Asians are suing Harvard and UNC - Chapel Hill for use of quotas

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm an Ivy grad and I'm uncomfortable with policies that explicitly limit acceptances based on racial identification. I'm equally uncomfortable with policies that explicitly privilege admissions based on racial identification.

My children are half Caucasian, half non-Caucasian. If the other half is Latino or African-American, they get a leg up. If it is Asian, they get discriminated against. Seems wildly un-American to me.

Would it be more American to have the Elite colleges consist of 50 percent Asians, 48 percent whites, and two percent combo of AA and Hispanics? In a country that looks nothing like that?

Not PP but what's wrong with that if it reflects the most qualified students?

By what measure? Standardized test scores? With no concept of the myriad advantages that led to those test scores?

By any transparent measure.

So what besides standardized test scores? Surely you don't mean to include grades, which obviously mean different things from different schools. Really you do you just mean standardized test scores. Which completely ignores the disparate impact that those tests have on different populations.

How AP exam pass rates? Proficiency tests in HS? Any and every measure of cognitive and academic performance ever created? Those?

So just standardized tests. How convenient. We don't even have AP classes in the town I grew up in. How fair.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The sports analogies are stupid. Fundamentally different missions. Only mission of sports is to make money.

And they do that by selecting the absolute best performing candidate without any thought to skin color.

If colleges admitted students based on who was most likely to make the most money and donate it to them, they should only letting the children of really wealthy alumni.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sad that the "extra special intangible quality" that admissions people are looking for can be summed up as "NOT ASIAN."

Just like in a job. Except the "extra special intangible quality" translate to "WHITES ONLY" for top positions. Grunt work can be done by the very qualified brown people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OMG. No one who reads Michelle Obama's senior thesis can reasonably come away without thinking she deserved to attend an Ivy. I had no idea it was that bad on virtually every level.

Yes, an Asian or Jewish student with higher SATs and a demonstrated ability to compose an English sentence was more deserving of her place at Princeton.

Nor, for that matter, do I. But, then, I didn't.

Should be "No one who reads Michelle Obama's senior thesis can reasonably come away without thinking she did not deserve to attend an Ivy."

And no one who reviews George W. Bush's academic record can reasonably come away without thinking he did not deserve to attend an Ivy.

At least we know that Bush cracked 1200 on his SATs, which made him a viable legacy candidate for Yale back in the 1960s. Michelle Robinson applied to Princeton roughly 20 years later, when admissions were more competitive, but the poor quality of her thesis suggests that she neither belonged at an Ivy nor benefited from an Ivy education. I mean, you can find her senior thesis on-line and read it. It's an exercise in poorly written navel-gazing, not scholarship. A more qualified Asian student surely would have come up with something more impressive.

Oh, sure. Let's see if we can find some Asian Ivy grad's thesis and crap on it now. Really? That's your example? You find one URM thesis and make fun of it? You are so desperate.
I just skimmed it, and it's a typical sociology thesis. I'm not a fan of sociology as a discipline, because it's too fuzzy for me. But you could find thousands of similar sociology theses by people of many races and they'd look similar. The writing itself is perfectly competent. You don't like the subject matter.

The writing is not competent at all, but you are correct that I also think it's a lightweight topic for what is supposed to be a Princeton student's crowning academic achievement. On the latter score, I'd feel the same way about a white student's fine arts project if it was some performance art BS where the student photographed herself 25 times covered in various favors of jello.

In MO's case, it begs the question as to whether she would have been better served taking remedial English courses at a CC before attending a four-year school, and whether society would have been better served had a more qualified Asian applicant been admitted to the Ivy instead. Ultimately, that's what this complaint seeks to adjudicate, whether you like it or not.

Don't be ridiculous, the writing is perfectly competent. Your bias is glaring.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought below was an interesting perspective from a Yahoo poster. Usually Yahoo comments are despicably racist but I thought this comment was interesting even though I disagree on one of his opinions.

• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
WJ Alden • 17 hours ago
As a private university, Harvard should have the right o admit whomever it wants. Of course most people at Harvard don't think businesses should have the right to hire whomever they want, so I guess they can't use that argument.

However, while Asians in the US may do better, on average, than non-Asians, they do not outperform the rest of us to a degree that suggests they should be >20% of Ivy League student bodies. Whether in politics, business, or culture, the evidence just isn't there. Are universities supposed to stick purely to grades and test scores - on which Asians do really, really well - to decide whom to admit, or can they look at post-college performance to understand that those aren't great predictors of our future elite?

If you look at just grades and test scores you could probably make a strong case that elite universities are discriminating against Asians. A look at post-college success, though, greatly weakens the case.

Of course not. It's still white's world out there. I must tell you, I am tired of people making Asian kids so one dimentional - like they can't do anything other than GPA and test scores. The fact that they perform at a higher level (w/ GPA/test scores) doesn't mean they can't do other things.

What else can they do?

Anec-data here....

The Val of my DD's high school class was Asian. Of course, he had the 4.0 unweighted GPA, 5s in 7+ APs, and the 2300 plus SAT I/800 SAT IIs. But on top of that, he was a varsity swimmer at a state-qualifying level (24 hour/week commitment in season, 15/hour/week out of season), president of two clubs, NHS, firsts in state science fair every year. He also had a part time job (lifeguarding).

Shut out of every Ivy.

As CalTech becomes increasingly Asian (over 60% to date), just how many students, Asian and non-Asian with the credentials you listed above will be shut out of not just CalTech but of every Ivy? Even if it were 100%, there are just so many seats. Then what?

Also, the credentials you listed above are not unusual, not by a long shot. Mosey on over to College Confidential. Those attributes are becoming a dime a dozen.

There were probably 3-4 thousand kids last year w/ 2300+ SATs out of 1.6 million test takers. Add on all the rest of the accomplishments and I seriously doubt kids like these are "a dime a dozen". There was an AA kid last year with a 2250 on the SATs, not top 10 in his class that everyone freaked out about because he got into every single one of the Ivies. Had be been Asian (or possibly even white) he would have been kicked to the curb.

3 or 4 thousand. 2000 spots. Do the math.

There were 23,000 kids admitted to the Ivy league schools last year. I did the math.

You're not just talking about Harvard, obviously. I don't think you or anyone will be happy until either the accept only whites or only Asians. But eventually, you will be at war with each other. Give it time.

Yes, the "Shut out of every Ivy" line kind of led me to believe we were talking about "every Ivy". I don't care what color the kids are; I just think it should be based on merit. Honestly though, Ivy league schools are private; they can do what they want. I do think affirmative action should be eliminated for public schools or at the very least be changed to be socio-economic based. The URM kids getting into the Ivy league schools are generally quite well off.

The kid from Banneker who was accepted to five of the Ivies is not well off. Neither is the kid from Brooklyn who was also accepted to several Ivies. What data do you base your statement on PP?

Yep, neither was the one i married, or one of my best friends, or the guy next door to us, or... Yeah, that pp just makes stuff up.

[Anonymous]

I wonder if malia and sasha are rockstar students in their own right or if they'll go to H on legacy/urm status.

Surprised and impressed that Jenna Bush went to UT-Austin when she could've waltzed into Yale given half her family went there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if malia and sasha are rockstar students in their own right or if they'll go to H on legacy/urm status.

Surprised and impressed that Jenna Bush went to UT-Austin when she could've waltzed into Yale given half her family went there.

They'll go because their dad is POTUS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if malia and sasha are rockstar students in their own right or if they'll go to H on legacy/urm status.

Surprised and impressed that Jenna Bush went to UT-Austin when she could've waltzed into Yale given half her family went there.

They'll go because their dad is POTUS.

Jenna Bush's dad was POTUS and she didn't go.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought below was an interesting perspective from a Yahoo poster. Usually Yahoo comments are despicably racist but I thought this comment was interesting even though I disagree on one of his opinions.

• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
WJ Alden • 17 hours ago
As a private university, Harvard should have the right o admit whomever it wants. Of course most people at Harvard don't think businesses should have the right to hire whomever they want, so I guess they can't use that argument.

However, while Asians in the US may do better, on average, than non-Asians, they do not outperform the rest of us to a degree that suggests they should be >20% of Ivy League student bodies. Whether in politics, business, or culture, the evidence just isn't there. Are universities supposed to stick purely to grades and test scores - on which Asians do really, really well - to decide whom to admit, or can they look at post-college performance to understand that those aren't great predictors of our future elite?

If you look at just grades and test scores you could probably make a strong case that elite universities are discriminating against Asians. A look at post-college success, though, greatly weakens the case.

Of course not. It's still white's world out there. I must tell you, I am tired of people making Asian kids so one dimentional - like they can't do anything other than GPA and test scores. The fact that they perform at a higher level (w/ GPA/test scores) doesn't mean they can't do other things.

What else can they do?

Anec-data here....

The Val of my DD's high school class was Asian. Of course, he had the 4.0 unweighted GPA, 5s in 7+ APs, and the 2300 plus SAT I/800 SAT IIs. But on top of that, he was a varsity swimmer at a state-qualifying level (24 hour/week commitment in season, 15/hour/week out of season), president of two clubs, NHS, firsts in state science fair every year. He also had a part time job (lifeguarding).

Shut out of every Ivy.

As CalTech becomes increasingly Asian (over 60% to date), just how many students, Asian and non-Asian with the credentials you listed above will be shut out of not just CalTech but of every Ivy? Even if it were 100%, there are just so many seats. Then what?

Also, the credentials you listed above are not unusual, not by a long shot. Mosey on over to College Confidential. Those attributes are becoming a dime a dozen.

There were probably 3-4 thousand kids last year w/ 2300+ SATs out of 1.6 million test takers. Add on all the rest of the accomplishments and I seriously doubt kids like these are "a dime a dozen". There was an AA kid last year with a 2250 on the SATs, not top 10 in his class that everyone freaked out about because he got into every single one of the Ivies. Had be been Asian (or possibly even white) he would have been kicked to the curb.

3 or 4 thousand. 2000 spots. Do the math.

There were 23,000 kids admitted to the Ivy league schools last year. I did the math.

You're not just talking about Harvard, obviously. I don't think you or anyone will be happy until either the accept only whites or only Asians. But eventually, you will be at war with each other. Give it time.

Yes, the "Shut out of every Ivy" line kind of led me to believe we were talking about "every Ivy". I don't care what color the kids are; I just think it should be based on merit. Honestly though, Ivy league schools are private; they can do what they want. I do think affirmative action should be eliminated for public schools or at the very least be changed to be socio-economic based. The URM kids getting into the Ivy league schools are generally quite well off.

The kid from Banneker who was accepted to five of the Ivies is not well off. Neither is the kid from Brooklyn who was also accepted to several Ivies. What data do you base your statement on PP?

Yep, neither was the one i married, or one of my best friends, or the guy next door to us, or... Yeah, that pp just makes stuff up.

Here's one article that talks about what I was remembering: http://magazine.good.is/articles/ivy-league-fooled-how-america-s-top-colleges-avoid-real-diversity

From the article: "Call it the Ivy League’s dirty little secret: While America’s most elite colleges do in fact make it a point to promote ethnic diversity on their campuses, a lot of them do so by admitting hugely disproportionate numbers of wealthy immigrants and their children rather than black students with deep roots—and troubled histories—in the United States."

There was another article that said that 85+% of the AA kids at ivy league schools were from middle-class and up families. I.e. not the types of folks you would expect to need affirmative action. I'll look and see if I can find that article as well, but I'm not just pulling stuff out of thin air.

[Anonymous]

You may recall when affirmative action was getting started whites complained about minorities getting in despite not having the required test scores and gpa and how this was unfair to more qualified white applicants.

