Admitting you are Asian (college apps)

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Would you be okay with job applicants of certain racial backgrounds being less likely to get jobs than equally qualified candidates of different backgrounds because the company desires diverse employees? I'm not necessarily arguing against what you're saying. Just curious.

Not the PP, but yes, I would be comfortable with the following: Two equally qualified candidates, one of whom is demographically similar to existing staff, and one of whom represents an identity not currently represented. The latter gets the job on the basis of bringing a new perspective, which can only be good for business.

To be more concrete, let’s say 1 is a Jew and 1 Indian American (or Black, or Hispanic...) Because 2% Jews are are already over represented at Harvard, you would pick against the Jewish student.

If all else is equal, then yes, you should choose the one from the underrepresented group. Was this question supposed to be some kind of a gotcha? -a Jewish person

WOW! I thought that no one could get into Harvard without at least 1420+ (at bare minimum). That makes me angry. Sorry.

Who said “all else being equal?” The H lawsuit presupposes Asians with superior stats.

Stats aren’t everything. That’s the thing. And where the Tiger mommies go wrong.

Stats aren’t everything cuz it’s “holistic.” That’s where H goes wrong. All their URM grads are holding less than perfect sheepskin cuz stats aren’t everything. It’s “holistic” where the society at large evaluate their URM graduates who can’t perform as well as UCLA or UC Berkeley grads.

Well, your behavior in this thread and the demonstration of the poor way in which you think is a big clue why your child would be passed over, assuming your child exhibits similar characteristics and tendencies. You, simply, are not elite college material. Your child probably is not, either.

It’s a fact that URMs with H degrees don’t have the same life outcome as whites.

As another PP mentioned, this is due to systemic racism.

Employers are simply discounting the Harvard premium when factoring in Harvard URMs, legacies, sports, etc.

Got data? Sounds like wishful thinking. The Harvard students in those categories have their pick of top firms/positions. Many of the legacies and athletes are well liked and know how to read. On top of that, they come off as much more intelligent than average or even above-average state school kids.

There’s an article posted above that shows Harvard isn’t all that. Harvard law and medical schools routinely reject Harvard undergrads.

Also check out the article posted above that shows Harvard URM’s average SAT is below 1200.

Below 1200 typically get a student into mediocre state universities. No, they DO NOT “come off as much more intelligent than average or even above-average state school kids.“

You probably scored below 1200 because if you read and comprehended the article it says that 1170 is the cutoff for URMs for Harvard to reach out to you to see if you want to apply. It’s not even the average score of URM applicants or much less of URM admits.

1170 is a pretty low bar. You can find kids with higher stats at any local community college.

At every community college? Maybe one kid. Although it seems at that score point cc to 4 year might be a better option because a kid might be a conscientious student but won’t get into UVa or VT at that range. My kid got about 200 points higher than that and the thought of them applying to Harvard would’ve been ludicrous.

1170 is pretty close to being the national SAT average. If you read the article carefully, it tells you Harvard admits more URM kids with 550 SAT math than 650 or over.

People as patently stupid as you should not be allowed to comment on anyone else’s intelligence:

“In 2009, the number of African American applicants with scores above 640 was more than double the number of applicants with scores below 550. But for the Class of 2012, there were fewer African American applicants with math scores above 640 than below 550.“

Applicants =\= admits.

The entire point of the article is criticizing Harvard for recruiting URM applicants who have no chance of being admitted.

Read again.
The stats were exposed during the litigation.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Would you be okay with job applicants of certain racial backgrounds being less likely to get jobs than equally qualified candidates of different backgrounds because the company desires diverse employees? I'm not necessarily arguing against what you're saying. Just curious.

Not the PP, but yes, I would be comfortable with the following: Two equally qualified candidates, one of whom is demographically similar to existing staff, and one of whom represents an identity not currently represented. The latter gets the job on the basis of bringing a new perspective, which can only be good for business.

To be more concrete, let’s say 1 is a Jew and 1 Indian American (or Black, or Hispanic...) Because 2% Jews are are already over represented at Harvard, you would pick against the Jewish student.

If all else is equal, then yes, you should choose the one from the underrepresented group. Was this question supposed to be some kind of a gotcha? -a Jewish person

WOW! I thought that no one could get into Harvard without at least 1420+ (at bare minimum). That makes me angry. Sorry.

Who said “all else being equal?” The H lawsuit presupposes Asians with superior stats.

Stats aren’t everything. That’s the thing. And where the Tiger mommies go wrong.

Stats aren’t everything cuz it’s “holistic.” That’s where H goes wrong. All their URM grads are holding less than perfect sheepskin cuz stats aren’t everything. It’s “holistic” where the society at large evaluate their URM graduates who can’t perform as well as UCLA or UC Berkeley grads.

Well, your behavior in this thread and the demonstration of the poor way in which you think is a big clue why your child would be passed over, assuming your child exhibits similar characteristics and tendencies. You, simply, are not elite college material. Your child probably is not, either.

It’s a fact that URMs with H degrees don’t have the same life outcome as whites.

As another PP mentioned, this is due to systemic racism.

Employers are simply discounting the Harvard premium when factoring in Harvard URMs, legacies, sports, etc.

Got data? Sounds like wishful thinking. The Harvard students in those categories have their pick of top firms/positions. Many of the legacies and athletes are well liked and know how to read. On top of that, they come off as much more intelligent than average or even above-average state school kids.

There’s an article posted above that shows Harvard isn’t all that. Harvard law and medical schools routinely reject Harvard undergrads.

Also check out the article posted above that shows Harvard URM’s average SAT is below 1200.

Below 1200 typically get a student into mediocre state universities. No, they DO NOT “come off as much more intelligent than average or even above-average state school kids.“

You probably scored below 1200 because if you read and comprehended the article it says that 1170 is the cutoff for URMs for Harvard to reach out to you to see if you want to apply. It’s not even the average score of URM applicants or much less of URM admits.

1170 is a pretty low bar. You can find kids with higher stats at any local community college.

At every community college? Maybe one kid. Although it seems at that score point cc to 4 year might be a better option because a kid might be a conscientious student but won’t get into UVa or VT at that range. My kid got about 200 points higher than that and the thought of them applying to Harvard would’ve been ludicrous.

1170 is pretty close to being the national SAT average. If you read the article carefully, it tells you Harvard admits more URM kids with 550 SAT math than 650 or over.

