NY Times on new application essays dabbling in so-called "identities"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no idea what it means not to partake in "identification". Are you saying that your kid refuses to answer questions about their gender, or religion, or nationality, or family status or hobbies?

Everyone I know identifies as something.

If you're a white male, cis/het, not religious, UMC, family been here a long time and intermixed (generic European), truly what is there to say?

I'm not in this category but I feel like these Qs should be optional. Otherwise it is very cringe and fake.

"Tell us about an aspect of your identity OR a life experience that has shaped you."

By 17, kids have been shaped by something. If not, write an eloquent essay about being an unmolded lump still seeking form.

No need to bolden that. "Shaping life experiences" are also none of a university's business and this part of the question has no legitimate purpose, either.

Anonymous wrote:
My kid has many aspects to his identity. He is Jewish. He has a disability. He has a brother with a disability. He is white. He is American. He is a cis male. He plays a sport. He grew up in the south. He enjoys science. He is an extrovert who prides himself on prioritizing friendships. He volunteers. Some of those things he shared in essays, and some he chose not to either because he felt they were too personal (e.g., his disability) or irrelevant (e.g., they saw his citizenship and sex/gender when he applied and he didn't have anything to add on that topic). That left him with tons and tons of things to talk about, many of which he "chose" for himself (sports, academic interests, volunteer work, friendships).

Are you familiar with the teen slang TMI?
None of this belongs in a college application, and shouldn't even be asked.

A college application should not ask about sports, academic interests, and volunteer work? Or, again, is the problem with race, religion, and gender?

Your brain seems so mushed that you can't see the difference. Yes, colleges can asked about academic interests - though better only academic achievements.

Race, religion, gender, sports, volunteer work are nonacademic issues that have no relevance. You know who does it that way?
Every industrialized country aside from the U.S. You send in your transcript, perhaps take an entrance exam, and that's what decides.

Not your oversharing your "identity" to play some kind of stupid game, as other posters have pointed out.

There is a reason for this. What makes a person successful in the U.S. has more to do with who they are than what their GPA or SAT scores were. The latter are the least relevant data points in real life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Our tribalistic group identities are something to overcome, not encourage.“

Yes! It’s so weird that the people who claim they don’t want race to be an issue are always making race an issue.

This country was founded on the principle of group identities (race) so it will never just 'not be an issue'.

False premise thereby dumb conclusion.

DP: How is it false? Only white men granted themselves the right to vote.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The people opposed to this only do so because they think race or gender are the only way people identify and they are afraid that being white and cis may hamper their kid's college app.

But it is BS because there are so many ways your identity is defined. Physically, racially, culturally.

My husband wrote his essay on being an only child.


When I read the question from the article, “Tell us about an aspect of your identity or a life experience that has shaped you," I immediately thought of how much of my life has been shaped by my physical disability (missing a limb). In fact, I wrote about this in my college app essay in 1994.

Sorry if it offends you that I was shaped by this, and that I shouldn't have written about it. I know some of you want to believe or downplay the experiences of others as cashing in on "trauma," but you are so far off the mark.

Yup. As always, the people who claim not to want to talk or think about race and gender can’t help but show that they are actually obsessed with it.

white/hetero/athletic/intelligent male:
People look at me and before they know anything about me or my background they think: 'toxic masculinity', 'privilege', 'racist', 'misogynist', 'homophobic', etc. They see the root cause of all that is wrong with society these days apparently. I am a walking billboard for them to direct their hate.

Give us some specific examples of how it's impacted your life.

NP here. If you asked any middle or UMC black person the same question, they are unlikely to have glaring examples to point to, like lack of homeownership or difficulty getting into colleges (on the contrary actually, they benefit). What they would point to were probably many small micro aggressions and insults to their personhood that accumulated over their life. This now happens to white cis males all the time, and if you can't see that you are blind.

+1000. Look at the rhetoric proliferating throughout college campuses, mass media, and major employers. White people are constantly warned that our mere presence in a ““predominantly white institution”” makes POC feel challenged, uncomfortable, and unwelcome. How is being told that our very existence is threatening not an example of racism and bigotry?

Well maybe you should listen and discuss. Have you ever found yourself spending years in an institution that was predominantly not your own race? What do you think that would be like? Are you brave enough to spend long amounts of time somewhere where you'd be a minority and very few people would be anything like you?

Why not engage in conversation and try to understand why someone feels unwelcome? Someone telling you they feel unwelcome in an environment is not personally targeting you. If they are saying YOU personally make them feel unwelcome, well, maybe you've done something.

What has your workplace specifically told YOU on a personal level about your very being? I'm white and I have not had your experience of "constantly being warned" that *my* mere presence--me, personally-- is challenging to my non-white colleagues in my workplace which is in fact a very white institution. But I have been in a few meetings where colleagues of color have shared their feelings about always being the only POC in their departments, meetings, etc., through their entire careers. That does not feel threatening to me, personally. It feels revealing and I understand better where they are coming from and why it's important to encourage diversity in the workplace.

Try it. Understanding other people is a great skill to have.

