MIT releases post-affirmative action class of 2028 data

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So no gain in white seats. All the seats previously occupied by URM went to Asians.

This follows what we are seeing on tours. We toured a dozen top20 schools this summer and the tour groups were 75-95% Asian and South Asian.

My kid (mixed race Asian) was completely turned off and we're left wondering what to do. She wants diversity in college.

You mean she wants White majority in college.

An uncomfortable fact is that affirmative action was partially motivated by suppressing Asian admits to keep white donor families comfortable. Once these schools hit 45% Asian, their social clout with affluent whites will evaporate.

That is the purpose. Anyone whose been to Berkeley has seen how exclusive majority Asian environments can be.

Is it bad? How is it compared to a majority white campus?

NP. I suspect it can feel uncomfortable to many people, especially those that are not from heavily Asian states. The US is about 7% Asian, so touring a school that is majority Asian looks and feels different than anything many people are used to seeing.

What really gets me is that the PP's kid is half-asian, and yet her kid is put off by seeing a lot of ethnically asian kids. Now most of those asian kids that are so off-putting to her, like mine, are no culturally different from her kid or a caucasian kid. It makes sad to think that no matter how many generations our family has been here, and no matter how much we have contributed to our communities, it is still skin color that matters the most to many people.

lol her kids wants to date white guys that’s why.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So no gain in white seats. All the seats previously occupied by URM went to Asians.

This follows what we are seeing on tours. We toured a dozen top20 schools this summer and the tour groups were 75-95% Asian and South Asian.

My kid (mixed race Asian) was completely turned off and we're left wondering what to do. She wants diversity in college.

You can look at the demographics of the schools.

Why? Diversity numbers are available online. Indians and Asians are and will continue to gun for top schools. Some folks may not like it, but.. <shrug>. If you don't like it, you should aim lower, aim rural or aim LACs. Might also help your daughter think through why she is 'completely turned off' by this. Most medium to large schools have enough people of all colors and shades that you are able to 'find your people' and, for all practical purposes, the diversity she wants will be there. If her self-identity is more White than Asian and she doesn't want to be around too many Asians, it would help her to acknowledge that and apply accordingly, instead of a generic thought like 'wants more diversity'.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still think that if we're getting rid of affirmative action, then we should also get rid of recruiting for sports. There is no difference between recruiting/changing the admissions requirements for a minority student vs doing the same for an athlete.

There is a huge difference, nitwit.

Recruited for sport = you have to be excellent at your sport, better than 95% of high school kids who play your sport. This requires exceptional MERIT.

AA = you were born with the “right” skin color. No merit, pure racism.

Furthermore athletes at elite schools have to meet high academic standards, and have high graduation rates, so they’re not stupid.

Nah. Depends on the sport. My son plays at an Ivy- uw 4.0/4.5, 5s AP exams and 35 ACT. Most of the sports- you need the credentials to get in or you won’t pass pre-read.

It really depends. My friend's daughter got into Columbia as a fencer despite lower academics because she was one of the top fencers in the country and she led them to all sorts of fencing success. She was extremely smart but so focused on fencing that I think it hurt her grades and test scores. I think she's a doctor now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As expected. But a little surprised by the decline in Latino students. There are a gazillion students with at least a grandparent from Latin America. Lots of Brazilian, Argentinian, Chilean families value education.

Only 2% of Latino students score over 700 in math SAT, so you simply should not expect to see a lot of them at MIT.

If you're going by over 700 SAT math, MIT should be about
47% Asian
43% White
3% Black
7% Hispanic

Actual class of 2027 is not too far off from that
47% Asian
37% White
5% Black
11% Hispanic

Now do 790 SAT.

If MIT just tracked SAT math scores, it would be even more Asian.

At MIT, 25% percentile for SAT math is 790 and 75% percentile is 800.

For 800 math scores, here is the national breakdown by race:

Asian 3%
White <1%
Mixed race <1%
Native American <1%
Black <1%
Hispanic <1%
Pacific Islander <1%

For 750+ math scores, here is the national breakdown by race:

Asian 22%
White 4%
Mixed race 4%
Native American 1%
Black <1%
Hispanic 1%
Pacific Islander 1%

no one wants to learn or create or live in a bubble of people selected based on SAT math scores.

Except for really rigorous environments like the folks developing fusion energy or the algorithmic trading hedge funds or anywhere competence actually matters.

I don't hear of any hedge funds or fusion energy researchers complaining that they absolutely can't hire anyone so they just have to close up shop. So, what's the problem?

MY DC works for IB and says there is pressure to hire more women and blacks over Asians and whites.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As expected. But a little surprised by the decline in Latino students. There are a gazillion students with at least a grandparent from Latin America. Lots of Brazilian, Argentinian, Chilean families value education.

Only 2% of Latino students score over 700 in math SAT, so you simply should not expect to see a lot of them at MIT.

If you're going by over 700 SAT math, MIT should be about
47% Asian
43% White
3% Black
7% Hispanic

Actual class of 2027 is not too far off from that
47% Asian
37% White
5% Black
11% Hispanic

Now do 790 SAT.

If MIT just tracked SAT math scores, it would be even more Asian.

At MIT, 25% percentile for SAT math is 790 and 75% percentile is 800.