People as patently stupid as you should not be allowed to comment on anyone else’s intelligence:

“In 2009, the number of African American applicants with scores above 640 was more than double the number of applicants with scores below 550. But for the Class of 2012, there were fewer African American applicants with math scores above 640 than below 550.“

Applicants =\= admits.

The entire point of the article is criticizing Harvard for recruiting URM applicants who have no chance of being admitted.

Read again.
The stats were exposed during the litigation.

Boy you are doubling down on this. Average SAT scores for African American admits were in the 1400-1420 range. This is the data Harvard provided and was accepted by the expert for the plaintiff. See page 26

https://samv91khoyt2i553a2t1s05i-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Doc-415-1-Arcidiacono-Expert-Report.pdf

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Would you be okay with job applicants of certain racial backgrounds being less likely to get jobs than equally qualified candidates of different backgrounds because the company desires diverse employees? I'm not necessarily arguing against what you're saying. Just curious.

Not the PP, but yes, I would be comfortable with the following: Two equally qualified candidates, one of whom is demographically similar to existing staff, and one of whom represents an identity not currently represented. The latter gets the job on the basis of bringing a new perspective, which can only be good for business.

To be more concrete, let’s say 1 is a Jew and 1 Indian American (or Black, or Hispanic...) Because 2% Jews are are already over represented at Harvard, you would pick against the Jewish student.

If all else is equal, then yes, you should choose the one from the underrepresented group. Was this question supposed to be some kind of a gotcha? -a Jewish person

WOW! I thought that no one could get into Harvard without at least 1420+ (at bare minimum). That makes me angry. Sorry.

Who said “all else being equal?” The H lawsuit presupposes Asians with superior stats.

Stats aren’t everything. That’s the thing. And where the Tiger mommies go wrong.

Stats aren’t everything cuz it’s “holistic.” That’s where H goes wrong. All their URM grads are holding less than perfect sheepskin cuz stats aren’t everything. It’s “holistic” where the society at large evaluate their URM graduates who can’t perform as well as UCLA or UC Berkeley grads.

Well, your behavior in this thread and the demonstration of the poor way in which you think is a big clue why your child would be passed over, assuming your child exhibits similar characteristics and tendencies. You, simply, are not elite college material. Your child probably is not, either.

It’s a fact that URMs with H degrees don’t have the same life outcome as whites.

As another PP mentioned, this is due to systemic racism.

Employers are simply discounting the Harvard premium when factoring in Harvard URMs, legacies, sports, etc.

Got data? Sounds like wishful thinking. The Harvard students in those categories have their pick of top firms/positions. Many of the legacies and athletes are well liked and know how to read. On top of that, they come off as much more intelligent than average or even above-average state school kids.

There’s an article posted above that shows Harvard isn’t all that. Harvard law and medical schools routinely reject Harvard undergrads.

Also check out the article posted above that shows Harvard URM’s average SAT is below 1200.

Below 1200 typically get a student into mediocre state universities. No, they DO NOT “come off as much more intelligent than average or even above-average state school kids.“

You probably scored below 1200 because if you read and comprehended the article it says that 1170 is the cutoff for URMs for Harvard to reach out to you to see if you want to apply. It’s not even the average score of URM applicants or much less of URM admits.

1170 is a pretty low bar. You can find kids with higher stats at any local community college.

At every community college? Maybe one kid. Although it seems at that score point cc to 4 year might be a better option because a kid might be a conscientious student but won’t get into UVa or VT at that range. My kid got about 200 points higher than that and the thought of them applying to Harvard would’ve been ludicrous.

1170 is pretty close to being the national SAT average. If you read the article carefully, it tells you Harvard admits more URM kids with 550 SAT math than 650 or over.

People as patently stupid as you should not be allowed to comment on anyone else’s intelligence:

“In 2009, the number of African American applicants with scores above 640 was more than double the number of applicants with scores below 550. But for the Class of 2012, there were fewer African American applicants with math scores above 640 than below 550.“

Applicants =\= admits.

The entire point of the article is criticizing Harvard for recruiting URM applicants who have no chance of being admitted.

Read again.
The stats were exposed during the litigation.

Boy you are doubling down on this. Average SAT scores for African American admits were in the 1400-1420 range. This is the data Harvard provided and was accepted by the expert for the plaintiff. See page 26

https://samv91khoyt2i553a2t1s05i-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Doc-415-1-Arcidiacono-Expert-Report.pdf

You do know that is way, way lower than the average admit, let alone the average Asian admit?

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Would you be okay with job applicants of certain racial backgrounds being less likely to get jobs than equally qualified candidates of different backgrounds because the company desires diverse employees? I'm not necessarily arguing against what you're saying. Just curious.

Not the PP, but yes, I would be comfortable with the following: Two equally qualified candidates, one of whom is demographically similar to existing staff, and one of whom represents an identity not currently represented. The latter gets the job on the basis of bringing a new perspective, which can only be good for business.

To be more concrete, let’s say 1 is a Jew and 1 Indian American (or Black, or Hispanic...) Because 2% Jews are are already over represented at Harvard, you would pick against the Jewish student.

If all else is equal, then yes, you should choose the one from the underrepresented group. Was this question supposed to be some kind of a gotcha? -a Jewish person

WOW! I thought that no one could get into Harvard without at least 1420+ (at bare minimum). That makes me angry. Sorry.

Who said “all else being equal?” The H lawsuit presupposes Asians with superior stats.

Stats aren’t everything. That’s the thing. And where the Tiger mommies go wrong.

Stats aren’t everything cuz it’s “holistic.” That’s where H goes wrong. All their URM grads are holding less than perfect sheepskin cuz stats aren’t everything. It’s “holistic” where the society at large evaluate their URM graduates who can’t perform as well as UCLA or UC Berkeley grads.

Well, your behavior in this thread and the demonstration of the poor way in which you think is a big clue why your child would be passed over, assuming your child exhibits similar characteristics and tendencies. You, simply, are not elite college material. Your child probably is not, either.

It’s a fact that URMs with H degrees don’t have the same life outcome as whites.

As another PP mentioned, this is due to systemic racism.

Employers are simply discounting the Harvard premium when factoring in Harvard URMs, legacies, sports, etc.

Got data? Sounds like wishful thinking. The Harvard students in those categories have their pick of top firms/positions. Many of the legacies and athletes are well liked and know how to read. On top of that, they come off as much more intelligent than average or even above-average state school kids.