I see where you are coming from, but I don’t agree with this perspective. Say, for example, I told a group of people—including a number of black people—that being in black-majority environments makes me uncomfortable, but it’s not anything to do with those specific black people. I do not think that conversation would go well. But for some reason, certain people believe it is socially acceptable to say this about whites.

Good grief. It's like you think the entire context of centuries of white oppression of blacks doesn't exist. White racism against blacks still exists today whether you want to believe that or not. It's still a reality for most black people. Just ask your black friends and neighbors and family.

I think if you were in a group with black colleagues and had an honest discussion and admitted you feel uncomfortable and WHY you feel uncomfortable when you are the only white person in a room and use that to discuss how you can therefore understand why black colleagues would feel uncomfortable always being the only black person in a room, then you'd start up a real conversation and dialogue. Is that a bad thing? Most white people I know are not entirely comfortable being the only white person in a room. One because they're not used to it. Two because you are self-conscious. Imagine now how it feels for your black/Asian/Native American colleagues who live their entire lives like this. Any thoughts about that? Why do you expect them to feel nothing when you acknowledge you'd feel strange in a reversed situation?

Is there anyone alive today who can claim to have experienced "centuries of racism?" Maybe a handful of centagenarians? Be real.

I don't expect anyone to feel nothing, but I do think learning to live with each other is far more productive than saying "whites are intrinsically unsettling to me." Our tribalistic group identities are something to overcome, not encourage.

+ a trillion.

Also, hey, millions of people who migrate here prove one important point: it is possible to move elsewhere too to some promised land where black people rule and all is beautiful and fair.

We’ve reached the inevitable “if you don’t like it, you can go elsewhere” part of this conversation. (Which, ironically, is what Harvard is saying to candidates who don’t want to write this essay.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Our tribalistic group identities are something to overcome, not encourage.“

Yes! It’s so weird that the people who claim they don’t want race to be an issue are always making race an issue.

This country was founded on the principle of group identities (race) so it will never just 'not be an issue'.

False premise thereby dumb conclusion.

DP: How is it false? Only white men granted themselves the right to vote.

False. Try harder.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Our tribalistic group identities are something to overcome, not encourage.“

Yes! It’s so weird that the people who claim they don’t want race to be an issue are always making race an issue.

This country was founded on the principle of group identities (race) so it will never just 'not be an issue'.

False premise thereby dumb conclusion.

DP: How is it false? Only white men granted themselves the right to vote.

False. Try harder.

How is that false? Try at all.

[Anonymous]

Excuses are valuable for rationalizing failure. People hang onto them as long as possible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no idea what it means not to partake in "identification". Are you saying that your kid refuses to answer questions about their gender, or religion, or nationality, or family status or hobbies?

Everyone I know identifies as something.

If you're a white male, cis/het, not religious, UMC, family been here a long time and intermixed (generic European), truly what is there to say?

I'm not in this category but I feel like these Qs should be optional. Otherwise it is very cringe and fake.

"Tell us about an aspect of your identity OR a life experience that has shaped you."

By 17, kids have been shaped by something. If not, write an eloquent essay about being an unmolded lump still seeking form.

No need to bolden that. "Shaping life experiences" are also none of a university's business and this part of the question has no legitimate purpose, either.

Anonymous wrote:
My kid has many aspects to his identity. He is Jewish. He has a disability. He has a brother with a disability. He is white. He is American. He is a cis male. He plays a sport. He grew up in the south. He enjoys science. He is an extrovert who prides himself on prioritizing friendships. He volunteers. Some of those things he shared in essays, and some he chose not to either because he felt they were too personal (e.g., his disability) or irrelevant (e.g., they saw his citizenship and sex/gender when he applied and he didn't have anything to add on that topic). That left him with tons and tons of things to talk about, many of which he "chose" for himself (sports, academic interests, volunteer work, friendships).

Are you familiar with the teen slang TMI?
None of this belongs in a college application, and shouldn't even be asked.

A college application should not ask about sports, academic interests, and volunteer work? Or, again, is the problem with race, religion, and gender?

Your brain seems so mushed that you can't see the difference. Yes, colleges can asked about academic interests - though better only academic achievements.

Race, religion, gender, sports, volunteer work are nonacademic issues that have no relevance. You know who does it that way?
Every industrialized country aside from the U.S. You send in your transcript, perhaps take an entrance exam, and that's what decides.

Not your oversharing your "identity" to play some kind of stupid game, as other posters have pointed out.

Might I recommend a little more precision in your reading and writing then, because you first declared that none of the examples (including academic interest) belonged in the application. Thus my confusion about the point you were trying to make.

Also, as others have pointed out, those countries you are talking about have fully and publicly funded universities. That is why they rely on exams.

But it's nice to see that you support publicly funded universities. I wasn't expecting you to be so forward thinking. What other social programs do you feel our government should support through taxes?

Please go back to the recent SCOTUS ruling. This has nothing to do with public vs private universities. Where does this connection come from?

Neither private nor public universities should force students to engage in soul searching about identities or parrot common talking points of certain political leanings.
Neither here nor elsewhere.

