URMs Feeling Pressure to Prove Themselves

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"DP here. URMs absolutely have lower test scores and GPAs for admittance to T25. You have to be really, really, really out of the loop not to know that. White kids and Asian kids would never get admitted with most of the URM scores and GPAs. It is not good or bad, it just is."

You're clueless. Their scores as a group might be lower that those of the wealthy white kids with professional parents who attended college. But no POC at a top school is getting in with a score that low. It would be pretty difficult to keep up with the ultra high achievers if you couldn't at least score in the top quintile, and it's really rare for URM students to flunk out of the most elite schools.

DP.

The chart doesn’t support that URM students are getting into Harvard (or Yale) with 1090 scores. The chart supports that the scores are at least at the 90% percentile, which is why the OP called BS on the original post. Big difference between 1090 and 1390. The OP didn’t claim that the scores for URM students are the SAME for white and Asian students.

that chart shows what the chart shows.. that the average black students admitted to Harvard have a much lower score than their Asian American counter parts.

You are being obtuse if you don't realize that Asian Americans have to far outperform every single group to be admitted to those schools.

Nope.

Asian Americans are admitted at 3X + their population. Already admitted at high rates. SFFA is crying "discrimination" but many applicants for limited spots. The SAT isn't everything.

well, now you're moving the goal posts. This particular thread was about test scores.

Fact is that Asian Americans have to outperform every group in every way, not just SATs, to get in.

Also, who says college admissions should reflect the demographics of the country?

If they are admitted at 3x their population that just says they are super performers.

DP. No PP isn't. THeir point about SAT not meaning that much is valid, and this thread is not particularly about test scores.
No they don't. They need to not perform similarly and bring similar assets to the table. If several kids submit for CS with robotics club, violin and AIME and high SATs, how many of those should they take and still expect to have a diverse community? Yes, this sounds like a stereotype, but it is the case for many kids at our magnet. Many kids have paths dictated by parents, and those become very similar.
When you ask about reflecting demographics, your underlying supposition is that college's should be able to admit the students they think will bring the most to their campus. You argue against yourself here.
No it doesn't. It could easily suggest that they come from cultural groups that value certain aspects of education and invest with lots of enrichment.

So, it's unfair to stereotype OP's URM kid but it's fair to stereotype Asian American students.

OK, here it goes.

Many URM parents don't really care about education that's why their kids perform so poorly in school. They spend money and time on things they value, like bling, and not education, like tutors and violin lessons. If their kids are failing in school they blame the teachers or racism or anyone/anything else other than themselves.

See how that goes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"DP here. URMs absolutely have lower test scores and GPAs for admittance to T25. You have to be really, really, really out of the loop not to know that. White kids and Asian kids would never get admitted with most of the URM scores and GPAs. It is not good or bad, it just is."

You're clueless. Their scores as a group might be lower that those of the wealthy white kids with professional parents who attended college. But no POC at a top school is getting in with a score that low. It would be pretty difficult to keep up with the ultra high achievers if you couldn't at least score in the top quintile, and it's really rare for URM students to flunk out of the most elite schools.

DP.

The chart doesn’t support that URM students are getting into Harvard (or Yale) with 1090 scores. The chart supports that the scores are at least at the 90% percentile, which is why the OP called BS on the original post. Big difference between 1090 and 1390. The OP didn’t claim that the scores for URM students are the SAME for white and Asian students.

that chart shows what the chart shows.. that the average black students admitted to Harvard have a much lower score than their Asian American counter parts.

You are being obtuse if you don't realize that Asian Americans have to far outperform every single group to be admitted to those schools.

Nope.

Asian Americans are admitted at 3X + their population. Already admitted at high rates. SFFA is crying "discrimination" but many applicants for limited spots. The SAT isn't everything.

So you think colleges should have quotas on how many people of one race they admit? That admissions should change to race based and population based admission, not college preparedness?

Try not to think of it this way - it only leads to frustration. Harvard and others like it are looking to produce the next Ron DeSantis or Terence Tao or Alice Walker or Bill Gates or Michelle Obama or whoever has influence on their world and country. It is almost impossible to predict this when looking at high school kids. College preparation is certainly one factor they are looking at when trying to decide who to admit but it’s a floor. Mostly they want to build this class of future leaders. Their success in picking at least a few superstars is what keeps their brand active and their coffers full. The stats you see are the product of that subjective and perhaps wrong assessment of some of the smartest 17/18 year olds in the world. It results in a class where more high achieving Asian Americans don’t make it than similarly qualified peers. Some of it may be (is) because of unconscious bias. But honestly it’s at least partly because you are using how you might choose those likely to be most successful (academic preparedness) with what Harvard is looking for (none of us really know).