There’s an article posted above that shows Harvard isn’t all that. Harvard law and medical schools routinely reject Harvard undergrads.

Also check out the article posted above that shows Harvard URM’s average SAT is below 1200.

Below 1200 typically get a student into mediocre state universities. No, they DO NOT “come off as much more intelligent than average or even above-average state school kids.“

You probably scored below 1200 because if you read and comprehended the article it says that 1170 is the cutoff for URMs for Harvard to reach out to you to see if you want to apply. It’s not even the average score of URM applicants or much less of URM admits.

1170 is a pretty low bar. You can find kids with higher stats at any local community college.

At every community college? Maybe one kid. Although it seems at that score point cc to 4 year might be a better option because a kid might be a conscientious student but won’t get into UVa or VT at that range. My kid got about 200 points higher than that and the thought of them applying to Harvard would’ve been ludicrous.

1170 is pretty close to being the national SAT average. If you read the article carefully, it tells you Harvard admits more URM kids with 550 SAT math than 650 or over.

People as patently stupid as you should not be allowed to comment on anyone else’s intelligence:

“In 2009, the number of African American applicants with scores above 640 was more than double the number of applicants with scores below 550. But for the Class of 2012, there were fewer African American applicants with math scores above 640 than below 550.“

Applicants =\= admits.

The entire point of the article is criticizing Harvard for recruiting URM applicants who have no chance of being admitted.

Read again.
The stats were exposed during the litigation.

Boy you are doubling down on this. Average SAT scores for African American admits were in the 1400-1420 range. This is the data Harvard provided and was accepted by the expert for the plaintiff. See page 26

https://samv91khoyt2i553a2t1s05i-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Doc-415-1-Arcidiacono-Expert-Report.pdf

You do know that is way, way lower than the average admit, let alone the average Asian admit?

Yes but that wasn’t the point. The point was that URMs were in the 1170-1200 range. Move the goal posts all you want but at least admit you were wrong and misleading on that point.

By way of comparison- all admits to Notre Dame averaged about 1475. Berkeley is around 1400. Duke is 1450. UVA is 1400.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Would you be okay with job applicants of certain racial backgrounds being less likely to get jobs than equally qualified candidates of different backgrounds because the company desires diverse employees? I'm not necessarily arguing against what you're saying. Just curious.

Not the PP, but yes, I would be comfortable with the following: Two equally qualified candidates, one of whom is demographically similar to existing staff, and one of whom represents an identity not currently represented. The latter gets the job on the basis of bringing a new perspective, which can only be good for business.

To be more concrete, let’s say 1 is a Jew and 1 Indian American (or Black, or Hispanic...) Because 2% Jews are are already over represented at Harvard, you would pick against the Jewish student.

If all else is equal, then yes, you should choose the one from the underrepresented group. Was this question supposed to be some kind of a gotcha? -a Jewish person

WOW! I thought that no one could get into Harvard without at least 1420+ (at bare minimum). That makes me angry. Sorry.

Who said “all else being equal?” The H lawsuit presupposes Asians with superior stats.

Stats aren’t everything. That’s the thing. And where the Tiger mommies go wrong.

Stats aren’t everything cuz it’s “holistic.” That’s where H goes wrong. All their URM grads are holding less than perfect sheepskin cuz stats aren’t everything. It’s “holistic” where the society at large evaluate their URM graduates who can’t perform as well as UCLA or UC Berkeley grads.

Well, your behavior in this thread and the demonstration of the poor way in which you think is a big clue why your child would be passed over, assuming your child exhibits similar characteristics and tendencies. You, simply, are not elite college material. Your child probably is not, either.

It’s a fact that URMs with H degrees don’t have the same life outcome as whites.

As another PP mentioned, this is due to systemic racism.

Employers are simply discounting the Harvard premium when factoring in Harvard URMs, legacies, sports, etc.

Got data? Sounds like wishful thinking. The Harvard students in those categories have their pick of top firms/positions. Many of the legacies and athletes are well liked and know how to read. On top of that, they come off as much more intelligent than average or even above-average state school kids.

There’s an article posted above that shows Harvard isn’t all that. Harvard law and medical schools routinely reject Harvard undergrads.

Also check out the article posted above that shows Harvard URM’s average SAT is below 1200.

Below 1200 typically get a student into mediocre state universities. No, they DO NOT “come off as much more intelligent than average or even above-average state school kids.“

You probably scored below 1200 because if you read and comprehended the article it says that 1170 is the cutoff for URMs for Harvard to reach out to you to see if you want to apply. It’s not even the average score of URM applicants or much less of URM admits.

1170 is a pretty low bar. You can find kids with higher stats at any local community college.

At every community college? Maybe one kid. Although it seems at that score point cc to 4 year might be a better option because a kid might be a conscientious student but won’t get into UVa or VT at that range. My kid got about 200 points higher than that and the thought of them applying to Harvard would’ve been ludicrous.

1170 is pretty close to being the national SAT average. If you read the article carefully, it tells you Harvard admits more URM kids with 550 SAT math than 650 or over.

People as patently stupid as you should not be allowed to comment on anyone else’s intelligence:

“In 2009, the number of African American applicants with scores above 640 was more than double the number of applicants with scores below 550. But for the Class of 2012, there were fewer African American applicants with math scores above 640 than below 550.“

Applicants =\= admits.

The entire point of the article is criticizing Harvard for recruiting URM applicants who have no chance of being admitted.

Read again.
The stats were exposed during the litigation.

Boy you are doubling down on this. Average SAT scores for African American admits were in the 1400-1420 range. This is the data Harvard provided and was accepted by the expert for the plaintiff. See page 26

https://samv91khoyt2i553a2t1s05i-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Doc-415-1-Arcidiacono-Expert-Report.pdf

I didn’t read his 170 page testimony- but did you know its author, PETER S. ARCIDIACONO, was a plaintiffs’ witness? He was pointing out the deleterious effect of unprepared students at Harvard. The average SAT score at some of the state unis is higher than 1400-1420.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s so sad that an Asian kid feels the need to hide identity because of discrimination. I’m white and I’m very empathetic to this. I’m sorry OP.

There is nothing inherently wrong with discrimination. When you choose a salad as your side, you discriminate against the French fries. That isn’t the issue.

I have no problem with colleges that desire a diverse student body effectively putting a cap on how many students of a similar background they will accept.