The argument then supporting affirmative action was the need for a holistic approach that provided diversification and opportunities for minorities who had been discriminated against in the past. Lawsuits were filed by whites who objected to this approach.

Now we have Asians who often fare better in test scores and gpa and whites are the ones arguing that these don't represent sufficient reasons to grant admission to Asians who are more qualified than white students using merely test scores. They argued that blacks and to a lesser extent Hispanics should not get preference just to provide a diversified student population. Now they argue that having too many Asians would skew the student population too much and make them too much like Caltech.

This is a perfect example where the primary goal of whites is to maintain their privileged position and they will turn arguments on its head to justify their position.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You may recall when affirmative action was getting started whites complained about minorities getting in despite not having the required test scores and gpa and how this was unfair to more qualified white applicants.

The argument then supporting affirmative action was the need for a holistic approach that provided diversification and opportunities for minorities who had been discriminated against in the past. Lawsuits were filed by whites who objected to this approach.

Now we have Asians who often fare better in test scores and gpa and whites are the ones arguing that these don't represent sufficient reasons to grant admission to Asians who are more qualified than white students using merely test scores. They argued that blacks and to a lesser extent Hispanics should not get preference just to provide a diversified student population. Now they argue that having too many Asians would skew the student population too much and make them too much like Caltech.

This is a perfect example where the primary goal of whites is to maintain their privileged position and they will turn arguments on its head to justify their position.

I don't think that's a common opinion. Most whites I know are perfectly fine with Asians being overrepresented in elite schools. I know I am. They've earned it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought below was an interesting perspective from a Yahoo poster. Usually Yahoo comments are despicably racist but I thought this comment was interesting even though I disagree on one of his opinions.

• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
WJ Alden • 17 hours ago
As a private university, Harvard should have the right o admit whomever it wants. Of course most people at Harvard don't think businesses should have the right to hire whomever they want, so I guess they can't use that argument.

However, while Asians in the US may do better, on average, than non-Asians, they do not outperform the rest of us to a degree that suggests they should be >20% of Ivy League student bodies. Whether in politics, business, or culture, the evidence just isn't there. Are universities supposed to stick purely to grades and test scores - on which Asians do really, really well - to decide whom to admit, or can they look at post-college performance to understand that those aren't great predictors of our future elite?

If you look at just grades and test scores you could probably make a strong case that elite universities are discriminating against Asians. A look at post-college success, though, greatly weakens the case.

Of course not. It's still white's world out there. I must tell you, I am tired of people making Asian kids so one dimentional - like they can't do anything other than GPA and test scores. The fact that they perform at a higher level (w/ GPA/test scores) doesn't mean they can't do other things.

What else can they do?

Anec-data here....

The Val of my DD's high school class was Asian. Of course, he had the 4.0 unweighted GPA, 5s in 7+ APs, and the 2300 plus SAT I/800 SAT IIs. But on top of that, he was a varsity swimmer at a state-qualifying level (24 hour/week commitment in season, 15/hour/week out of season), president of two clubs, NHS, firsts in state science fair every year. He also had a part time job (lifeguarding).

Shut out of every Ivy.

As CalTech becomes increasingly Asian (over 60% to date), just how many students, Asian and non-Asian with the credentials you listed above will be shut out of not just CalTech but of every Ivy? Even if it were 100%, there are just so many seats. Then what?

Also, the credentials you listed above are not unusual, not by a long shot. Mosey on over to College Confidential. Those attributes are becoming a dime a dozen.

There were probably 3-4 thousand kids last year w/ 2300+ SATs out of 1.6 million test takers. Add on all the rest of the accomplishments and I seriously doubt kids like these are "a dime a dozen". There was an AA kid last year with a 2250 on the SATs, not top 10 in his class that everyone freaked out about because he got into every single one of the Ivies. Had be been Asian (or possibly even white) he would have been kicked to the curb.

