial preferences (of any kind).

This is really the final simple point. If we want a race-neutral society, which based on watching my kids grow up in a very multi-cultural environment and seeming to really not distinguish or between races is absolutely doable - I will say this with certainty- my kids have NO racial biases - how amazing is that? It's the adults/society that want to constantly focus on race. Seeing the same URM kid gleefully show up as accepted on every IVY and Tier 1 school tier on college confidential with a 1400 and 3.7 GPA talking about how HARD it is going to be to pick from all the offers! while your kid with a 1580 and 4.4 has been rejected or waitlisted from everything except safeties, it fuels racial discord because the solution to past racism (in many people's mind) is not to implement new racist polices to manipulate outcomes. I know a lot of URM do support this - they see it as they are "due" but it ultimately moves us away from the goal of being race neutral.

In addition, we should similarly do away with sexual orientation in college admissions. What business is it of any organization the private sexual lives of people - it's so absurd, I cannot believe it has become such an open talking point. Let's class up, America.

Diversity in higher institutions of learning is good.

Colleges want diversity on campus.

There are many bright applicants across all demographics.

There are more applicants than spots. Some will get in. Some will not.

Colleges are the gatekeepers and will decide who they want.

Forcing you to mark your race and using it is racism.

Nobody is forcing your kid to apply to selective schools. If you don’t like their ecosystem go somewhere else.

So I can be a racist to my customers as well.

Sure, as long as you don't break the law.

what law

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Of course people understand the admissions office goals and that students are accepted within a range of scores, experiences, talents and majors. But it's like CRT, a political football that gets people foaming at the mouth and pits us against each other.

Exactly the goal of the group that brought this lawsuit. That group is using Asian students as a pawn in a larger chess game.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a great article on how to teach your child to have no competitive spirit and be happy with what meager rations they are given.

Kids this bright are quite aware of who is getting into the schools they and their friends have been targeting for 2 or 3 years and they can see the reverse discrimination and unfairness at play. They are not 2 year olds looking for moms reaction on this.

Maybe responsible parenting is acknowledging that while top schools are a stretch for everyone, it IS unfair that qualities outside of their control and baseless to achievement are getting prioritized over what should matter and thus impacting your child's results. It's not fair and there is nothing we can do.

But that they will still go to a good school and because they are brilliant they will make the best of it. The world will level out once they get past the insanity/bubble of college admissions because in the real world results matter more than checking a demographic box and brilliance and hard work will pay off, regardless of liberal agendas.

Companies focus on things that matter and so while this phase of life will illustrate to them the unfairness of racism of discrimination, the good news is that they will be past this BS in four years.

That is the article I would write.

WELL SAID!!!

You all have *no* idea how competitive college admissions works. That your kid has a perfect GPA, or a perfect SAT/ACT, makes them indistinguishable from literally 10X the number of applicants that the particular competitive school can admit. And you all think that the answer is to stack up a variety of variegated ECs that tell no coherent story except that they work really, really hard to rack up credentials. And every parent of that kid is telling them that it's racism that didn't get them admitted.

If you want your DC to get considered seriously in the admissions sweepstakes, you might consider (i) ways in which your child is different from thousands of high-stat, generally applicable ECs, from this area; and (ii) how their essay and ECs tells a persuasive and evidence-backed story about why they want to attend that particular school for that particular major. You parents complaining over and over about racial discrimination have no, no idea how the top schools admit students. You want your Asian kid to get admitted to a top school? Have them apply as an English major, after years of summer writing programs, creative writing awards, volunteering to help disavantaged students with writing, etc. Plus an amazing essay about that experience.

And, you have no idea what other kids' application packages look like.

No one is disputing the bolded part. What we are complaining about, if you can please keep up, is that skin color is being used as a differentiator, such that all of a sudden, a specific skin color allows for less than perfect GPA, less than perfect SAT/ACT, and otherwise average essays and ECs. No one is claiming that they are entitled to attend a certain school, or that a school must accept all students that meet a certain objective entrance bar. What we are complaining about, is that race is being used to admit less-well-performing students over better-performing students.

Performing how?

Performance is not certainly tied to one's skin color.
That's how.