I wish American voters think the same way you think when they vote for POTUS. Except for one, since independence we have had only white dudes for POTUS. We need diversity at POTUS level - in terms of race, religion, and gender.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Would you be okay with job applicants of certain racial backgrounds being less likely to get jobs than equally qualified candidates of different backgrounds because the company desires diverse employees? I'm not necessarily arguing against what you're saying. Just curious.

Not the PP, but yes, I would be comfortable with the following: Two equally qualified candidates, one of whom is demographically similar to existing staff, and one of whom represents an identity not currently represented. The latter gets the job on the basis of bringing a new perspective, which can only be good for business.

To be more concrete, let’s say 1 is a Jew and 1 Indian American (or Black, or Hispanic...) Because 2% Jews are are already over represented at Harvard, you would pick against the Jewish student.

If all else is equal, then yes, you should choose the one from the underrepresented group. Was this question supposed to be some kind of a gotcha? -a Jewish person

WOW! I thought that no one could get into Harvard without at least 1420+ (at bare minimum). That makes me angry. Sorry.

Who said “all else being equal?” The H lawsuit presupposes Asians with superior stats.

Stats aren’t everything. That’s the thing. And where the Tiger mommies go wrong.

Stats aren’t everything cuz it’s “holistic.” That’s where H goes wrong. All their URM grads are holding less than perfect sheepskin cuz stats aren’t everything. It’s “holistic” where the society at large evaluate their URM graduates who can’t perform as well as UCLA or UC Berkeley grads.

Well, your behavior in this thread and the demonstration of the poor way in which you think is a big clue why your child would be passed over, assuming your child exhibits similar characteristics and tendencies. You, simply, are not elite college material. Your child probably is not, either.

It’s a fact that URMs with H degrees don’t have the same life outcome as whites.

As another PP mentioned, this is due to systemic racism.

Employers are simply discounting the Harvard premium when factoring in Harvard URMs, legacies, sports, etc.

Got data? Sounds like wishful thinking. The Harvard students in those categories have their pick of top firms/positions. Many of the legacies and athletes are well liked and know how to read. On top of that, they come off as much more intelligent than average or even above-average state school kids.

There’s an article posted above that shows Harvard isn’t all that. Harvard law and medical schools routinely reject Harvard undergrads.

Also check out the article posted above that shows Harvard URM’s average SAT is below 1200.

Below 1200 typically get a student into mediocre state universities. No, they DO NOT “come off as much more intelligent than average or even above-average state school kids.“

You probably scored below 1200 because if you read and comprehended the article it says that 1170 is the cutoff for URMs for Harvard to reach out to you to see if you want to apply. It’s not even the average score of URM applicants or much less of URM admits.

1170 is a pretty low bar. You can find kids with higher stats at any local community college.

At every community college? Maybe one kid. Although it seems at that score point cc to 4 year might be a better option because a kid might be a conscientious student but won’t get into UVa or VT at that range. My kid got about 200 points higher than that and the thought of them applying to Harvard would’ve been ludicrous.

1170 is pretty close to being the national SAT average. If you read the article carefully, it tells you Harvard admits more URM kids with 550 SAT math than 650 or over.

People as patently stupid as you should not be allowed to comment on anyone else’s intelligence:

“In 2009, the number of African American applicants with scores above 640 was more than double the number of applicants with scores below 550. But for the Class of 2012, there were fewer African American applicants with math scores above 640 than below 550.“

Applicants =\= admits.

The entire point of the article is criticizing Harvard for recruiting URM applicants who have no chance of being admitted.

Read again.
The stats were exposed during the litigation.

Boy you are doubling down on this. Average SAT scores for African American admits were in the 1400-1420 range. This is the data Harvard provided and was accepted by the expert for the plaintiff. See page 26

https://samv91khoyt2i553a2t1s05i-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Doc-415-1-Arcidiacono-Expert-Report.pdf

I didn’t read his 170 page testimony- but did you know its author, PETER S. ARCIDIACONO, was a plaintiffs’ witness? He was pointing out the deleterious effect of unprepared students at Harvard. The average SAT score at some of the state unis is higher than 1400-1420.

I did know that - I even stated that I my post. I’m not surprised you didn’t read it since you can’t manage to read and understand a five line forum post.

I read his testimony. I would have read it in order to comment on it so I don’t make stupid comments not grounded in facts. But you do you.

Re state universities - which ones? Do you know them off the top of your head? Berkeley and UVA aren’t. Michigan isn’t either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s so sad that an Asian kid feels the need to hide identity because of discrimination. I’m white and I’m very empathetic to this. I’m sorry OP.

There is nothing inherently wrong with discrimination. When you choose a salad as your side, you discriminate against the French fries. That isn’t the issue.

I have no problem with colleges that desire a diverse student body effectively putting a cap on how many students of a similar background they will accept.

I wish American voters think the same way you think when they vote for POTUS. Except for one, since independence we have had only white dudes for POTUS. We need diversity at POTUS level - in terms of race, religion, and gender.

In all fairness, for most of US history, there basically were only white people in the US. As recently as 1990, 86% of the voting public was non-hispanic white. The generations that could have been president for the past 60 years basically includes greatest generation, silent generation, and boomers. Even today, after a huge amount of immigration in the last two decades, boomers (the ages most commonly elected president) are something like 75% white. So it's disingenuous to imply that there is something odd about the racial makeup of past presidents, and even weirder to take it all the way back to "independence."

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Would you be okay with job applicants of certain racial backgrounds being less likely to get jobs than equally qualified candidates of different backgrounds because the company desires diverse employees? I'm not necessarily arguing against what you're saying. Just curious.

Not the PP, but yes, I would be comfortable with the following: Two equally qualified candidates, one of whom is demographically similar to existing staff, and one of whom represents an identity not currently represented. The latter gets the job on the basis of bringing a new perspective, which can only be good for business.

To be more concrete, let’s say 1 is a Jew and 1 Indian American (or Black, or Hispanic...) Because 2% Jews are are already over represented at Harvard, you would pick against the Jewish student.

If all else is equal, then yes, you should choose the one from the underrepresented group. Was this question supposed to be some kind of a gotcha? -a Jewish person

WOW! I thought that no one could get into Harvard without at least 1420+ (at bare minimum). That makes me angry. Sorry.

Who said “all else being equal?” The H lawsuit presupposes Asians with superior stats.

Stats aren’t everything. That’s the thing. And where the Tiger mommies go wrong.