3 or 4 thousand. 2000 spots. Do the math.

There were 23,000 kids admitted to the Ivy league schools last year. I did the math.

You're not just talking about Harvard, obviously. I don't think you or anyone will be happy until either the accept only whites or only Asians. But eventually, you will be at war with each other. Give it time.

Yes, the "Shut out of every Ivy" line kind of led me to believe we were talking about "every Ivy". I don't care what color the kids are; I just think it should be based on merit. Honestly though, Ivy league schools are private; they can do what they want. I do think affirmative action should be eliminated for public schools or at the very least be changed to be socio-economic based. The URM kids getting into the Ivy league schools are generally quite well off.

The kid from Banneker who was accepted to five of the Ivies is not well off. Neither is the kid from Brooklyn who was also accepted to several Ivies. What data do you base your statement on PP?

Yep, neither was the one i married, or one of my best friends, or the guy next door to us, or... Yeah, that pp just makes stuff up.

Here's one article that talks about what I was remembering: http://magazine.good.is/articles/ivy-league-fooled-how-america-s-top-colleges-avoid-real-diversity

From the article: "Call it the Ivy League’s dirty little secret: While America’s most elite colleges do in fact make it a point to promote ethnic diversity on their campuses, a lot of them do so by admitting hugely disproportionate numbers of wealthy immigrants and their children rather than black students with deep roots—and troubled histories—in the United States."

There was another article that said that 85+% of the AA kids at ivy league schools were from middle-class and up families. I.e. not the types of folks you would expect to need affirmative action. I'll look and see if I can find that article as well, but I'm not just pulling stuff out of thin air.

And what percent of the white and Asian kids are from middle class and up? Bet it's at least 85.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You may recall when affirmative action was getting started whites complained about minorities getting in despite not having the required test scores and gpa and how this was unfair to more qualified white applicants.

The argument then supporting affirmative action was the need for a holistic approach that provided diversification and opportunities for minorities who had been discriminated against in the past. Lawsuits were filed by whites who objected to this approach.

Now we have Asians who often fare better in test scores and gpa and whites are the ones arguing that these don't represent sufficient reasons to grant admission to Asians who are more qualified than white students using merely test scores. They argued that blacks and to a lesser extent Hispanics should not get preference just to provide a diversified student population. Now they argue that having too many Asians would skew the student population too much and make them too much like Caltech.

This is a perfect example where the primary goal of whites is to maintain their privileged position and they will turn arguments on its head to justify their position.

Nah. Different white people. I think discrimination against URMs is real, so I never argued against affirmative action, despite the fact that it wasn't to my benefit. Now I still think affirmative action makes sense and there should be an advantage for URMs. Nothing inconsistent there. No ones saying Asians shouldn't be over represented. They already are, by a lot. People are arguing about whether any other factors than test scores can be considered. You think Asians should be even more over represented than they already are, and relying solely on test scores is the way to get that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought below was an interesting perspective from a Yahoo poster. Usually Yahoo comments are despicably racist but I thought this comment was interesting even though I disagree on one of his opinions.

• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
WJ Alden • 17 hours ago
As a private university, Harvard should have the right o admit whomever it wants. Of course most people at Harvard don't think businesses should have the right to hire whomever they want, so I guess they can't use that argument.

However, while Asians in the US may do better, on average, than non-Asians, they do not outperform the rest of us to a degree that suggests they should be >20% of Ivy League student bodies. Whether in politics, business, or culture, the evidence just isn't there. Are universities supposed to stick purely to grades and test scores - on which Asians do really, really well - to decide whom to admit, or can they look at post-college performance to understand that those aren't great predictors of our future elite?

If you look at just grades and test scores you could probably make a strong case that elite universities are discriminating against Asians. A look at post-college success, though, greatly weakens the case.

Of course not. It's still white's world out there. I must tell you, I am tired of people making Asian kids so one dimentional - like they can't do anything other than GPA and test scores. The fact that they perform at a higher level (w/ GPA/test scores) doesn't mean they can't do other things.

