Harvard Class of 2020

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^But the article posted #1 is from 1998. Also it does not state that black kids with 200-400 points lower than white kids are getting into Ivy League schools. That's the evidence I want to see.

I think it has been proven that black kids even of higher SES score lower but I will maintain that there are enough black students within a reasonable range who are admitted to top schools.

I'm reposting an op-ed piece that discusses the recent study about race and test scores where it did indeed show a gap for black students. However, the investigators for the study acknowledge that they did not take into account any other measures for admission (grades, essays, ECs, character). The author is Asian and an alum of Yale.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/30/opinion/white-students-unfair-advantage-in-admissions.html

"I’ve often heard Asian-Americans express resentment toward blacks and Latinos for benefiting from affirmative action. As a Yale senior, I remember feeling disillusioned myself when an upper-middle-class black classmate with significantly less academic achievement than I was admitted to a top medical school that had rejected me.

But if Asians are being held back, it’s not so much because of affirmative action but because of preference for whites. The 450-point advantage that the Princeton study demonstrated blacks have over Asians draws the most attention. But the number that is most revealing is the 140-point advantage for whites over Asians."

PP, that's a great article! Here's another fascinating quote from the author: "The study isolated race as a factor by controlling for variables like academic performance, legacy status, social class, type of high school (public or private) and participation in athletics. So that 140-point gap is between a white student and an Asian student who differ by little more than race."

Giving that big a preference to whites over Asians is wrong. I'll just note that the study also indicates that the 450-point advantage blacks have over Asians is between a black student and an Asian student who differ by little more than race. That's a heck of an advantage for an upper-middle-class black student to have over an upper-middle-class Asian student. I support some advantage being accorded to the well-to-do African American student (not to the well-to-do Nigerian boarding school student), but I don't know why it needs to be 450 points.

I support affirmative action, but when the advantage is this large (actually, massive) REGARDLESS of socio-economic status, then I question the application of that kind of preference in the name of affirmative action.

If you look at the link to the actual study, the researcher does not feel they have a "smoking gun". In fact they ran models of different policy actions that could be taken and you would not achieve a similar level of diversity by just using SES as the measure. (I'm operating on the assumption that most of us value diversity in higher education). As an AA, though this study does give me pause and I agree 450 points is just crazy. Our approach with my DC who will be entering college next year has been to focus on getting a high test score, high grades and stellar ECs - all of which DC has in place. My DC is planning to apply to top schools. However, I have a lot of skepticism that it will be a slam dunk. At the same time if it is a slam dunk, I will not apologize for it. IMO everyone should take any advantage they can to get ahead. Isn't that they way of the college admissions world, anyway?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^But the article posted #1 is from 1998. Also it does not state that black kids with 200-400 points lower than white kids are getting into Ivy League schools. That's the evidence I want to see.

I think it has been proven that black kids even of higher SES score lower but I will maintain that there are enough black students within a reasonable range who are admitted to top schools.

I'm reposting an op-ed piece that discusses the recent study about race and test scores where it did indeed show a gap for black students. However, the investigators for the study acknowledge that they did not take into account any other measures for admission (grades, essays, ECs, character). The author is Asian and an alum of Yale.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/30/opinion/white-students-unfair-advantage-in-admissions.html

"I’ve often heard Asian-Americans express resentment toward blacks and Latinos for benefiting from affirmative action. As a Yale senior, I remember feeling disillusioned myself when an upper-middle-class black classmate with significantly less academic achievement than I was admitted to a top medical school that had rejected me.

But if Asians are being held back, it’s not so much because of affirmative action but because of preference for whites. The 450-point advantage that the Princeton study demonstrated blacks have over Asians draws the most attention. But the number that is most revealing is the 140-point advantage for whites over Asians."

PP, that's a great article! Here's another fascinating quote from the author: "The study isolated race as a factor by controlling for variables like academic performance, legacy status, social class, type of high school (public or private) and participation in athletics. So that 140-point gap is between a white student and an Asian student who differ by little more than race."

Giving that big a preference to whites over Asians is wrong. I'll just note that the study also indicates that the 450-point advantage blacks have over Asians is between a black student and an Asian student who differ by little more than race. That's a heck of an advantage for an upper-middle-class black student to have over an upper-middle-class Asian student. I support some advantage being accorded to the well-to-do African American student (not to the well-to-do Nigerian boarding school student), but I don't know why it needs to be 450 points.

I support affirmative action, but when the advantage is this large (actually, massive) REGARDLESS of socio-economic status, then I question the application of that kind of preference in the name of affirmative action.