That some major mental gymnastics to justify racism. Kudos.

And you are using racism as a dog whistle to drown out the cogent points PP made.

Whatever you need to tell yourself to ignore your own racism. Anyone can make points to justify racism. That’s why the KKK has followers, justifying beliefs to sleep at night.

Sorry you don’t like that some of us can see through your word salad.

[Anonymous]

Mostly they want to build this class of future leaders. Their success in picking at least a few superstars is what keeps their brand active and their coffers full. The stats you see are the product of that subjective and perhaps wrong assessment of some of the smartest 17/18 year olds in the world. It results in a class where more high achieving Asian Americans don’t make it than similarly qualified peers.

So Harvard thinks we don't want a bunch of grade-grubbing, test-prepping, exam-cheating, boring NPCs being our future leaders. Harvard is wrong about a lot of things but they might have something in this case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"DP here. URMs absolutely have lower test scores and GPAs for admittance to T25. You have to be really, really, really out of the loop not to know that. White kids and Asian kids would never get admitted with most of the URM scores and GPAs. It is not good or bad, it just is."

You're clueless. Their scores as a group might be lower that those of the wealthy white kids with professional parents who attended college. But no POC at a top school is getting in with a score that low. It would be pretty difficult to keep up with the ultra high achievers if you couldn't at least score in the top quintile, and it's really rare for URM students to flunk out of the most elite schools.

DP.

The chart doesn’t support that URM students are getting into Harvard (or Yale) with 1090 scores. The chart supports that the scores are at least at the 90% percentile, which is why the OP called BS on the original post. Big difference between 1090 and 1390. The OP didn’t claim that the scores for URM students are the SAME for white and Asian students.

that chart shows what the chart shows.. that the average black students admitted to Harvard have a much lower score than their Asian American counter parts.

You are being obtuse if you don't realize that Asian Americans have to far outperform every single group to be admitted to those schools.

Nope.

Asian Americans are admitted at 3X + their population. Already admitted at high rates. SFFA is crying "discrimination" but many applicants for limited spots. The SAT isn't everything.

So you think colleges should have quotas on how many people of one race they admit? That admissions should change to race based and population based admission, not college preparedness?

Try not to think of it this way - it only leads to frustration. Harvard and others like it are looking to produce the next Ron DeSantis or Terence Tao or Alice Walker or Bill Gates or Michelle Obama or whoever has influence on their world and country. It is almost impossible to predict this when looking at high school kids. College preparation is certainly one factor they are looking at when trying to decide who to admit but it’s a floor. Mostly they want to build this class of future leaders. Their success in picking at least a few superstars is what keeps their brand active and their coffers full. The stats you see are the product of that subjective and perhaps wrong assessment of some of the smartest 17/18 year olds in the world. It results in a class where more high achieving Asian Americans don’t make it than similarly qualified peers. Some of it may be (is) because of unconscious bias. But honestly it’s at least partly because you are using how you might choose those likely to be most successful (academic preparedness) with what Harvard is looking for (none of us really know).

DP. You are suggesting that Harvard and co. are run by people so smart that you want to trust them to be 'king makers' for the world. i don't. What if the outcome would be even better if they were to depend on academic preparedness as opposed to other random criteria? How will we know unless it's tried out?

Sundar Pichai and Satya Nadella came out a system that almost exclusively rewards academic preparedness. They beat out thousands of others, many of who with undergrad and grad from Harvard, MIT and Stanford to get to where they are. Not too shabby. Why not extend that to all of society? What if they had been rejected from undergrad admissions because their college preferred to give away that seat who started a fake-charity or gold star pickleball player? Imagine the loss..

No I certainly don’t think Harvard should be in charge of being king makers. But until they are displaced by someone else, they will claim they are and people will flock to them. In some ways Stanford did that in this country in Tech. But they are now following the same model.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"DP here. URMs absolutely have lower test scores and GPAs for admittance to T25. You have to be really, really, really out of the loop not to know that. White kids and Asian kids would never get admitted with most of the URM scores and GPAs. It is not good or bad, it just is."

You're clueless. Their scores as a group might be lower that those of the wealthy white kids with professional parents who attended college. But no POC at a top school is getting in with a score that low. It would be pretty difficult to keep up with the ultra high achievers if you couldn't at least score in the top quintile, and it's really rare for URM students to flunk out of the most elite schools.

