MIT releases post-affirmative action class of 2028 data

[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?

Probably; racists gonna racist

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it is not fair to remove programs at MIT that help disadvantaged URMs. Affirmative action for women at MIT has a much bigger effect than affirmative action for URMs ever did. Nobody criticizes that because it benefits wealthy people.

How does affirmative action at MIT help women?
Have you ever been to MIT. The women are all asian and they are no wealthier than the average MIT satudent. The only group where the man don't outnumber the women... by a LOT... is the asians. Those asian women tend to be as smart as anyone else there.

They were still much less likely to get in for many many years before mit made it easier for women to get in. Women representation is also pretty important for sciences.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it is not fair to remove programs at MIT that help disadvantaged URMs. Affirmative action for women at MIT has a much bigger effect than affirmative action for URMs ever did. Nobody criticizes that because it benefits wealthy people.

How does affirmative action at MIT help women?
Have you ever been to MIT. The women are all asian and they are no wealthier than the average MIT satudent. The only group where the man don't outnumber the women... by a LOT... is the asians. Those asian women tend to be as smart as anyone else there.

The MIT acceptance rate for women is almost double that for men. Is the female applicant pool that much better than the male applicant pool?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it is not fair to remove programs at MIT that help disadvantaged URMs. Affirmative action for women at MIT has a much bigger effect than affirmative action for URMs ever did. Nobody criticizes that because it benefits wealthy people.

How does affirmative action at MIT help women?
Have you ever been to MIT. The women are all asian and they are no wealthier than the average MIT satudent. The only group where the man don't outnumber the women... by a LOT... is the asians. Those asian women tend to be as smart as anyone else there.

The MIT acceptance rate for women is almost double that for men. Is the female applicant pool that much better than the male applicant pool?

It’s probably somewhat stronger. Young men tend to be cocksure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it is not fair to remove programs at MIT that help disadvantaged URMs. Affirmative action for women at MIT has a much bigger effect than affirmative action for URMs ever did. Nobody criticizes that because it benefits wealthy people.

How does affirmative action at MIT help women?
Have you ever been to MIT. The women are all asian and they are no wealthier than the average MIT satudent. The only group where the man don't outnumber the women... by a LOT... is the asians. Those asian women tend to be as smart as anyone else there.

They were still much less likely to get in for many many years before mit made it easier for women to get in. Women representation is also pretty important for sciences.

So you think that having women in science is important but having URMs is not?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it is not fair to remove programs at MIT that help disadvantaged URMs. Affirmative action for women at MIT has a much bigger effect than affirmative action for URMs ever did. Nobody criticizes that because it benefits wealthy people.

How does affirmative action at MIT help women?
Have you ever been to MIT. The women are all asian and they are no wealthier than the average MIT satudent. The only group where the man don't outnumber the women... by a LOT... is the asians. Those asian women tend to be as smart as anyone else there.

The MIT acceptance rate for women is almost double that for men. Is the female applicant pool that much better than the male applicant pool?

I wonder what people think about Brown's acceptance rate for men being about 1.6x higher than their acceptance rate for women.

[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?

Sentiment won't change overnight.
They need to earn it over time..
Revisit in 10 years.

Why the F would they have to "earn" it??? The whole premise of this discussion is that no affirmative action has been applied.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it is not fair to remove programs at MIT that help disadvantaged URMs. Affirmative action for women at MIT has a much bigger effect than affirmative action for URMs ever did. Nobody criticizes that because it benefits wealthy people.

How does affirmative action at MIT help women?
Have you ever been to MIT. The women are all asian and they are no wealthier than the average MIT satudent. The only group where the man don't outnumber the women... by a LOT... is the asians. Those asian women tend to be as smart as anyone else there.

The MIT acceptance rate for women is almost double that for men. Is the female applicant pool that much better than the male applicant pool?

It’s probably somewhat stronger. Young men tend to be cocksure.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_International_Mathematical_Olympiad_participants

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it is not fair to remove programs at MIT that help disadvantaged URMs. Affirmative action for women at MIT has a much bigger effect than affirmative action for URMs ever did. Nobody criticizes that because it benefits wealthy people.