If you look at the link to the actual study, the researcher does not feel they have a "smoking gun". In fact they ran models of different policy actions that could be taken and you would not achieve a similar level of diversity by just using SES as the measure. (I'm operating on the assumption that most of us value diversity in higher education). As an AA, though this study does give me pause and I agree 450 points is just crazy. Our approach with my DC who will be entering college next year has been to focus on getting a high test score, high grades and stellar ECs - all of which DC has in place. My DC is planning to apply to top schools. However, I have a lot of skepticism that it will be a slam dunk. At the same time if it is a slam dunk, I will not apologize for it. IMO everyone should take any advantage they can to get ahead. Isn't that they way of the college admissions world, anyway?

I believe that you're the first AA on this forum to admit, despite the overwhelming supporting data, that AAs get a boost through handicapped test scores. And kudos for acknowledging that a 450 spread is a bit absurd. I agree wholeheartedly with your last sentiment.....anybody in your position would take every available systemic advantage because you're right, nothing is a slam dunk these days. Best of luck to your DC in the admissions process and thank you for being level headed!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^But the article posted #1 is from 1998. Also it does not state that black kids with 200-400 points lower than white kids are getting into Ivy League schools. That's the evidence I want to see.

I think it has been proven that black kids even of higher SES score lower but I will maintain that there are enough black students within a reasonable range who are admitted to top schools.

I'm reposting an op-ed piece that discusses the recent study about race and test scores where it did indeed show a gap for black students. However, the investigators for the study acknowledge that they did not take into account any other measures for admission (grades, essays, ECs, character). The author is Asian and an alum of Yale.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/30/opinion/white-students-unfair-advantage-in-admissions.html

"I’ve often heard Asian-Americans express resentment toward blacks and Latinos for benefiting from affirmative action. As a Yale senior, I remember feeling disillusioned myself when an upper-middle-class black classmate with significantly less academic achievement than I was admitted to a top medical school that had rejected me.

But if Asians are being held back, it’s not so much because of affirmative action but because of preference for whites. The 450-point advantage that the Princeton study demonstrated blacks have over Asians draws the most attention. But the number that is most revealing is the 140-point advantage for whites over Asians."

PP, that's a great article! Here's another fascinating quote from the author: "The study isolated race as a factor by controlling for variables like academic performance, legacy status, social class, type of high school (public or private) and participation in athletics. So that 140-point gap is between a white student and an Asian student who differ by little more than race."

Giving that big a preference to whites over Asians is wrong. I'll just note that the study also indicates that the 450-point advantage blacks have over Asians is between a black student and an Asian student who differ by little more than race. That's a heck of an advantage for an upper-middle-class black student to have over an upper-middle-class Asian student. I support some advantage being accorded to the well-to-do African American student (not to the well-to-do Nigerian boarding school student), but I don't know why it needs to be 450 points.

I support affirmative action, but when the advantage is this large (actually, massive) REGARDLESS of socio-economic status, then I question the application of that kind of preference in the name of affirmative action.

If you look at the link to the actual study, the researcher does not feel they have a "smoking gun". In fact they ran models of different policy actions that could be taken and you would not achieve a similar level of diversity by just using SES as the measure. (I'm operating on the assumption that most of us value diversity in higher education). As an AA, though this study does give me pause and I agree 450 points is just crazy. Our approach with my DC who will be entering college next year has been to focus on getting a high test score, high grades and stellar ECs - all of which DC has in place. My DC is planning to apply to top schools. However, I have a lot of skepticism that it will be a slam dunk. At the same time if it is a slam dunk, I will not apologize for it. IMO everyone should take any advantage they can to get ahead. Isn't that they way of the college admissions world, anyway?

I believe that you're the first AA on this forum to admit, despite the overwhelming supporting data, that AAs get a boost through handicapped test scores. And kudos for acknowledging that a 450 spread is a bit absurd. I agree wholeheartedly with your last sentiment.....anybody in your position would take every available systemic advantage because you're right, nothing is a slam dunk these days. Best of luck to your DC in the admissions process and thank you for being level headed!

Here's what makes sense to me: give a boost for an AA student, but one that gets smaller as SES increases. Give a boost to every diverse group, which gets smaller as SES increases. And the "boost" could vary from one diverse group to another. But as to whites, there would only be a boost if they were low SES.

That plan would accommodate -- in a reasonable way -- the value of affirmative action by race/ethnicity and also the value of boosts by SES status. It would recognize that poor diverse students face a lot more hurdles than wealthy diverse students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^But the article posted #1 is from 1998. Also it does not state that black kids with 200-400 points lower than white kids are getting into Ivy League schools. That's the evidence I want to see.