What else can they do?

Anec-data here....

The Val of my DD's high school class was Asian. Of course, he had the 4.0 unweighted GPA, 5s in 7+ APs, and the 2300 plus SAT I/800 SAT IIs. But on top of that, he was a varsity swimmer at a state-qualifying level (24 hour/week commitment in season, 15/hour/week out of season), president of two clubs, NHS, firsts in state science fair every year. He also had a part time job (lifeguarding).

Shut out of every Ivy.

As CalTech becomes increasingly Asian (over 60% to date), just how many students, Asian and non-Asian with the credentials you listed above will be shut out of not just CalTech but of every Ivy? Even if it were 100%, there are just so many seats. Then what?

Also, the credentials you listed above are not unusual, not by a long shot. Mosey on over to College Confidential. Those attributes are becoming a dime a dozen.

There were probably 3-4 thousand kids last year w/ 2300+ SATs out of 1.6 million test takers. Add on all the rest of the accomplishments and I seriously doubt kids like these are "a dime a dozen". There was an AA kid last year with a 2250 on the SATs, not top 10 in his class that everyone freaked out about because he got into every single one of the Ivies. Had be been Asian (or possibly even white) he would have been kicked to the curb.

3 or 4 thousand. 2000 spots. Do the math.

There were 23,000 kids admitted to the Ivy league schools last year. I did the math.

You're not just talking about Harvard, obviously. I don't think you or anyone will be happy until either the accept only whites or only Asians. But eventually, you will be at war with each other. Give it time.

Yes, the "Shut out of every Ivy" line kind of led me to believe we were talking about "every Ivy". I don't care what color the kids are; I just think it should be based on merit. Honestly though, Ivy league schools are private; they can do what they want. I do think affirmative action should be eliminated for public schools or at the very least be changed to be socio-economic based. The URM kids getting into the Ivy league schools are generally quite well off.

The kid from Banneker who was accepted to five of the Ivies is not well off. Neither is the kid from Brooklyn who was also accepted to several Ivies. What data do you base your statement on PP?

Yep, neither was the one i married, or one of my best friends, or the guy next door to us, or... Yeah, that pp just makes stuff up.

Here's one article that talks about what I was remembering: http://magazine.good.is/articles/ivy-league-fooled-how-america-s-top-colleges-avoid-real-diversity

From the article: "Call it the Ivy League’s dirty little secret: While America’s most elite colleges do in fact make it a point to promote ethnic diversity on their campuses, a lot of them do so by admitting hugely disproportionate numbers of wealthy immigrants and their children rather than black students with deep roots—and troubled histories—in the United States."

There was another article that said that 85+% of the AA kids at ivy league schools were from middle-class and up families. I.e. not the types of folks you would expect to need affirmative action. I'll look and see if I can find that article as well, but I'm not just pulling stuff out of thin air.

And what percent of the white and Asian kids are from middle class and up? Bet it's at least 85.

Absolutely. But affirmative action should be for people that have disadvantages in life, not just to balance the distribution of races. The AA child of a doctor shouldn't need affirmative action.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought below was an interesting perspective from a Yahoo poster. Usually Yahoo comments are despicably racist but I thought this comment was interesting even though I disagree on one of his opinions.

• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
WJ Alden • 17 hours ago
As a private university, Harvard should have the right o admit whomever it wants. Of course most people at Harvard don't think businesses should have the right to hire whomever they want, so I guess they can't use that argument.

However, while Asians in the US may do better, on average, than non-Asians, they do not outperform the rest of us to a degree that suggests they should be >20% of Ivy League student bodies. Whether in politics, business, or culture, the evidence just isn't there. Are universities supposed to stick purely to grades and test scores - on which Asians do really, really well - to decide whom to admit, or can they look at post-college performance to understand that those aren't great predictors of our future elite?

If you look at just grades and test scores you could probably make a strong case that elite universities are discriminating against Asians. A look at post-college success, though, greatly weakens the case.