For 800 math scores, here is the national breakdown by race:

Asian 3%
White <1%
Mixed race <1%
Native American <1%
Black <1%
Hispanic <1%
Pacific Islander <1%

For 750+ math scores, here is the national breakdown by race:

Asian 22%
White 4%
Mixed race 4%
Native American 1%
Black <1%
Hispanic 1%
Pacific Islander 1%

no one wants to learn or create or live in a bubble of people selected based on SAT math scores.

Except for really rigorous environments like the folks developing fusion energy or the algorithmic trading hedge funds or anywhere competence actually matters.

I don't hear of any hedge funds or fusion energy researchers complaining that they absolutely can't hire anyone so they just have to close up shop. So, what's the problem?

MY DC works for IB and says there is pressure to hire more women and blacks over Asians and whites.

Govt. contractors are required to implement affirmative action in employment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So no gain in white seats. All the seats previously occupied by URM went to Asians.

This follows what we are seeing on tours. We toured a dozen top20 schools this summer and the tour groups were 75-95% Asian and South Asian.

My kid (mixed race Asian) was completely turned off and we're left wondering what to do. She wants diversity in college.

Agree; we need to stop all these asians! Just awful.

[Anonymous]

Are the URM students accepted by MIT this year still going to be treated like they don't deserve to be there?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still think that if we're getting rid of affirmative action, then we should also get rid of recruiting for sports. There is no difference between recruiting/changing the admissions requirements for a minority student vs doing the same for an athlete.

There is a huge difference, nitwit.

Recruited for sport = you have to be excellent at your sport, better than 95% of high school kids who play your sport. This requires exceptional MERIT.

AA = you were born with the “right” skin color. No merit, pure racism.

Furthermore athletes at elite schools have to meet high academic standards, and have high graduation rates, so they’re not stupid.

Nah. Depends on the sport. My son plays at an Ivy- uw 4.0/4.5, 5s AP exams and 35 ACT. Most of the sports- you need the credentials to get in or you won’t pass pre-read.

It really depends. My friend's daughter got into Columbia as a fencer despite lower academics because she was one of the top fencers in the country and she led them to all sorts of fencing success. She was extremely smart but so focused on fencing that I think it hurt her grades and test scores. I think she's a doctor now.

.

She was not that smart; just good at fencing

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Are the URM students accepted by MIT this year still going to be treated like they don't deserve to be there?

What matters is that we judge students not by their academic ability or character, but by the color of their skin.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are the URM students accepted by MIT this year still going to be treated like they don't deserve to be there?

What matters is that we judge students not by their academic ability or character, but by the color of their skin.

+1

Bring back the quotas!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So no gain in white seats. All the seats previously occupied by URM went to Asians.

This follows what we are seeing on tours. We toured a dozen top20 schools this summer and the tour groups were 75-95% Asian and South Asian.

My kid (mixed race Asian) was completely turned off and we're left wondering what to do. She wants diversity in college.

Agree; we need to stop all these asians! Just awful.

Trademark of DCUM

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess this shows that affirmative action really did hurt Asian American students. It’s interesting that it didn’t hurt white students. I actually thought it might benefit them, but it turns out it was neutral. Asians are kind of the like the 21st century Jews, schools didn’t want too many of them.

Exactly, white people tried to appease URM folks by hurting Asian Americans. They did that for over 50 years.

I always thought it was ironic that the white people were assuaging their white guilt over slavery and segregation by hurting a group of people that didn't own slaves or pass any jim crow laws.
What's next, assuaging white guilt over discriminating against asians by discriminating against the next immigrant group.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess this shows that affirmative action really did hurt Asian American students. It’s interesting that it didn’t hurt white students. I actually thought it might benefit them, but it turns out it was neutral. Asians are kind of the like the 21st century Jews, schools didn’t want too many of them.

Exactly, white people tried to appease URM folks by hurting Asian Americans. They did that for over 50 years.

I always thought it was ironic that the white people were assuaging their white guilt over slavery and segregation by hurting a group of people that didn't own slaves or pass any jim crow laws.
What's next, assuaging white guilt over discriminating against asians by discriminating against the next immigrant group.

Don't forget Jews. Jews were before Asians.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So no gain in white seats. All the seats previously occupied by URM went to Asians.

This follows what we are seeing on tours. We toured a dozen top20 schools this summer and the tour groups were 75-95% Asian and South Asian.

My kid (mixed race Asian) was completely turned off and we're left wondering what to do. She wants diversity in college.

Why do you care about racial diversity in an elite college like MIT? MIT is supposed only to admit the most talented students in STEM, not political poster children. As clearly shown by MIT's admission data, some of the seats were stolen from Asian students by URM due to unconstitutional affirmative action before the Supreme Court stuck it down.

Because MIT exists in a city/state/nation that is diverse. It educates students that will live, work, and hopefully make positive contributions to a diverse society outside its halls. Because they benefit from research dollars via taxes paid by this diverse community. They receive the opportunity to avoid paying taxes to the diverse community in which it resides. Our colleges and universities in the US do not exist in a bubble.

Nothing was ‘stolen’. That speaks of entitlement. A clear underlying belief based on the comment above.

MIT is supposed to…. According to whom?

What do you call it when you take something from someone who earned it and give it to someone who didn't earn it because you did something horrible to the second person's ancestors?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Yes, merit-based, race-blind, equal opportunity, fair competition for everyone is the way to go.

Except our society is not either merit-based or race-blind and neither does it provide equal opportunities or fair competition. You have a lot to learn about America.

Yes, america is not any of these things but it should aspire to be.
We should not aspire to be a nation that categorizes people based on skin color and dole out opportunities on the basis of that skin color.