Do you really think a slightly lower GPA or test score impacts someone’s ability to do well at an elite school? There is a range. They don’t just take the highest scoring 2000 kids or whatever (they couldn’t because it would be a tie). There is a range, then they look at other factors: recs, ECs, etc. Diversity is one thing they look at. I know you don’t respect the idea of diversity but they are open that they consider it. No one is hiding the ball. The kids that are admitted are within the basic range. Just like they may take a ballerina over a musician or whatever, they also want diversity of background (race, location, SES, etc). I know you understand this. I’m sure you are intelligent. You just don’t agree with the approach and you believe if you continue to make the same arguments over and over on DCUM it will change, but it won’t. They use holistic admissions and have been very clear about that. There are plenty of schools that don’t. If you don’t agree with the basic philosophy of the school, why choose it? If you want your kid to go there despite the philosophy, play the game. Find a way to get your kid to stand out and have their application seem different. Stop using the “formula” that no longer works.

Formula is simple. Don't be racist.
Just like you said the ones are getting are all equally qualified, so then diveristy will be achived natually.

by the way, I guess all state schools are shitty in terms of diversity (loctaion) by your standard

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of course people understand the admissions office goals and that students are accepted within a range of scores, experiences, talents and majors. But it's like CRT, a political football that gets people foaming at the mouth and pits us against each other.

Exactly the goal of the group that brought this lawsuit. That group is using Asian students as a pawn in a larger chess game.

Bingo

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of course people understand the admissions office goals and that students are accepted within a range of scores, experiences, talents and majors. But it's like CRT, a political football that gets people foaming at the mouth and pits us against each other.

Exactly the goal of the group that brought this lawsuit. That group is using Asian students as a pawn in a larger chess game.

+1

Also worth noting that there are many Asian organizations that have filed amicus briefs supporting Harvard's side in the SFFA lawsuit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a great article on how to teach your child to have no competitive spirit and be happy with what meager rations they are given.

Kids this bright are quite aware of who is getting into the schools they and their friends have been targeting for 2 or 3 years and they can see the reverse discrimination and unfairness at play. They are not 2 year olds looking for moms reaction on this.

Maybe responsible parenting is acknowledging that while top schools are a stretch for everyone, it IS unfair that qualities outside of their control and baseless to achievement are getting prioritized over what should matter and thus impacting your child's results. It's not fair and there is nothing we can do.

But that they will still go to a good school and because they are brilliant they will make the best of it. The world will level out once they get past the insanity/bubble of college admissions because in the real world results matter more than checking a demographic box and brilliance and hard work will pay off, regardless of liberal agendas.

Companies focus on things that matter and so while this phase of life will illustrate to them the unfairness of racism of discrimination, the good news is that they will be past this BS in four years.

That is the article I would write.

WELL SAID!!!

You all have *no* idea how competitive college admissions works. That your kid has a perfect GPA, or a perfect SAT/ACT, makes them indistinguishable from literally 10X the number of applicants that the particular competitive school can admit. And you all think that the answer is to stack up a variety of variegated ECs that tell no coherent story except that they work really, really hard to rack up credentials. And every parent of that kid is telling them that it's racism that didn't get them admitted.

If you want your DC to get considered seriously in the admissions sweepstakes, you might consider (i) ways in which your child is different from thousands of high-stat, generally applicable ECs, from this area; and (ii) how their essay and ECs tells a persuasive and evidence-backed story about why they want to attend that particular school for that particular major. You parents complaining over and over about racial discrimination have no, no idea how the top schools admit students. You want your Asian kid to get admitted to a top school? Have them apply as an English major, after years of summer writing programs, creative writing awards, volunteering to help disavantaged students with writing, etc. Plus an amazing essay about that experience.

And, you have no idea what other kids' application packages look like.

No one is disputing the bolded part. What we are complaining about, if you can please keep up, is that skin color is being used as a differentiator, such that all of a sudden, a specific skin color allows for less than perfect GPA, less than perfect SAT/ACT, and otherwise average essays and ECs. No one is claiming that they are entitled to attend a certain school, or that a school must accept all students that meet a certain objective entrance bar. What we are complaining about, is that race is being used to admit less-well-performing students over better-performing students.

Performing how?

Performance is not certainly tied to one's skin color.
That's how.