I think it has been proven that black kids even of higher SES score lower but I will maintain that there are enough black students within a reasonable range who are admitted to top schools.

I'm reposting an op-ed piece that discusses the recent study about race and test scores where it did indeed show a gap for black students. However, the investigators for the study acknowledge that they did not take into account any other measures for admission (grades, essays, ECs, character). The author is Asian and an alum of Yale.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/30/opinion/white-students-unfair-advantage-in-admissions.html

"I’ve often heard Asian-Americans express resentment toward blacks and Latinos for benefiting from affirmative action. As a Yale senior, I remember feeling disillusioned myself when an upper-middle-class black classmate with significantly less academic achievement than I was admitted to a top medical school that had rejected me.

But if Asians are being held back, it’s not so much because of affirmative action but because of preference for whites. The 450-point advantage that the Princeton study demonstrated blacks have over Asians draws the most attention. But the number that is most revealing is the 140-point advantage for whites over Asians."

PP, that's a great article! Here's another fascinating quote from the author: "The study isolated race as a factor by controlling for variables like academic performance, legacy status, social class, type of high school (public or private) and participation in athletics. So that 140-point gap is between a white student and an Asian student who differ by little more than race."

Giving that big a preference to whites over Asians is wrong. I'll just note that the study also indicates that the 450-point advantage blacks have over Asians is between a black student and an Asian student who differ by little more than race. That's a heck of an advantage for an upper-middle-class black student to have over an upper-middle-class Asian student. I support some advantage being accorded to the well-to-do African American student (not to the well-to-do Nigerian boarding school student), but I don't know why it needs to be 450 points.

I support affirmative action, but when the advantage is this large (actually, massive) REGARDLESS of socio-economic status, then I question the application of that kind of preference in the name of affirmative action.

If you look at the link to the actual study, the researcher does not feel they have a "smoking gun". In fact they ran models of different policy actions that could be taken and you would not achieve a similar level of diversity by just using SES as the measure. (I'm operating on the assumption that most of us value diversity in higher education). As an AA, though this study does give me pause and I agree 450 points is just crazy. Our approach with my DC who will be entering college next year has been to focus on getting a high test score, high grades and stellar ECs - all of which DC has in place. My DC is planning to apply to top schools. However, I have a lot of skepticism that it will be a slam dunk. At the same time if it is a slam dunk, I will not apologize for it. IMO everyone should take any advantage they can to get ahead. Isn't that they way of the college admissions world, anyway?

I believe that you're the first AA on this forum to admit, despite the overwhelming supporting data, that AAs get a boost through handicapped test scores. And kudos for acknowledging that a 450 spread is a bit absurd. I agree wholeheartedly with your last sentiment.....anybody in your position would take every available systemic advantage because you're right, nothing is a slam dunk these days. Best of luck to your DC in the admissions process and thank you for being level headed!

Here's what makes sense to me: give a boost for an AA student, but one that gets smaller as SES increases. Give a boost to every diverse group, which gets smaller as SES increases. And the "boost" could vary from one diverse group to another. But as to whites, there would only be a boost if they were low SES.

That plan would accommodate -- in a reasonable way -- the value of affirmative action by race/ethnicity and also the value of boosts by SES status. It would recognize that poor diverse students face a lot more hurdles than wealthy diverse students.

I think that's a smart approach but don't forget that the colleges benefit from taking URMs from with high SES. The higher the SES the greater the probability that the student will assimilate and graduate. The risk of taking a lower SES applicant is huge and colleges protect their retention and graduation rates because they impact rankings which of course is the be all and end all. It is sad that rankings drive these kind of behaviors but I think your idea has a lot of merit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I wonder if it's because legacy and athletics are becoming less of a "guaranteed white" admittance. My DC has 2 close friends who are legacies at an Ivy, one child is white, the other is AA. She has another close friend who is a first generation american of asian descent, and that child's parents encourage significant participation in a sport hoping it will help give a boost to college options.

Assuming grades, test scores, etc are equivalent, I would expect a competitive school to give an AA legacy a slight edge over a white legacy, at least until they're getting a good number of AA legacy applicants (I would assume it's still a fairly small pool compared to white legacy applicants).

I would like to see us use SES instead of race. It would give a boost to the kids who truly need one. I think a lot of colleges are punting on real diversity by accepting wealthy kids over disadvantaged kids.

Just because you don't value racial diversity doesn't mean other people don't. I can say for certain that the experience of rich, black kids at my private school was different than the experience of rich white and Asian kids. And I'm glad to have known them to get that perspective (the neighborhood my parents lived in was pretty much just white and a little Asian, so I didn't meet rich black kids near my home). Ironically, all of the black students I was friends with at my HYPS school were from lower SES backgrounds except for one Kenyan one, so despite all the concern that rich black kids are taking diversity spots at elite schools my anecdotes don't bear it out.