Stats aren’t everything cuz it’s “holistic.” That’s where H goes wrong. All their URM grads are holding less than perfect sheepskin cuz stats aren’t everything. It’s “holistic” where the society at large evaluate their URM graduates who can’t perform as well as UCLA or UC Berkeley grads.

Well, your behavior in this thread and the demonstration of the poor way in which you think is a big clue why your child would be passed over, assuming your child exhibits similar characteristics and tendencies. You, simply, are not elite college material. Your child probably is not, either.

It’s a fact that URMs with H degrees don’t have the same life outcome as whites.

As another PP mentioned, this is due to systemic racism.

Employers are simply discounting the Harvard premium when factoring in Harvard URMs, legacies, sports, etc.

Got data? Sounds like wishful thinking. The Harvard students in those categories have their pick of top firms/positions. Many of the legacies and athletes are well liked and know how to read. On top of that, they come off as much more intelligent than average or even above-average state school kids.

There’s an article posted above that shows Harvard isn’t all that. Harvard law and medical schools routinely reject Harvard undergrads.

Also check out the article posted above that shows Harvard URM’s average SAT is below 1200.

Below 1200 typically get a student into mediocre state universities. No, they DO NOT “come off as much more intelligent than average or even above-average state school kids.“

You probably scored below 1200 because if you read and comprehended the article it says that 1170 is the cutoff for URMs for Harvard to reach out to you to see if you want to apply. It’s not even the average score of URM applicants or much less of URM admits.

1170 is a pretty low bar. You can find kids with higher stats at any local community college.

At every community college? Maybe one kid. Although it seems at that score point cc to 4 year might be a better option because a kid might be a conscientious student but won’t get into UVa or VT at that range. My kid got about 200 points higher than that and the thought of them applying to Harvard would’ve been ludicrous.

1170 is pretty close to being the national SAT average. If you read the article carefully, it tells you Harvard admits more URM kids with 550 SAT math than 650 or over.

People as patently stupid as you should not be allowed to comment on anyone else’s intelligence:

“In 2009, the number of African American applicants with scores above 640 was more than double the number of applicants with scores below 550. But for the Class of 2012, there were fewer African American applicants with math scores above 640 than below 550.“

Applicants =\= admits.

The entire point of the article is criticizing Harvard for recruiting URM applicants who have no chance of being admitted.

Read again.
The stats were exposed during the litigation.

Boy you are doubling down on this. Average SAT scores for African American admits were in the 1400-1420 range. This is the data Harvard provided and was accepted by the expert for the plaintiff. See page 26

https://samv91khoyt2i553a2t1s05i-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Doc-415-1-Arcidiacono-Expert-Report.pdf

I didn’t read his 170 page testimony- but did you know its author, PETER S. ARCIDIACONO, was a plaintiffs’ witness? He was pointing out the deleterious effect of unprepared students at Harvard. The average SAT score at some of the state unis is higher than 1400-1420.

One other thing - please find the portion of his report where he states the students are “unprepared”. There is a difference between the lower academic rankings of certain groups (athletes and URMs) and unprepared. But that may be too much for your brain to grasp considering the problems you have with basic reading

[Anonymous]

Maybe some parents need to let go of the notion that there is only ONE path to success, and that the road there needs to be as wide as possible for children just like theirs.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Would you be okay with job applicants of certain racial backgrounds being less likely to get jobs than equally qualified candidates of different backgrounds because the company desires diverse employees? I'm not necessarily arguing against what you're saying. Just curious.

Not the PP, but yes, I would be comfortable with the following: Two equally qualified candidates, one of whom is demographically similar to existing staff, and one of whom represents an identity not currently represented. The latter gets the job on the basis of bringing a new perspective, which can only be good for business.

To be more concrete, let’s say 1 is a Jew and 1 Indian American (or Black, or Hispanic...) Because 2% Jews are are already over represented at Harvard, you would pick against the Jewish student.

If all else is equal, then yes, you should choose the one from the underrepresented group. Was this question supposed to be some kind of a gotcha? -a Jewish person

WOW! I thought that no one could get into Harvard without at least 1420+ (at bare minimum). That makes me angry. Sorry.

Who said “all else being equal?” The H lawsuit presupposes Asians with superior stats.

Stats aren’t everything. That’s the thing. And where the Tiger mommies go wrong.

Stats aren’t everything cuz it’s “holistic.” That’s where H goes wrong. All their URM grads are holding less than perfect sheepskin cuz stats aren’t everything. It’s “holistic” where the society at large evaluate their URM graduates who can’t perform as well as UCLA or UC Berkeley grads.

Well, your behavior in this thread and the demonstration of the poor way in which you think is a big clue why your child would be passed over, assuming your child exhibits similar characteristics and tendencies. You, simply, are not elite college material. Your child probably is not, either.

It’s a fact that URMs with H degrees don’t have the same life outcome as whites.

As another PP mentioned, this is due to systemic racism.

Employers are simply discounting the Harvard premium when factoring in Harvard URMs, legacies, sports, etc.

Got data? Sounds like wishful thinking. The Harvard students in those categories have their pick of top firms/positions. Many of the legacies and athletes are well liked and know how to read. On top of that, they come off as much more intelligent than average or even above-average state school kids.

There’s an article posted above that shows Harvard isn’t all that. Harvard law and medical schools routinely reject Harvard undergrads.

Also check out the article posted above that shows Harvard URM’s average SAT is below 1200.

Below 1200 typically get a student into mediocre state universities. No, they DO NOT “come off as much more intelligent than average or even above-average state school kids.“

You probably scored below 1200 because if you read and comprehended the article it says that 1170 is the cutoff for URMs for Harvard to reach out to you to see if you want to apply. It’s not even the average score of URM applicants or much less of URM admits.

1170 is a pretty low bar. You can find kids with higher stats at any local community college.

At every community college? Maybe one kid. Although it seems at that score point cc to 4 year might be a better option because a kid might be a conscientious student but won’t get into UVa or VT at that range. My kid got about 200 points higher than that and the thought of them applying to Harvard would’ve been ludicrous.

1170 is pretty close to being the national SAT average. If you read the article carefully, it tells you Harvard admits more URM kids with 550 SAT math than 650 or over.

People as patently stupid as you should not be allowed to comment on anyone else’s intelligence:

“In 2009, the number of African American applicants with scores above 640 was more than double the number of applicants with scores below 550. But for the Class of 2012, there were fewer African American applicants with math scores above 640 than below 550.“

Applicants =\= admits.