Of course not. It's still white's world out there. I must tell you, I am tired of people making Asian kids so one dimentional - like they can't do anything other than GPA and test scores. The fact that they perform at a higher level (w/ GPA/test scores) doesn't mean they can't do other things.

What else can they do?

Anec-data here....

The Val of my DD's high school class was Asian. Of course, he had the 4.0 unweighted GPA, 5s in 7+ APs, and the 2300 plus SAT I/800 SAT IIs. But on top of that, he was a varsity swimmer at a state-qualifying level (24 hour/week commitment in season, 15/hour/week out of season), president of two clubs, NHS, firsts in state science fair every year. He also had a part time job (lifeguarding).

Shut out of every Ivy.

As CalTech becomes increasingly Asian (over 60% to date), just how many students, Asian and non-Asian with the credentials you listed above will be shut out of not just CalTech but of every Ivy? Even if it were 100%, there are just so many seats. Then what?

Also, the credentials you listed above are not unusual, not by a long shot. Mosey on over to College Confidential. Those attributes are becoming a dime a dozen.

There were probably 3-4 thousand kids last year w/ 2300+ SATs out of 1.6 million test takers. Add on all the rest of the accomplishments and I seriously doubt kids like these are "a dime a dozen". There was an AA kid last year with a 2250 on the SATs, not top 10 in his class that everyone freaked out about because he got into every single one of the Ivies. Had be been Asian (or possibly even white) he would have been kicked to the curb.

3 or 4 thousand. 2000 spots. Do the math.

There were 23,000 kids admitted to the Ivy league schools last year. I did the math.

You're not just talking about Harvard, obviously. I don't think you or anyone will be happy until either the accept only whites or only Asians. But eventually, you will be at war with each other. Give it time.

Yes, the "Shut out of every Ivy" line kind of led me to believe we were talking about "every Ivy". I don't care what color the kids are; I just think it should be based on merit. Honestly though, Ivy league schools are private; they can do what they want. I do think affirmative action should be eliminated for public schools or at the very least be changed to be socio-economic based. The URM kids getting into the Ivy league schools are generally quite well off.

The kid from Banneker who was accepted to five of the Ivies is not well off. Neither is the kid from Brooklyn who was also accepted to several Ivies. What data do you base your statement on PP?

Yep, neither was the one i married, or one of my best friends, or the guy next door to us, or... Yeah, that pp just makes stuff up.

Here's one article that talks about what I was remembering: http://magazine.good.is/articles/ivy-league-fooled-how-america-s-top-colleges-avoid-real-diversity

From the article: "Call it the Ivy League’s dirty little secret: While America’s most elite colleges do in fact make it a point to promote ethnic diversity on their campuses, a lot of them do so by admitting hugely disproportionate numbers of wealthy immigrants and their children rather than black students with deep roots—and troubled histories—in the United States."

There was another article that said that 85+% of the AA kids at ivy league schools were from middle-class and up families. I.e. not the types of folks you would expect to need affirmative action. I'll look and see if I can find that article as well, but I'm not just pulling stuff out of thin air.

And what percent of the white and Asian kids are from middle class and up? Bet it's at least 85.

Absolutely. But affirmative action should be for people that have disadvantages in life, not just to balance the distribution of races. The AA child of a doctor shouldn't need affirmative action.

Says who? Let me guess, you're not a URM? I think the day when affirmative action isn't merited will be the day when black boys in hoodies aren't shot for carrying skittles. I have kids who are URMs, and they are the kids of extremely well-educated professionals. But yes, I've seen racism happen to them. Even in their schools and every by their teachers. And they're not even 6 yet. And they're only 2 generations removed from complete illiteracy.
I do agree that there ought to be some consideration for socioeconomic background, but schools do actually consider this as well (though I'd argue not nearly enough). You do definitely get a bump from being the first in your family to go to college. But does that mean race doesn't matter? No. Hell no.