Do you really think a slightly lower GPA or test score impacts someone’s ability to do well at an elite school? There is a range. They don’t just take the highest scoring 2000 kids or whatever (they couldn’t because it would be a tie). There is a range, then they look at other factors: recs, ECs, etc. Diversity is one thing they look at. I know you don’t respect the idea of diversity but they are open that they consider it. No one is hiding the ball. The kids that are admitted are within the basic range. Just like they may take a ballerina over a musician or whatever, they also want diversity of background (race, location, SES, etc). I know you understand this. I’m sure you are intelligent. You just don’t agree with the approach and you believe if you continue to make the same arguments over and over on DCUM it will change, but it won’t. They use holistic admissions and have been very clear about that. There are plenty of schools that don’t. If you don’t agree with the basic philosophy of the school, why choose it? If you want your kid to go there despite the philosophy, play the game. Find a way to get your kid to stand out and have their application seem different. Stop using the “formula” that no longer works.

Formula is simple. Don't be racist.
Just like you said the ones are getting are all equally qualified, so then diveristy will be achived natually.

by the way, I guess all state schools are shitty in terms of diversity (loctaion) by your standard

You are either incredibly dense or intentionally obtuse. Critical thinking—give it a try.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nobody is disputing that blacks were historically discriminated against in college admissions. Jews were previously "over-represented" and discriminated against too. Now it is Asians.
Many of us are arguing for race-blind admissions over racial preferences (of any kind).

This is really the final simple point. If we want a race-neutral society, which based on watching my kids grow up in a very multi-cultural environment and seeming to really not distinguish or between races is absolutely doable - I will say this with certainty- my kids have NO racial biases - how amazing is that? It's the adults/society that want to constantly focus on race. Seeing the same URM kid gleefully show up as accepted on every IVY and Tier 1 school tier on college confidential with a 1400 and 3.7 GPA talking about how HARD it is going to be to pick from all the offers! while your kid with a 1580 and 4.4 has been rejected or waitlisted from everything except safeties, it fuels racial discord because the solution to past racism (in many people's mind) is not to implement new racist polices to manipulate outcomes. I know a lot of URM do support this - they see it as they are "due" but it ultimately moves us away from the goal of being race neutral.

In addition, we should similarly do away with sexual orientation in college admissions. What business is it of any organization the private sexual lives of people - it's so absurd, I cannot believe it has become such an open talking point. Let's class up, America.

Diversity in higher institutions of learning is good.

Colleges want diversity on campus.

There are many bright applicants across all demographics.

There are more applicants than spots. Some will get in. Some will not.

Colleges are the gatekeepers and will decide who they want.

Forcing you to mark your race and using it is racism.

Nobody is forcing your kid to apply to selective schools. If you don’t like their ecosystem go somewhere else.

So I can be a racist to my customers as well.

Sure, as long as you don't break the law.

what law

The Civil Rights Act.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nobody is disputing that blacks were historically discriminated against in college admissions. Jews were previously "over-represented" and discriminated against too. Now it is Asians.
Many of us are arguing for race-blind admissions over racial preferences (of any kind).

This is really the final simple point. If we want a race-neutral society, which based on watching my kids grow up in a very multi-cultural environment and seeming to really not distinguish or between races is absolutely doable - I will say this with certainty- my kids have NO racial biases - how amazing is that? It's the adults/society that want to constantly focus on race. Seeing the same URM kid gleefully show up as accepted on every IVY and Tier 1 school tier on college confidential with a 1400 and 3.7 GPA talking about how HARD it is going to be to pick from all the offers! while your kid with a 1580 and 4.4 has been rejected or waitlisted from everything except safeties, it fuels racial discord because the solution to past racism (in many people's mind) is not to implement new racist polices to manipulate outcomes. I know a lot of URM do support this - they see it as they are "due" but it ultimately moves us away from the goal of being race neutral.

In addition, we should similarly do away with sexual orientation in college admissions. What business is it of any organization the private sexual lives of people - it's so absurd, I cannot believe it has become such an open talking point. Let's class up, America.

Diversity in higher institutions of learning is good.

Colleges want diversity on campus.

There are many bright applicants across all demographics.

There are more applicants than spots. Some will get in. Some will not.

Colleges are the gatekeepers and will decide who they want.

Forcing you to mark your race and using it is racism.

Nobody is forcing your kid to apply to selective schools. If you don’t like their ecosystem go somewhere else.

So I can be a racist to my customers as well.

Sure, as long as you don't break the law.

what law

The Civil Rights Act.

Exacly. That's why employers, golf club, or any place don't ask people's race.

Civil Rights Act of 1964
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 is a landmark civil rights and labor law in the United States that outlaws discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, and later sexual orientation and gender identity.