The entire point of the article is criticizing Harvard for recruiting URM applicants who have no chance of being admitted.

Read again.
The stats were exposed during the litigation.

Boy you are doubling down on this. Average SAT scores for African American admits were in the 1400-1420 range. This is the data Harvard provided and was accepted by the expert for the plaintiff. See page 26

https://samv91khoyt2i553a2t1s05i-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Doc-415-1-Arcidiacono-Expert-Report.pdf

I didn’t read his 170 page testimony- but did you know its author, PETER S. ARCIDIACONO, was a plaintiffs’ witness? He was pointing out the deleterious effect of unprepared students at Harvard. The average SAT score at some of the state unis is higher than 1400-1420.

One other thing - please find the portion of his report where he states the students are “unprepared”. There is a difference between the lower academic rankings of certain groups (athletes and URMs) and unprepared. But that may be too much for your brain to grasp considering the problems you have with basic reading

You need to learn to read between the lines. The author was a plaintiff’s expert witness.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Would you be okay with job applicants of certain racial backgrounds being less likely to get jobs than equally qualified candidates of different backgrounds because the company desires diverse employees? I'm not necessarily arguing against what you're saying. Just curious.

Not the PP, but yes, I would be comfortable with the following: Two equally qualified candidates, one of whom is demographically similar to existing staff, and one of whom represents an identity not currently represented. The latter gets the job on the basis of bringing a new perspective, which can only be good for business.

To be more concrete, let’s say 1 is a Jew and 1 Indian American (or Black, or Hispanic...) Because 2% Jews are are already over represented at Harvard, you would pick against the Jewish student.

If all else is equal, then yes, you should choose the one from the underrepresented group. Was this question supposed to be some kind of a gotcha? -a Jewish person

WOW! I thought that no one could get into Harvard without at least 1420+ (at bare minimum). That makes me angry. Sorry.

Who said “all else being equal?” The H lawsuit presupposes Asians with superior stats.

Stats aren’t everything. That’s the thing. And where the Tiger mommies go wrong.

Stats aren’t everything cuz it’s “holistic.” That’s where H goes wrong. All their URM grads are holding less than perfect sheepskin cuz stats aren’t everything. It’s “holistic” where the society at large evaluate their URM graduates who can’t perform as well as UCLA or UC Berkeley grads.

Well, your behavior in this thread and the demonstration of the poor way in which you think is a big clue why your child would be passed over, assuming your child exhibits similar characteristics and tendencies. You, simply, are not elite college material. Your child probably is not, either.

It’s a fact that URMs with H degrees don’t have the same life outcome as whites.

As another PP mentioned, this is due to systemic racism.

Employers are simply discounting the Harvard premium when factoring in Harvard URMs, legacies, sports, etc.

Got data? Sounds like wishful thinking. The Harvard students in those categories have their pick of top firms/positions. Many of the legacies and athletes are well liked and know how to read. On top of that, they come off as much more intelligent than average or even above-average state school kids.

There’s an article posted above that shows Harvard isn’t all that. Harvard law and medical schools routinely reject Harvard undergrads.

Also check out the article posted above that shows Harvard URM’s average SAT is below 1200.

Below 1200 typically get a student into mediocre state universities. No, they DO NOT “come off as much more intelligent than average or even above-average state school kids.“

You probably scored below 1200 because if you read and comprehended the article it says that 1170 is the cutoff for URMs for Harvard to reach out to you to see if you want to apply. It’s not even the average score of URM applicants or much less of URM admits.

1170 is a pretty low bar. You can find kids with higher stats at any local community college.

At every community college? Maybe one kid. Although it seems at that score point cc to 4 year might be a better option because a kid might be a conscientious student but won’t get into UVa or VT at that range. My kid got about 200 points higher than that and the thought of them applying to Harvard would’ve been ludicrous.

1170 is pretty close to being the national SAT average. If you read the article carefully, it tells you Harvard admits more URM kids with 550 SAT math than 650 or over.

People as patently stupid as you should not be allowed to comment on anyone else’s intelligence:

“In 2009, the number of African American applicants with scores above 640 was more than double the number of applicants with scores below 550. But for the Class of 2012, there were fewer African American applicants with math scores above 640 than below 550.“

Applicants =\= admits.

The entire point of the article is criticizing Harvard for recruiting URM applicants who have no chance of being admitted.

Read again.
The stats were exposed during the litigation.

Boy you are doubling down on this. Average SAT scores for African American admits were in the 1400-1420 range. This is the data Harvard provided and was accepted by the expert for the plaintiff. See page 26

https://samv91khoyt2i553a2t1s05i-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Doc-415-1-Arcidiacono-Expert-Report.pdf

I didn’t read his 170 page testimony- but did you know its author, PETER S. ARCIDIACONO, was a plaintiffs’ witness? He was pointing out the deleterious effect of unprepared students at Harvard. The average SAT score at some of the state unis is higher than 1400-1420.

I did know that - I even stated that I my post. I’m not surprised you didn’t read it since you can’t manage to read and understand a five line forum post.

I read his testimony. I would have read it in order to comment on it so I don’t make stupid comments not grounded in facts. But you do you.

Re state universities - which ones? Do you know them off the top of your head? Berkeley and UVA aren’t. Michigan isn’t either.

The average sat at Berkeley is not under 1400. Come on now.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Would you be okay with job applicants of certain racial backgrounds being less likely to get jobs than equally qualified candidates of different backgrounds because the company desires diverse employees? I'm not necessarily arguing against what you're saying. Just curious.

Not the PP, but yes, I would be comfortable with the following: Two equally qualified candidates, one of whom is demographically similar to existing staff, and one of whom represents an identity not currently represented. The latter gets the job on the basis of bringing a new perspective, which can only be good for business.

To be more concrete, let’s say 1 is a Jew and 1 Indian American (or Black, or Hispanic...) Because 2% Jews are are already over represented at Harvard, you would pick against the Jewish student.

If all else is equal, then yes, you should choose the one from the underrepresented group. Was this question supposed to be some kind of a gotcha? -a Jewish person

WOW! I thought that no one could get into Harvard without at least 1420+ (at bare minimum). That makes me angry. Sorry.

Who said “all else being equal?” The H lawsuit presupposes Asians with superior stats.

Stats aren’t everything. That’s the thing. And where the Tiger mommies go wrong.