You are not the only person in this debate, and your perspective isn't the only one that matters. If you got rid of racial diversity admissions, my college experience would have been worse.

Looking at the data, your friendship experience appears to be an anomaly -- unless by saying that your diverse friends were from "lower SES backgrounds" than you, you simply meant that your family was in the top 10% and theirs was in the top 20%.

There just aren't many diverse students who are disadvantaged at HYPS, because very few students at those schools of any color are from less-advantaged families. As mentioned above, only 4.5% of students at Harvard come from the bottom 20% socio-economically. 67% come from the top 20% of income! And the data from Princeton, Yale, and Stanford are the same or worse. Don't believe it? Look here https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/college-mobility/harvard-university. It has data for many top schools.

Nothing in the data you posted suggests that the black students at those schools don't come from lower SES. That might be true, but your data don't back it up. Black students are a small minority, as are poor students. It's possible, though maybe unlikely, that most of the poor students are also black...but it's definitely likely that a larger fraction of the black students are poor.

And I never said my experience was representative of anything other than my experience. You aren't addressing my point, though, that racial diversity among rich students is also valuable. At least to some of us.

At Harvard, only 4.5% of the students have a family income in the bottom 20%. If 50% of the kids are minority, and ALL of the lower income kids are minority (which most likely isn't true) that means there are 44.5% of the students who are minority and have incomes over the bottom 20%.

http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2017/1/25/harvard-income-percentile/

[Anonymous]

I believe that you're the first AA on this forum to admit, despite the overwhelming supporting data, that AAs get a boost through handicapped test scores. And kudos for acknowledging that a 450 spread is a bit absurd. I agree wholeheartedly with your last sentiment.....anybody in your position would take every available systemic advantage because you're right, nothing is a slam dunk these days. Best of luck to your DC in the admissions process and thank you for being level headed!

NP. Crap. Whites have enjoyed de facto affirmative action for centuries (affirmative action worth more than a 500 point spread on the SAT). Our cannot dupe the rest of America by introducing the new and separate watered down version in 1960s and claim you are giving others a hand. What hand? This is a ruse. Affirmatively scoop advantage with a large wide shovel for Whites with one hand while handing out crumbs with porous fingers for others. Then cowardly claim discrimination because you can not compete. Do the math. Whites have huge advantages in college and job admission in America.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This thread is bizarre. The question is asking why Harvard is 51% minority while the country is only 37% minority. Harvard admits 22% Asians, more than 4x or 17% higher than the national fraction of Asian-Americans (4.8%)...a margin that is more than sufficient to explain the different between 37% vs 51% minority.

Any y'all are fixated on the 2% over-representation of black Americans?

No wonder your kids won't get into Harvard. You lack basic reasoning skills.

-- Harvard PhD

+ 1 Harvard Alum. Class of 2000.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah East Coast schools are still biased against Asians (22%)

It's only 12% international

15% Black seems really high that is Affirmative Action (Blacks score 100 points lower on SATs vs you need a perfect score to get in as Asian)

https://college.harvard.edu/admissions/admissions-statistics

This!

My child is White, has a 4.2 GPA, takes all AP courses and a 1,400 SAT and doubt he will get into his preferred school.

that's a comically low sat score for an asian or white.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:let me add so you can understand

There are easily 3000 white and Asian students across the country who are better than 250 of the 300 black students at Harvard and deserve a spot over them

It is so amazing how the default is always to assume that all blacks are poor and lack intelligence when the reality is that blacks are as diverse as any racial group in terms intellect, SES and values. Having less melanin or being from Asia does not inherently make an individual more intelligent or have better values. Seeing this post just reminds me how racist and dumb people on DCUM are.

And this thread is especially ridiculous because you have some people suggesting all blacks are poor and the others suggesting they're better off than whites because they're like Sasha and Malia. White people kill me!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whatever happened to MLK's "content of their character..." when it comes to College Admission? Why can't race be blind on a resume, just like it is on job applications?

I don't think he was ever in charge of college admissions, so there's that. Also, lol to race blind job applications. I'm so done listening to white people whine about efforts to level the playing field in a system that they rigged for centuries, and expect us to think you've done your due diligence in a single generation. Done. My mother couldn't drink at the same water fountains as some of you fools. I'm under 30. It hasn't been long enough for you to pat your selves on the back and called it square.