This should apply to colleges and colleges should not ask applicant's race.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nobody is disputing that blacks were historically discriminated against in college admissions. Jews were previously "over-represented" and discriminated against too. Now it is Asians.
Many of us are arguing for race-blind admissions over racial preferences (of any kind).

This is really the final simple point. If we want a race-neutral society, which based on watching my kids grow up in a very multi-cultural environment and seeming to really not distinguish or between races is absolutely doable - I will say this with certainty- my kids have NO racial biases - how amazing is that? It's the adults/society that want to constantly focus on race. Seeing the same URM kid gleefully show up as accepted on every IVY and Tier 1 school tier on college confidential with a 1400 and 3.7 GPA talking about how HARD it is going to be to pick from all the offers! while your kid with a 1580 and 4.4 has been rejected or waitlisted from everything except safeties, it fuels racial discord because the solution to past racism (in many people's mind) is not to implement new racist polices to manipulate outcomes. I know a lot of URM do support this - they see it as they are "due" but it ultimately moves us away from the goal of being race neutral.

In addition, we should similarly do away with sexual orientation in college admissions. What business is it of any organization the private sexual lives of people - it's so absurd, I cannot believe it has become such an open talking point. Let's class up, America.

Diversity in higher institutions of learning is good.

Colleges want diversity on campus.

There are many bright applicants across all demographics.

There are more applicants than spots. Some will get in. Some will not.

Colleges are the gatekeepers and will decide who they want.

Forcing you to mark your race and using it is racism.

Nobody is forcing your kid to apply to selective schools. If you don’t like their ecosystem go somewhere else.

So I can be a racist to my customers as well.

Sure, as long as you don't break the law.

what law

The Civil Rights Act.

Exacly. That's why employers, golf club, or any place don't ask people's race.

Civil Rights Act of 1964
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 is a landmark civil rights and labor law in the United States that outlaws discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, and later sexual orientation and gender identity.

This should apply to colleges and colleges should not ask applicant's race.

Imagine, a golf club ask you to put down your race, then
Oh we have too mamy Blacks at 20%, let's reject some Blacks and make some space for Asians.

[Anonymous]

But a country club doesn't have to consider how potential members might use the facilities. They aren't limited by the number of people who want to play golf or tennis or use the pool to swim. They have a set number of members across the entire facility. A college can't accept all nursing majors nor can they accept all the students who want to study engineering. The space in each of those specific schools within the college is limited.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nobody is disputing that blacks were historically discriminated against in college admissions. Jews were previously "over-represented" and discriminated against too. Now it is Asians.
Many of us are arguing for race-blind admissions over racial preferences (of any kind).

This is really the final simple point. If we want a race-neutral society, which based on watching my kids grow up in a very multi-cultural environment and seeming to really not distinguish or between races is absolutely doable - I will say this with certainty- my kids have NO racial biases - how amazing is that? It's the adults/society that want to constantly focus on race. Seeing the same URM kid gleefully show up as accepted on every IVY and Tier 1 school tier on college confidential with a 1400 and 3.7 GPA talking about how HARD it is going to be to pick from all the offers! while your kid with a 1580 and 4.4 has been rejected or waitlisted from everything except safeties, it fuels racial discord because the solution to past racism (in many people's mind) is not to implement new racist polices to manipulate outcomes. I know a lot of URM do support this - they see it as they are "due" but it ultimately moves us away from the goal of being race neutral.

In addition, we should similarly do away with sexual orientation in college admissions. What business is it of any organization the private sexual lives of people - it's so absurd, I cannot believe it has become such an open talking point. Let's class up, America.

Diversity in higher institutions of learning is good.

Colleges want diversity on campus.

There are many bright applicants across all demographics.

There are more applicants than spots. Some will get in. Some will not.

Colleges are the gatekeepers and will decide who they want.

Forcing you to mark your race and using it is racism.

Nobody is forcing your kid to apply to selective schools. If you don’t like their ecosystem go somewhere else.

So I can be a racist to my customers as well.

Sure, as long as you don't break the law.

what law

The Civil Rights Act.

Exacly. That's why employers, golf club, or any place don't ask people's race.

Civil Rights Act of 1964
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 is a landmark civil rights and labor law in the United States that outlaws discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, and later sexual orientation and gender identity.