Stats aren’t everything cuz it’s “holistic.” That’s where H goes wrong. All their URM grads are holding less than perfect sheepskin cuz stats aren’t everything. It’s “holistic” where the society at large evaluate their URM graduates who can’t perform as well as UCLA or UC Berkeley grads.

Well, your behavior in this thread and the demonstration of the poor way in which you think is a big clue why your child would be passed over, assuming your child exhibits similar characteristics and tendencies. You, simply, are not elite college material. Your child probably is not, either.

It’s a fact that URMs with H degrees don’t have the same life outcome as whites.

As another PP mentioned, this is due to systemic racism.

Employers are simply discounting the Harvard premium when factoring in Harvard URMs, legacies, sports, etc.

Got data? Sounds like wishful thinking. The Harvard students in those categories have their pick of top firms/positions. Many of the legacies and athletes are well liked and know how to read. On top of that, they come off as much more intelligent than average or even above-average state school kids.

There’s an article posted above that shows Harvard isn’t all that. Harvard law and medical schools routinely reject Harvard undergrads.

Also check out the article posted above that shows Harvard URM’s average SAT is below 1200.

Below 1200 typically get a student into mediocre state universities. No, they DO NOT “come off as much more intelligent than average or even above-average state school kids.“

You probably scored below 1200 because if you read and comprehended the article it says that 1170 is the cutoff for URMs for Harvard to reach out to you to see if you want to apply. It’s not even the average score of URM applicants or much less of URM admits.

1170 is a pretty low bar. You can find kids with higher stats at any local community college.

At every community college? Maybe one kid. Although it seems at that score point cc to 4 year might be a better option because a kid might be a conscientious student but won’t get into UVa or VT at that range. My kid got about 200 points higher than that and the thought of them applying to Harvard would’ve been ludicrous.

1170 is pretty close to being the national SAT average. If you read the article carefully, it tells you Harvard admits more URM kids with 550 SAT math than 650 or over.

People as patently stupid as you should not be allowed to comment on anyone else’s intelligence:

“In 2009, the number of African American applicants with scores above 640 was more than double the number of applicants with scores below 550. But for the Class of 2012, there were fewer African American applicants with math scores above 640 than below 550.“

Applicants =\= admits.

The entire point of the article is criticizing Harvard for recruiting URM applicants who have no chance of being admitted.

Read again.
The stats were exposed during the litigation.

Boy you are doubling down on this. Average SAT scores for African American admits were in the 1400-1420 range. This is the data Harvard provided and was accepted by the expert for the plaintiff. See page 26

https://samv91khoyt2i553a2t1s05i-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Doc-415-1-Arcidiacono-Expert-Report.pdf

I didn’t read his 170 page testimony- but did you know its author, PETER S. ARCIDIACONO, was a plaintiffs’ witness? He was pointing out the deleterious effect of unprepared students at Harvard. The average SAT score at some of the state unis is higher than 1400-1420.

One other thing - please find the portion of his report where he states the students are “unprepared”. There is a difference between the lower academic rankings of certain groups (athletes and URMs) and unprepared. But that may be too much for your brain to grasp considering the problems you have with basic reading

You need to learn to read between the lines. The author was a plaintiff’s expert witness.

considering the difficulties you have reading the actual lines, I'll decline to take advice from you. What the author was saying was that there are applicants who have higher academic rankings that others. They made no attempt to quantify what constitutes "prepared" or not. You can reach your own conclusions as it appears you have, but it's not based on the study. I find it difficult to believe that a student who scores 1400 on the SAT is unprepared for any college in this country.

So - where are those state unis with higher average SAT scores?

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Would you be okay with job applicants of certain racial backgrounds being less likely to get jobs than equally qualified candidates of different backgrounds because the company desires diverse employees? I'm not necessarily arguing against what you're saying. Just curious.

Not the PP, but yes, I would be comfortable with the following: Two equally qualified candidates, one of whom is demographically similar to existing staff, and one of whom represents an identity not currently represented. The latter gets the job on the basis of bringing a new perspective, which can only be good for business.

To be more concrete, let’s say 1 is a Jew and 1 Indian American (or Black, or Hispanic...) Because 2% Jews are are already over represented at Harvard, you would pick against the Jewish student.

If all else is equal, then yes, you should choose the one from the underrepresented group. Was this question supposed to be some kind of a gotcha? -a Jewish person

WOW! I thought that no one could get into Harvard without at least 1420+ (at bare minimum). That makes me angry. Sorry.

Who said “all else being equal?” The H lawsuit presupposes Asians with superior stats.

Stats aren’t everything. That’s the thing. And where the Tiger mommies go wrong.

Stats aren’t everything cuz it’s “holistic.” That’s where H goes wrong. All their URM grads are holding less than perfect sheepskin cuz stats aren’t everything. It’s “holistic” where the society at large evaluate their URM graduates who can’t perform as well as UCLA or UC Berkeley grads.

Well, your behavior in this thread and the demonstration of the poor way in which you think is a big clue why your child would be passed over, assuming your child exhibits similar characteristics and tendencies. You, simply, are not elite college material. Your child probably is not, either.

It’s a fact that URMs with H degrees don’t have the same life outcome as whites.

As another PP mentioned, this is due to systemic racism.

Employers are simply discounting the Harvard premium when factoring in Harvard URMs, legacies, sports, etc.

Got data? Sounds like wishful thinking. The Harvard students in those categories have their pick of top firms/positions. Many of the legacies and athletes are well liked and know how to read. On top of that, they come off as much more intelligent than average or even above-average state school kids.

There’s an article posted above that shows Harvard isn’t all that. Harvard law and medical schools routinely reject Harvard undergrads.

Also check out the article posted above that shows Harvard URM’s average SAT is below 1200.

Below 1200 typically get a student into mediocre state universities. No, they DO NOT “come off as much more intelligent than average or even above-average state school kids.“

You probably scored below 1200 because if you read and comprehended the article it says that 1170 is the cutoff for URMs for Harvard to reach out to you to see if you want to apply. It’s not even the average score of URM applicants or much less of URM admits.

1170 is a pretty low bar. You can find kids with higher stats at any local community college.

At every community college? Maybe one kid. Although it seems at that score point cc to 4 year might be a better option because a kid might be a conscientious student but won’t get into UVa or VT at that range. My kid got about 200 points higher than that and the thought of them applying to Harvard would’ve been ludicrous.