How does affirmative action at MIT help women?
Have you ever been to MIT. The women are all asian and they are no wealthier than the average MIT satudent. The only group where the man don't outnumber the women... by a LOT... is the asians. Those asian women tend to be as smart as anyone else there.

The MIT acceptance rate for women is almost double that for men. Is the female applicant pool that much better than the male applicant pool?

I wonder what people think about Brown's acceptance rate for men being about 1.6x higher than their acceptance rate for women.

Some people are upset about it.

But most people think Brown and MIT trying to balance the gender ratio is a good idea. They see the value. But why do people not see the value in having more racial diversity?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Sentiment won't change overnight.
They need to earn it over time..
Revisit in 10 years.

Why the F would they have to "earn" it??? The whole premise of this discussion is that no affirmative action has been applied.

Because these racists can’t imagine that there are extremely talented URM kids.

[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:Several posters already seem to be uncomfortable with how Asian elite schools are getting and it's still early in the process. Will we see "white flight" out of the ivies?

We can only hope.

Look what happened to TJ. Affirmative action in disguise to significantly reduce Asian students in favor of other races. Clear discrimination that is an "inconvenient truth":

Asians face more discrimination (sometimes language difficulties as well) than URMs and still manage to excel and gain admission to top schools and gain employment to top companies.

It clearly is NOT discrimination.

It wasn’t about reducing the number of Asian students, it was about expanding access to more kids from across the county. Which is why they ADDED seats for this expanded access.

Asian students still make up the majority of students and are accepted at a higher rate than other groups. And, in fact, there are MORE Asian students at TJ since the admissions change than almost any other year in the school’s history.

The number of Asian students enrolled at TJ by school year (fall):


Acceptance rates (class of 2025):
Asian 19%
Black 14% (5% lower)
Multiracial/Other* 13% (6% lower)
Hispanic 21%
White 17%

Plus, the court decided it wasn’t discrimination.
https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/221280.P.pdf
Pg 7
“we are satisfied that the challenged admissions policy does not disparately impact Asian American students”

And the SCOTUS left ruling in place:
https://virginiamercury.com/2024/02/20/supreme-court-wont-hear-thomas-jefferson-admissions-case/

On average, classes have ~60 more URMs, which was a huge % increase, more than 200% jump.



More importantly, we’ve seen representation from all middle schools and kids from lower-income families. In fact, per the courts, the students who benefited the most were Asian from low-income families.

TJ is not just a school for wealthy kids from feeder schools. Or wealthy kids who gained an unfair advantage because their families could afford to get access to previous test questions on an NDA-protected test.

You don’t sound very smart or you’re just evil. Did you purposely forget to look at the percentage of each race?

That one way to respond when the numbers aren't on your side

??
Do you know the percentage numbers? I know for a fact, Asian percentages dropped a lot after the TJ “reform”.

Mostly because the denominator increased. The actual number of Asian students attending is close to an all-time high.

Math.

Why are Asians subject to higher standards? That’s racist and unlawful.

Asians are not being subjected to higher standards.
They have reduced standards so that the admitted class looks more like the applicant pool.
THAT is how much they wanted to racially balance the population. They were willing to undermine what made TJ the crown jewel of FCPS and top ranked high school in the nation so that they could increase diversity.

Diversity is vitally important to higher education in this country. You won't change my mind about that.

How much does Soros pay you to destroy this country?

????

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it is not fair to remove programs at MIT that help disadvantaged URMs. Affirmative action for women at MIT has a much bigger effect than affirmative action for URMs ever did. Nobody criticizes that because it benefits wealthy people.

How does affirmative action at MIT help women?
Have you ever been to MIT. The women are all asian and they are no wealthier than the average MIT satudent. The only group where the man don't outnumber the women... by a LOT... is the asians. Those asian women tend to be as smart as anyone else there.

They were still much less likely to get in for many many years before mit made it easier for women to get in. Women representation is also pretty important for sciences.

So you think that having women in science is important but having URMs is not?