DP.

The chart doesn’t support that URM students are getting into Harvard (or Yale) with 1090 scores. The chart supports that the scores are at least at the 90% percentile, which is why the OP called BS on the original post. Big difference between 1090 and 1390. The OP didn’t claim that the scores for URM students are the SAME for white and Asian students.

that chart shows what the chart shows.. that the average black students admitted to Harvard have a much lower score than their Asian American counter parts.

You are being obtuse if you don't realize that Asian Americans have to far outperform every single group to be admitted to those schools.

Nope.

Asian Americans are admitted at 3X + their population. Already admitted at high rates. SFFA is crying "discrimination" but many applicants for limited spots. The SAT isn't everything.

So you think colleges should have quotas on how many people of one race they admit? That admissions should change to race based and population based admission, not college preparedness?

Try not to think of it this way - it only leads to frustration. Harvard and others like it are looking to produce the next Ron DeSantis or Terence Tao or Alice Walker or Bill Gates or Michelle Obama or whoever has influence on their world and country. It is almost impossible to predict this when looking at high school kids. College preparation is certainly one factor they are looking at when trying to decide who to admit but it’s a floor. Mostly they want to build this class of future leaders. Their success in picking at least a few superstars is what keeps their brand active and their coffers full. The stats you see are the product of that subjective and perhaps wrong assessment of some of the smartest 17/18 year olds in the world. It results in a class where more high achieving Asian Americans don’t make it than similarly qualified peers. Some of it may be (is) because of unconscious bias. But honestly it’s at least partly because you are using how you might choose those likely to be most successful (academic preparedness) with what Harvard is looking for (none of us really know).

DP. You are suggesting that Harvard and co. are run by people so smart that you want to trust them to be 'king makers' for the world. i don't. What if the outcome would be even better if they were to depend on academic preparedness as opposed to other random criteria? How will we know unless it's tried out?

Sundar Pichai and Satya Nadella came out a system that almost exclusively rewards academic preparedness. They beat out thousands of others, many of who with undergrad and grad from Harvard, MIT and Stanford to get to where they are. Not too shabby. Why not extend that to all of society? What if they had been rejected from undergrad admissions because their college preferred to give away that seat who started a fake-charity or gold star pickleball player? Imagine the loss..

No I certainly don’t think Harvard should be in charge of being king makers. But until they are displaced by someone else, they will claim they are and people will flock to them. In some ways Stanford did that in this country in Tech. But they are now following the same model.

Therefore it's time for the society's stewards (i.e. government, courts, etc) to step in and fix these freeloaders from screwing up our society.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Mostly they want to build this class of future leaders. Their success in picking at least a few superstars is what keeps their brand active and their coffers full. The stats you see are the product of that subjective and perhaps wrong assessment of some of the smartest 17/18 year olds in the world. It results in a class where more high achieving Asian Americans don’t make it than similarly qualified peers.

So Harvard thinks we don't want a bunch of grade-grubbing, test-prepping, exam-cheating, boring NPCs being our future leaders. Harvard is wrong about a lot of things but they might have something in this case.

As opposed to choosing ball chucking, bling chasing, weekday drinking, daddy-funded fools? Good choice indeed!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"DP here. URMs absolutely have lower test scores and GPAs for admittance to T25. You have to be really, really, really out of the loop not to know that. White kids and Asian kids would never get admitted with most of the URM scores and GPAs. It is not good or bad, it just is."

You're clueless. Their scores as a group might be lower that those of the wealthy white kids with professional parents who attended college. But no POC at a top school is getting in with a score that low. It would be pretty difficult to keep up with the ultra high achievers if you couldn't at least score in the top quintile, and it's really rare for URM students to flunk out of the most elite schools.

DP.

The chart doesn’t support that URM students are getting into Harvard (or Yale) with 1090 scores. The chart supports that the scores are at least at the 90% percentile, which is why the OP called BS on the original post. Big difference between 1090 and 1390. The OP didn’t claim that the scores for URM students are the SAME for white and Asian students.

that chart shows what the chart shows.. that the average black students admitted to Harvard have a much lower score than their Asian American counter parts.

You are being obtuse if you don't realize that Asian Americans have to far outperform every single group to be admitted to those schools.

Nope.

Asian Americans are admitted at 3X + their population. Already admitted at high rates. SFFA is crying "discrimination" but many applicants for limited spots. The SAT isn't everything.