There is still a massive discrepancy in the quality of education and enrichment that many minority children have access to compared to your lily white snowflakes. So sorry to break it to you, but the black kid you think stole your kid's seat because he scored 100 points lower? That kid is a fighter. He ran the same race as your kid, except he had a handicap, and your kid had wheels, and in the end your kid barely beat him. Yes he deserves the spot. That black kid has the abilities coupled with a drive to change the world. He'll give back to his community and to the university. Your kid may do that same things, but white men have always had their chance. It's time for everyone else to have theirs too.

Ah, yes. Those black kids growing up in 1.5 million dollar houses and going to Sidwell/Maret/etc.- such fighters. Such handicaps. I'm so glad they will finally have their chance.

Do you know why there are black kids growing up in those million dollar homes? Because affirmative action programs gave their parents a shot even though they may not have had perfect scores of their better prepared white peers. Save it.

Holy hell. You are saying wealthy, successful black people got that way because of affirmative action? That's just downright offensive.

No it isn't. I'm black. Not offended. It's true. Getting in because of affirmative action does not mean you are not smart, it means the whites didn't get a chance to deny you just because you're not white. Plenty of people who benefit from affirmative action have the scores and wherewithall, however, but for affirmative action, white schools and white employers would legally discriminate against them for no other reason than because they're not white or not male. Affirmative action helps white women more than any other minority group so if your white DD didn't get in, she was never getting in. Sorry!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My kid is Asian and I think having a diverse class is very important. Who wants to go to a college that is 70% Asians and 30% White. I did not know any AAs until I met them in college. Valuable exposure in my opinion. Also, Asian ms are good at study skills and test prep but pretty weak with social skills. Campuses are a lot more interesting with all demographics represented including international students.

+ 1000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I had stats high enough to get in 1500+ 4.2+ several 5s on AP test

I went to UVA I don't care I didn't go to an IVY

What I do care about is ignorance/stupidity on what really goes on in the admission process

and overall the PC and people running scared from speaking the truth.... hell I'm not even Asian

When California went race blind Asians shot up and Blacks shot down that's all you need to know

This explains a lot!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Yes indeed. Let's see some data from a reputable source. There are lots of stereotypes and other misinformation being banded about on this thread by those wanting to support their narrow-minded views (or perhaps justify why they or their offspring did not get into Harvard or the like). I would love to see some data backing these statements. I would also love to see data that shows that UMC and rich black students are intellectually deficient when compared with their peers who are white or asian.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/2999198 Even when controlled for socioeconomic status, blacks still score lower than whites and Asians.

And one interpretation for that is there is racial bias in those tests independent of SES.

This backs up the point, though, that rich black kids are different than rich white kids.

so the psat opressed malia into getting a lower score than chelsea clinton?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is bizarre. The question is asking why Harvard is 51% minority while the country is only 37% minority. Harvard admits 22% Asians, more than 4x or 17% higher than the national fraction of Asian-Americans (4.8%)...a margin that is more than sufficient to explain the different between 37% vs 51% minority.

Any y'all are fixated on the 2% over-representation of black Americans?

No wonder your kids won't get into Harvard. You lack basic reasoning skills.

-- Harvard PhD

+ 1 Harvard Alum. Class of 2000.

This again

Asian > White > Hispanic > Black

True for

Crime Rate
Out of wedlock births
Income
Test Scores

Hint they are all related

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an asian parent I'm not advocating for looking at only grades and test scores but to remove the artificial quotas based on skin color. Commitments and talents to other activities and your critical thinking as conveyed on the essays should matter but comparison and selection ideally wouldn't be within buckets defined as children who are yellow, brown or peach. If you get down to it they're just different mixes of red, green and white. It's having people with a variety of experiences that make for an interesting cultural mix. I grew up yellow and very poor. I bet my scars and growth from those years is more similar to black and very poor than not.

I'm black and agree with this in theory, but how should a school measure diversity, if it is something they value? Also race is not just skin color, it is a social construct we live under in the US (like it or not). I'd love it if all advantages were thrown out for EVERYONE. I just don't understand why black students get attacked in these discussions when they make up such a small percentage at any of these top schools. It is truly tiny. Why isn't the focus on legacy and athletic advantage, that's what hurts Asian admits more.


The problem is at the tippy top schools no one really truly knows how they make their selections and honestly the private schools can do whatever they please. They are not reliant on government funding. And NIH for example is not going to stop giving research grants to Harvard.

If you could show legacy/athlete admits had SAT scores, GPAs, AP test score averages several deviations below the mean for the entering class then the justification is plausible. Studies show this is true for black applicants and that is why there is such outrage.

Studies show this as well. You're choosing not to read them, clearly.