And also, what about equity in science for LGTBQIA+ students / future scientists?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it is not fair to remove programs at MIT that help disadvantaged URMs. Affirmative action for women at MIT has a much bigger effect than affirmative action for URMs ever did. Nobody criticizes that because it benefits wealthy people.

How does affirmative action at MIT help women?
Have you ever been to MIT. The women are all asian and they are no wealthier than the average MIT satudent. The only group where the man don't outnumber the women... by a LOT... is the asians. Those asian women tend to be as smart as anyone else there.

The MIT acceptance rate for women is almost double that for men. Is the female applicant pool that much better than the male applicant pool?

I wonder what people think about Brown's acceptance rate for men being about 1.6x higher than their acceptance rate for women.

Men get affirmative action at most liberal arts colleges/undergraduate-focused institutions. It has to do with colleges trying to maintain 50/50

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it is not fair to remove programs at MIT that help disadvantaged URMs. Affirmative action for women at MIT has a much bigger effect than affirmative action for URMs ever did. Nobody criticizes that because it benefits wealthy people.

How does affirmative action at MIT help women?
Have you ever been to MIT. The women are all asian and they are no wealthier than the average MIT satudent. The only group where the man don't outnumber the women... by a LOT... is the asians. Those asian women tend to be as smart as anyone else there.

They were still much less likely to get in for many many years before mit made it easier for women to get in. Women representation is also pretty important for sciences.

So you think that having women in science is important but having URMs is not?

And also, what about equity in science for LGTBQIA+ students / future scientists?

Why do we need gay representation in the sciences? Are there any serious concerns by queer white students, for example, that they can’t make it in science because they’re queer. You don’t even have to disclose that information in the lab.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Several posters already seem to be uncomfortable with how Asian elite schools are getting and it's still early in the process. Will we see "white flight" out of the ivies?

We can only hope.

Look what happened to TJ. Affirmative action in disguise to significantly reduce Asian students in favor of other races. Clear discrimination that is an "inconvenient truth":

Asians face more discrimination (sometimes language difficulties as well) than URMs and still manage to excel and gain admission to top schools and gain employment to top companies.

It clearly is NOT discrimination.

It wasn’t about reducing the number of Asian students, it was about expanding access to more kids from across the county. Which is why they ADDED seats for this expanded access.

Asian students still make up the majority of students and are accepted at a higher rate than other groups. And, in fact, there are MORE Asian students at TJ since the admissions change than almost any other year in the school’s history.

The number of Asian students enrolled at TJ by school year (fall):


Acceptance rates (class of 2025):
Asian 19%
Black 14% (5% lower)
Multiracial/Other* 13% (6% lower)
Hispanic 21%
White 17%

Plus, the court decided it wasn’t discrimination.
https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/221280.P.pdf
Pg 7
“we are satisfied that the challenged admissions policy does not disparately impact Asian American students”

And the SCOTUS left ruling in place:
https://virginiamercury.com/2024/02/20/supreme-court-wont-hear-thomas-jefferson-admissions-case/

On average, classes have ~60 more URMs, which was a huge % increase, more than 200% jump.



More importantly, we’ve seen representation from all middle schools and kids from lower-income families. In fact, per the courts, the students who benefited the most were Asian from low-income families.

TJ is not just a school for wealthy kids from feeder schools. Or wealthy kids who gained an unfair advantage because their families could afford to get access to previous test questions on an NDA-protected test.

You don’t sound very smart or you’re just evil. Did you purposely forget to look at the percentage of each race?

That one way to respond when the numbers aren't on your side

??
Do you know the percentage numbers? I know for a fact, Asian percentages dropped a lot after the TJ “reform”.

Mostly because the denominator increased. The actual number of Asian students attending is close to an all-time high.

Math.

Why are Asians subject to higher standards? That’s racist and unlawful.

Asians are not being subjected to higher standards.
They have reduced standards so that the admitted class looks more like the applicant pool.
THAT is how much they wanted to racially balance the population. They were willing to undermine what made TJ the crown jewel of FCPS and top ranked high school in the nation so that they could increase diversity.

Diversity is vitally important to higher education in this country. You won't change my mind about that.

+1