So you think colleges should have quotas on how many people of one race they admit? That admissions should change to race based and population based admission, not college preparedness?

Try not to think of it this way - it only leads to frustration. Harvard and others like it are looking to produce the next Ron DeSantis or Terence Tao or Alice Walker or Bill Gates or Michelle Obama or whoever has influence on their world and country. It is almost impossible to predict this when looking at high school kids. College preparation is certainly one factor they are looking at when trying to decide who to admit but it’s a floor. Mostly they want to build this class of future leaders. Their success in picking at least a few superstars is what keeps their brand active and their coffers full. The stats you see are the product of that subjective and perhaps wrong assessment of some of the smartest 17/18 year olds in the world. It results in a class where more high achieving Asian Americans don’t make it than similarly qualified peers. Some of it may be (is) because of unconscious bias. But honestly it’s at least partly because you are using how you might choose those likely to be most successful (academic preparedness) with what Harvard is looking for (none of us really know).

DP. You are suggesting that Harvard and co. are run by people so smart that you want to trust them to be 'king makers' for the world. i don't. What if the outcome would be even better if they were to depend on academic preparedness as opposed to other random criteria? How will we know unless it's tried out?

Sundar Pichai and Satya Nadella came out a system that almost exclusively rewards academic preparedness. They beat out thousands of others, many of who with undergrad and grad from Harvard, MIT and Stanford to get to where they are. Not too shabby. Why not extend that to all of society? What if they had been rejected from undergrad admissions because their college preferred to give away that seat who started a fake-charity or gold star pickleball player? Imagine the loss..

No I certainly don’t think Harvard should be in charge of being king makers. But until they are displaced by someone else, they will claim they are and people will flock to them. In some ways Stanford did that in this country in Tech. But they are now following the same model.

Therefore it's time for the society's stewards (i.e. government, courts, etc) to step in and fix these freeloaders from screwing up our society.

Not in a capitalist society.

[Anonymous]

Harvard has been around for nearly 400 years, folks.

Pretty sure they understand their value proposition and have a plan to last 400 more.

So long as they keep admitting and educating kids who go on to be influential adults it does not matter o them at all who they did not admit. Why should it?

[Anonymous]

You should joke back “If only they were a legacy, then they could REALLY slack off!”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can’t have it both ways OP. That’s what you/your kids have to pay. They will never shake that doubt in other people’s eyes.

+1 cuts both ways.

Lots of Asian Americans can't understand why they got rejected over a lower stat URM other than due to the color of their skin. Oh yes, it's because their personality is lacking.

Almost all kids with very high stats worked hard. But the comment " “Your kid will have an advantage in college admissions” is very true, and the numbers reflect that.

"lots of asian americans"...how about lots of kids in general...this is typical racism. Personality may be lacking in any race, why single out asians?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You can’t have it both ways OP. That’s what you/your kids have to pay. They will never shake that doubt in other people’s eyes.

+1. Also doesn’t help that, quite frankly, there is a not-insignificant number of URMs from super elite schools that I’ve encountered who simply are not quite as brilliant as one would hope. But the same goes for legacies and donor admits and athletes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"DP here. URMs absolutely have lower test scores and GPAs for admittance to T25. You have to be really, really, really out of the loop not to know that. White kids and Asian kids would never get admitted with most of the URM scores and GPAs. It is not good or bad, it just is."

You're clueless. Their scores as a group might be lower that those of the wealthy white kids with professional parents who attended college. But no POC at a top school is getting in with a score that low. It would be pretty difficult to keep up with the ultra high achievers if you couldn't at least score in the top quintile, and it's really rare for URM students to flunk out of the most elite schools.

DP.

The chart doesn’t support that URM students are getting into Harvard (or Yale) with 1090 scores. The chart supports that the scores are at least at the 90% percentile, which is why the OP called BS on the original post. Big difference between 1090 and 1390. The OP didn’t claim that the scores for URM students are the SAME for white and Asian students.

that chart shows what the chart shows.. that the average black students admitted to Harvard have a much lower score than their Asian American counter parts.

You are being obtuse if you don't realize that Asian Americans have to far outperform every single group to be admitted to those schools.

Nope.

Asian Americans are admitted at 3X + their population. Already admitted at high rates. SFFA is crying "discrimination" but many applicants for limited spots. The SAT isn't everything.

So you think colleges should have quotas on how many people of one race they admit? That admissions should change to race based and population based admission, not college preparedness?