Although, even though some may say that private universities can do as they please, SCOTUS makes clear that's not the case. They are correct. We're talking about public goods here, not subgroups separated from society that can do as they please. That's also the counterargument to those who say: Oh, you could tell us about X Y or Z, or "then don't apply."

As a society, we need to decide what our values are and how we select those to whom we grant access to limited resources. Should we value those we can parrot identity ideology or those who have proven that they can strive and be successful at endeavors they want to go to the university for?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Being "Black" or "Asian" or "Jewish" or "LGBTQ" or "Catholic" is just a part of who a person is. In different times and places people are treated better or worse because of those things. That is ordinary for everyone.

If a student wants to write about then great joy and comfort they receive from their community then why shouldn't they?

Again, that’s not the real intent of the essay. It’s to get urms in legally.

If you say so. You are the expert. /s

[Anonymous]

One odd thing about any discussion of minorities & admissions is that much of the rhetoric seems to be based on the premise that admissions workers belong to a racist cabal & therefore they need to be forced into giving URMs an even shake.

But I’ve never heard anyone claim that admissions workers are any different from the soft-hearted people in other college departments. In fact, since they deal with a wider cross-section of the general public than most college workers, they are are probably among the quickest to tire of entitled students & their pushy parents, and become eager to give the humble masses fair treatment.

If all that is true, the goal should be to give everyone a fair chance, not trying to figure out ways to ensure identity is still a key criterion.

—Parent of 2 URM kids

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My student will be filling out college applications soon. I don't know if he'll get an identity question. He's male, cis-gender, white-ish (Mexican mom, white dad), and has dyslexia.

I have zero idea what he'd choose to write about but I wonder if the dyslexia portion would be a negative for colleges.

In general, a challenge he has overcome is a good thing to write about. An ongoing challenge is not such a good thing to write about. So it depends on how how much his dyslexia currently impacts his life, I'm guessing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My student will be filling out college applications soon. I don't know if he'll get an identity question. He's male, cis-gender, white-ish (Mexican mom, white dad), and has dyslexia.

I have zero idea what he'd choose to write about but I wonder if the dyslexia portion would be a negative for colleges.

In general, a challenge he has overcome is a good thing to write about. An ongoing challenge is not such a good thing to write about. So it depends on how how much his dyslexia currently impacts his life, I'm guessing.

That’s a good point. Thanks for the feedback.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Excuses are valuable for rationalizing failure. People hang onto them as long as possible.

So, for example, when people fail to get into the college they hoped to, and they blame it on not having "hooks", or on colleges being interested in people's experiences, that's valuable?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:One odd thing about any discussion of minorities & admissions is that much of the rhetoric seems to be based on the premise that admissions workers belong to a racist cabal & therefore they need to be forced into giving URMs an even shake.

But I’ve never heard anyone claim that admissions workers are any different from the soft-hearted people in other college departments. In fact, since they deal with a wider cross-section of the general public than most college workers, they are are probably among the quickest to tire of entitled students & their pushy parents, and become eager to give the humble masses fair treatment.

If all that is true, the goal should be to give everyone a fair chance, not trying to figure out ways to ensure identity is still a key criterion.

—Parent of 2 URM kids

I am afraid you have not read in the Harvard case how those friendly admissions workers manipulated personality scores to target Asian minorities and make them less likely to join the club.

It's quite eye-opening.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One odd thing about any discussion of minorities & admissions is that much of the rhetoric seems to be based on the premise that admissions workers belong to a racist cabal & therefore they need to be forced into giving URMs an even shake.

But I’ve never heard anyone claim that admissions workers are any different from the soft-hearted people in other college departments. In fact, since they deal with a wider cross-section of the general public than most college workers, they are are probably among the quickest to tire of entitled students & their pushy parents, and become eager to give the humble masses fair treatment.

If all that is true, the goal should be to give everyone a fair chance, not trying to figure out ways to ensure identity is still a key criterion.

—Parent of 2 URM kids

I am afraid you have not read in the Harvard case how those friendly admissions workers manipulated personality scores to target Asian minorities and make them less likely to join the club.

It's quite eye-opening.

Why do you think Harvard AOs, who reject almost every application they get, are a good example of the average AO?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One odd thing about any discussion of minorities & admissions is that much of the rhetoric seems to be based on the premise that admissions workers belong to a racist cabal & therefore they need to be forced into giving URMs an even shake.

But I’ve never heard anyone claim that admissions workers are any different from the soft-hearted people in other college departments. In fact, since they deal with a wider cross-section of the general public than most college workers, they are are probably among the quickest to tire of entitled students & their pushy parents, and become eager to give the humble masses fair treatment.

If all that is true, the goal should be to give everyone a fair chance, not trying to figure out ways to ensure identity is still a key criterion.

—Parent of 2 URM kids

I am afraid you have not read in the Harvard case how those friendly admissions workers manipulated personality scores to target Asian minorities and make them less likely to join the club.

It's quite eye-opening.

Why do you think Harvard AOs, who reject almost every application they get, are a good example of the average AO?

Because 1) Harvard is often portrayed as an ideal, a best practice, and 2) thanks to the SCOTUS case we have gained direct access to their very dirty tactics.

But, sure, you can choose not to see what's right in front of you.