This should apply to colleges and colleges should not ask applicant's race.

There are federal laws requiring that institutions receiving federal funds report data including race.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nobody is disputing that blacks were historically discriminated against in college admissions. Jews were previously "over-represented" and discriminated against too. Now it is Asians.
Many of us are arguing for race-blind admissions over racial preferences (of any kind).

This is really the final simple point. If we want a race-neutral society, which based on watching my kids grow up in a very multi-cultural environment and seeming to really not distinguish or between races is absolutely doable - I will say this with certainty- my kids have NO racial biases - how amazing is that? It's the adults/society that want to constantly focus on race. Seeing the same URM kid gleefully show up as accepted on every IVY and Tier 1 school tier on college confidential with a 1400 and 3.7 GPA talking about how HARD it is going to be to pick from all the offers! while your kid with a 1580 and 4.4 has been rejected or waitlisted from everything except safeties, it fuels racial discord because the solution to past racism (in many people's mind) is not to implement new racist polices to manipulate outcomes. I know a lot of URM do support this - they see it as they are "due" but it ultimately moves us away from the goal of being race neutral.

In addition, we should similarly do away with sexual orientation in college admissions. What business is it of any organization the private sexual lives of people - it's so absurd, I cannot believe it has become such an open talking point. Let's class up, America.

Diversity in higher institutions of learning is good.

Colleges want diversity on campus.

There are many bright applicants across all demographics.

There are more applicants than spots. Some will get in. Some will not.

Colleges are the gatekeepers and will decide who they want.

Forcing you to mark your race and using it is racism.

Nobody is forcing your kid to apply to selective schools. If you don’t like their ecosystem go somewhere else.

So I can be a racist to my customers as well.

Sure, as long as you don't break the law.

what law

The Civil Rights Act.

Exacly. That's why employers, golf club, or any place don't ask people's race.

Civil Rights Act of 1964
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 is a landmark civil rights and labor law in the United States that outlaws discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, and later sexual orientation and gender identity.

This should apply to colleges and colleges should not ask applicant's race.

There are federal laws requiring that institutions receiving federal funds report data including race.

+1 required by law AND you are not required to give that information as an applicant.

[Anonymous]

If someone I work with went to a very competitive school and I don't think they're very impressive, if I find out their father went to the same school, I'm going to be suspicious that they got into that school on academic merit. Even if they did.

By the same token, if that person is from an URM group and they're underperforming, I may also assume they didn't get in based on academic merit. Even if they did.

Our Supreme Court nominee seems amazingly qualified, yet people were asking to see her LSAT scores. Is this racist? Maybe. But unfortunately, raced-based admissions raises those questions.

I wish people picked on unfair legacy admissions more than race-based ones. But when you make race a factor in admissions, you can't fault logically-thinking people from assuming race was a factor in any given admission decision. (And telling them their poor snowflake didn't cut it won't change that.)

Sure, if people don't like holistic admissions policies, their kids can simply apply elsewhere. But their support of race-blind policies aren't what is fanning the flames of racism. It is race-based policies that perpetuate racial stereotypes and prejudice.

[Anonymous]

I don't like athletic recruiting or legacy admits. I do like holistic admissions. I don't like admitting big donors but I understand it and maybe that money helps all the students.

But in any case, I look at the system and I have to decide:. do I hold my nose and play the game? do I skip it and try to find another way? do I try to change the game?

Good luck with whatever you and your student choose.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If someone I work with went to a very competitive school and I don't think they're very impressive, if I find out their father went to the same school, I'm going to be suspicious that they got into that school on academic merit. Even if they did.

By the same token, if that person is from an URM group and they're underperforming, I may also assume they didn't get in based on academic merit. Even if they did.

Our Supreme Court nominee seems amazingly qualified, yet people were asking to see her LSAT scores. Is this racist? Maybe. But unfortunately, raced-based admissions raises those questions.

I wish people picked on unfair legacy admissions more than race-based ones. But when you make race a factor in admissions, you can't fault logically-thinking people from assuming race was a factor in any given admission decision. (And telling them their poor snowflake didn't cut it won't change that.)

Sure, if people don't like holistic admissions policies, their kids can simply apply elsewhere. But their support of race-blind policies aren't what is fanning the flames of racism. It is race-based policies that perpetuate racial stereotypes and prejudice.

The URM at work doesn't care what people like you think about them.

SAT scores are not the holy grail.