Try not to think of it this way - it only leads to frustration. Harvard and others like it are looking to produce the next Ron DeSantis or Terence Tao or Alice Walker or Bill Gates or Michelle Obama or whoever has influence on their world and country. It is almost impossible to predict this when looking at high school kids. College preparation is certainly one factor they are looking at when trying to decide who to admit but it’s a floor. Mostly they want to build this class of future leaders. Their success in picking at least a few superstars is what keeps their brand active and their coffers full. The stats you see are the product of that subjective and perhaps wrong assessment of some of the smartest 17/18 year olds in the world. It results in a class where more high achieving Asian Americans don’t make it than similarly qualified peers. Some of it may be (is) because of unconscious bias. But honestly it’s at least partly because you are using how you might choose those likely to be most successful (academic preparedness) with what Harvard is looking for (none of us really know).

DP. You are suggesting that Harvard and co. are run by people so smart that you want to trust them to be 'king makers' for the world. i don't. What if the outcome would be even better if they were to depend on academic preparedness as opposed to other random criteria? How will we know unless it's tried out?

Sundar Pichai and Satya Nadella came out a system that almost exclusively rewards academic preparedness. They beat out thousands of others, many of who with undergrad and grad from Harvard, MIT and Stanford to get to where they are. Not too shabby. Why not extend that to all of society? What if they had been rejected from undergrad admissions because their college preferred to give away that seat who started a fake-charity or gold star pickleball player? Imagine the loss..

No I certainly don’t think Harvard should be in charge of being king makers. But until they are displaced by someone else, they will claim they are and people will flock to them. In some ways Stanford did that in this country in Tech. But they are now following the same model.

Therefore it's time for the society's stewards (i.e. government, courts, etc) to step in and fix these freeloaders from screwing up our society.

Not in a capitalist society.

Do you realize we subsidize all institutions of higher ed through tax breaks? They.don't.pay.any.taxes! Who do you think is footing that bill?

Did you say capitalism?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Mostly they want to build this class of future leaders. Their success in picking at least a few superstars is what keeps their brand active and their coffers full. The stats you see are the product of that subjective and perhaps wrong assessment of some of the smartest 17/18 year olds in the world. It results in a class where more high achieving Asian Americans don’t make it than similarly qualified peers.

So Harvard thinks we don't want a bunch of grade-grubbing, test-prepping, exam-cheating, boring NPCs being our future leaders. Harvard is wrong about a lot of things but they might have something in this case.

Harvard is no king maker. The school is looking for leadership in their candidates and I suppose it can be apparant in a variety of ways. Just having Harvard on one's resume does not guarantee success in life. Same with Stanford. My sibling is a Stanford Phd and can't hold down a job because sibling's personality kind of sucks (haughty, condescending, slightly asperger-ish, lots of denial). When I was a teen I worked in a bookstore with a recent Harvard grad. That poor woman was so incapable and admitted to poor mathematical skills. She also spoke a bit too loud. She was white. I felt sorry for her mostly because after such a precious education she was working in a new age bookstore selling crystal crap.

I hung out with many Ivy products and you'd be surprised at the outcome. One of my colleagues is a Harvard alumn. Really nice guy, but not exactly a groundbreaker and not looking to be. College does NOT make the person. Like one person said, character is baked in by 19. While it is nice to have the name on one's resume, life is still no cakewalk afterwards. If you go in without social capital, you might still leave with no social capital. The school gives you 4 years of education and a degree, not a mission in life, not a purpose, not drive, creativity, wonder, determination. That all has to be fostered from within by nature and nurture.

Plenty of people have managed to be leaders without Harvard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can’t have it both ways OP. That’s what you/your kids have to pay. They will never shake that doubt in other people’s eyes.

+1. Also doesn’t help that, quite frankly, there is a not-insignificant number of URMs from super elite schools that I’ve encountered who simply are not quite as brilliant as one would hope. But the same goes for legacies and donor admits and athletes.

Hey, Jared Kushner is a Harvard grad (thanks to dad's bounty). He really dazzled in the White House didn't he?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can’t have it both ways OP. That’s what you/your kids have to pay. They will never shake that doubt in other people’s eyes.

+1. Also doesn’t help that, quite frankly, there is a not-insignificant number of URMs from super elite schools that I’ve encountered who simply are not quite as brilliant as one would hope. But the same goes for legacies and donor admits and athletes.

How is it that you have encountered a not insignificant number of URMs from super elite schools???? I'm one AND I spend my workdays at an even more elite institution. There are very. Very few of us here.