1170 is pretty close to being the national SAT average. If you read the article carefully, it tells you Harvard admits more URM kids with 550 SAT math than 650 or over.

People as patently stupid as you should not be allowed to comment on anyone else’s intelligence:

“In 2009, the number of African American applicants with scores above 640 was more than double the number of applicants with scores below 550. But for the Class of 2012, there were fewer African American applicants with math scores above 640 than below 550.“

Applicants =\= admits.

The entire point of the article is criticizing Harvard for recruiting URM applicants who have no chance of being admitted.

Read again.
The stats were exposed during the litigation.

Boy you are doubling down on this. Average SAT scores for African American admits were in the 1400-1420 range. This is the data Harvard provided and was accepted by the expert for the plaintiff. See page 26

https://samv91khoyt2i553a2t1s05i-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Doc-415-1-Arcidiacono-Expert-Report.pdf

I didn’t read his 170 page testimony- but did you know its author, PETER S. ARCIDIACONO, was a plaintiffs’ witness? He was pointing out the deleterious effect of unprepared students at Harvard. The average SAT score at some of the state unis is higher than 1400-1420.

I did know that - I even stated that I my post. I’m not surprised you didn’t read it since you can’t manage to read and understand a five line forum post.

I read his testimony. I would have read it in order to comment on it so I don’t make stupid comments not grounded in facts. But you do you.

Re state universities - which ones? Do you know them off the top of your head? Berkeley and UVA aren’t. Michigan isn’t either.

The average sat at Berkeley is not under 1400. Come on now.

Didn't say it was under 1400. Just said it wasn't higher than 1400-1420.

https://www.prepscholar.com/sat/s/colleges/UC-Berkeley-SAT-scores-GPA

It's 1415 by the way.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Would you be okay with job applicants of certain racial backgrounds being less likely to get jobs than equally qualified candidates of different backgrounds because the company desires diverse employees? I'm not necessarily arguing against what you're saying. Just curious.

Not the PP, but yes, I would be comfortable with the following: Two equally qualified candidates, one of whom is demographically similar to existing staff, and one of whom represents an identity not currently represented. The latter gets the job on the basis of bringing a new perspective, which can only be good for business.

To be more concrete, let’s say 1 is a Jew and 1 Indian American (or Black, or Hispanic...) Because 2% Jews are are already over represented at Harvard, you would pick against the Jewish student.

If all else is equal, then yes, you should choose the one from the underrepresented group. Was this question supposed to be some kind of a gotcha? -a Jewish person

WOW! I thought that no one could get into Harvard without at least 1420+ (at bare minimum). That makes me angry. Sorry.

Who said “all else being equal?” The H lawsuit presupposes Asians with superior stats.

Stats aren’t everything. That’s the thing. And where the Tiger mommies go wrong.

Stats aren’t everything cuz it’s “holistic.” That’s where H goes wrong. All their URM grads are holding less than perfect sheepskin cuz stats aren’t everything. It’s “holistic” where the society at large evaluate their URM graduates who can’t perform as well as UCLA or UC Berkeley grads.

Well, your behavior in this thread and the demonstration of the poor way in which you think is a big clue why your child would be passed over, assuming your child exhibits similar characteristics and tendencies. You, simply, are not elite college material. Your child probably is not, either.

It’s a fact that URMs with H degrees don’t have the same life outcome as whites.

As another PP mentioned, this is due to systemic racism.

Employers are simply discounting the Harvard premium when factoring in Harvard URMs, legacies, sports, etc.

Got data? Sounds like wishful thinking. The Harvard students in those categories have their pick of top firms/positions. Many of the legacies and athletes are well liked and know how to read. On top of that, they come off as much more intelligent than average or even above-average state school kids.

There’s an article posted above that shows Harvard isn’t all that. Harvard law and medical schools routinely reject Harvard undergrads.

Also check out the article posted above that shows Harvard URM’s average SAT is below 1200.

Below 1200 typically get a student into mediocre state universities. No, they DO NOT “come off as much more intelligent than average or even above-average state school kids.“

You probably scored below 1200 because if you read and comprehended the article it says that 1170 is the cutoff for URMs for Harvard to reach out to you to see if you want to apply. It’s not even the average score of URM applicants or much less of URM admits.

1170 is a pretty low bar. You can find kids with higher stats at any local community college.

At every community college? Maybe one kid. Although it seems at that score point cc to 4 year might be a better option because a kid might be a conscientious student but won’t get into UVa or VT at that range. My kid got about 200 points higher than that and the thought of them applying to Harvard would’ve been ludicrous.

1170 is pretty close to being the national SAT average. If you read the article carefully, it tells you Harvard admits more URM kids with 550 SAT math than 650 or over.

People as patently stupid as you should not be allowed to comment on anyone else’s intelligence:

“In 2009, the number of African American applicants with scores above 640 was more than double the number of applicants with scores below 550. But for the Class of 2012, there were fewer African American applicants with math scores above 640 than below 550.“

Applicants =\= admits.

The entire point of the article is criticizing Harvard for recruiting URM applicants who have no chance of being admitted.

Read again.
The stats were exposed during the litigation.

Boy you are doubling down on this. Average SAT scores for African American admits were in the 1400-1420 range. This is the data Harvard provided and was accepted by the expert for the plaintiff. See page 26

https://samv91khoyt2i553a2t1s05i-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Doc-415-1-Arcidiacono-Expert-Report.pdf

I didn’t read his 170 page testimony- but did you know its author, PETER S. ARCIDIACONO, was a plaintiffs’ witness? He was pointing out the deleterious effect of unprepared students at Harvard. The average SAT score at some of the state unis is higher than 1400-1420.

I did know that - I even stated that I my post. I’m not surprised you didn’t read it since you can’t manage to read and understand a five line forum post.

I read his testimony. I would have read it in order to comment on it so I don’t make stupid comments not grounded in facts. But you do you.

Re state universities - which ones? Do you know them off the top of your head? Berkeley and UVA aren’t. Michigan isn’t either.

The average sat at Berkeley is not under 1400. Come on now.

Didn't say it was under 1400. Just said it wasn't higher than 1400-1420.

https://www.prepscholar.com/sat/s/colleges/UC-Berkeley-SAT-scores-GPA

It's 1415 by the way.

LOL prep scholar is always inaccurate. Go to the Common Data Set for real info. And no random unhooked UMC kid is getting into Berkeley with a 1400.