SFFA doesn't like the Asian American %

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The reality is that white people, and really people of all races, mostly dont want to go to schools that are dominated by asians. This is why Asian universities, despite the fact that they are some of the best/most competitive in the world, are mostly no names. For whatever reason, people of all kinds flock to historically white institutions and all desperately want to be included. The same desire to be surrounded by asians does not exist in the reverse for white people, and there are so many examples of this phenomenon: https://psmag.com/news/ghosts-of-white-people-past-witnessing-white-flight-from-an-asian-ethnoburb/

MIT is about to learn this the hard way. Many intellectually gifted white students passed it up before and will do so even more now that their Asian numbers have increased. Why go to #1 with a bunch of Asians when you can go to #2 with a more balanced representation of America.

Colleges should follow the laws of America and whatever happens will happen.
Things will eventually get to an equilibrium, maybe 50% Asians.

No one will want to go there. Not white people, black people, Hispanic people. Nope!

It's a free country as long as you follow the laws of this country.
Suit yourself.

[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:SFFA wants the stats of all non-Asians admitted to these colleges this year? Is that the short answer?

The asian students too. All the stats for all the students. You can't really do an analysis with partial data.

With each identified by race. Also need their personal statements, mental health records, etc. Everything.

I agree about the essays, but why would the admissions committee have mental health records?

So long as they get the essays they can evaluate and compare discussions of family struggles, financial, immigration issues, medications, therapy, suicide attempts, gender dismorphia, divorces, lottery winnings, business failures, rational and irrational fears, car accidents... everything. Plus all the letters of recommendation from teachers. They will have to be identified by name and race as well. Everything

But…colleges don’t keep this information. They assign scores to these essays and move on. Much in the same way Harvard’s case was decided by the deltas in points compared to interview scores. What organization keeps 1000s of essays just lying around?

The Common App is a massive database holding everything. Everything submitted by the student. Everything shared by the College Board. Every letter written by teachers, etc. That is where SFFA will have to go to get it all. Nothing ever gets deleted from the internet. So if there is something sensitive in an applicants essays or in a letter-of-recommendation it will be exposed during discovery.

https://www.commonapp.org/counselors-and-recommenders/recommender-guide

Seems like a security concern. I don’t think anyone should be applying to a system that up and forfeits their info to a bunch of randoms obsessed with race.

Yes, I would have huge issues with this. I feel like Asians are trying to turn our college system into what exists in China or India. I don’t want that.

or UK, Germany, France etc. pretty much rest of the world that has more clear and fair rules and standards

Then I wonder why people from all over the world still come to the US for college and why a US college education continues to be considered so valuable.

The thing is, outside a handful of highly competitive schools in the US, admissions ARE very compliant and largely based on GPA and test scores. It's just at a small number of private, highly selective colleges, the process is opaque because they have way more people with sufficiently high quantitative metrics than they have spots. So they use a qualitative approach that is necessarily squishy and places a high value on metrics like "fit" and "class balance" and "character."

And what some of you who are enraged about this don't understand is that these qualitative metrics lead to desirable learning environments for many people, and if admissions was purely based on test scores, many people would value it less.

Why do you think that is?

Until around WWII, US colleges were regarded as 2nd 3rd tier schools. People from all over the world went to Europe.
Real talents form US who want to really study and research further went to schools in UK, Germany, France.
It a combination of many factors and the economical, political, cultural power of the country play big roles.

Again, nobody really says anything like 'purely based on test scores.'
There has been clearly a discriminatory practice that they required much higher standards from Asians.
This cannot be tolerated, and the US Supreme Court ruled it.
Now you get it?

That personal score was pretty damning.

It was the one thing that got my harvard acquaintances to admit that harvard was probably being racist.

Harvard alumni were very defensive of harvard admissions because they are frequently involved in the process as interviewers and then they saw the gap in personal score and they simply couldn't reconcile it.

[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:SFFA wants the stats of all non-Asians admitted to these colleges this year? Is that the short answer?

The asian students too. All the stats for all the students. You can't really do an analysis with partial data.

With each identified by race. Also need their personal statements, mental health records, etc. Everything.

I agree about the essays, but why would the admissions committee have mental health records?

So long as they get the essays they can evaluate and compare discussions of family struggles, financial, immigration issues, medications, therapy, suicide attempts, gender dismorphia, divorces, lottery winnings, business failures, rational and irrational fears, car accidents... everything. Plus all the letters of recommendation from teachers. They will have to be identified by name and race as well. Everything

But…colleges don’t keep this information. They assign scores to these essays and move on. Much in the same way Harvard’s case was decided by the deltas in points compared to interview scores. What organization keeps 1000s of essays just lying around?

The Common App is a massive database holding everything. Everything submitted by the student. Everything shared by the College Board. Every letter written by teachers, etc. That is where SFFA will have to go to get it all. Nothing ever gets deleted from the internet. So if there is something sensitive in an applicants essays or in a letter-of-recommendation it will be exposed during discovery.

https://www.commonapp.org/counselors-and-recommenders/recommender-guide

Seems like a security concern. I don’t think anyone should be applying to a system that up and forfeits their info to a bunch of randoms obsessed with race.

Yes, I would have huge issues with this. I feel like Asians are trying to turn our college system into what exists in China or India. I don’t want that.

or UK, Germany, France etc. pretty much rest of the world that has more clear and fair rules and standards

Then I wonder why people from all over the world still come to the US for college and why a US college education continues to be considered so valuable.

The thing is, outside a handful of highly competitive schools in the US, admissions ARE very compliant and largely based on GPA and test scores. It's just at a small number of private, highly selective colleges, the process is opaque because they have way more people with sufficiently high quantitative metrics than they have spots. So they use a qualitative approach that is necessarily squishy and places a high value on metrics like "fit" and "class balance" and "character."

And what some of you who are enraged about this don't understand is that these qualitative metrics lead to desirable learning environments for many people, and if admissions was purely based on test scores, many people would value it less.

Why do you think that is?

Until around WWII, US colleges were regarded as 2nd 3rd tier schools. People from all over the world went to Europe.
Real talents form US who want to really study and research further went to schools in UK, Germany, France.
It a combination of many factors and the economical, political, cultural power of the country play big roles.

Again, nobody really says anything like 'purely based on test scores.'
There has been clearly a discriminatory practice that they required much higher standards from Asians.
This cannot be tolerated, and the US Supreme Court ruled it.
Now you get it?

Get what? Your thoughts are scattered and your lead in paragraph about European universities in the early part of the 20th century has nothing to do with your conclusion about Asians.

Hopefully you are able to communicate better in your native tongue. You post a ton and most of your posts are disjointed with lots of broken English.

Let’s see how long it takes you to post a rebuttal in similarly poor English while you will attempt to tie together a bunch of random thoughts in a poorly constructed argument.

:roll:

You attack the PP's English rather than the points. Typical to resort to personal attacks when you have no real argument.

-dp

If the points made any sense.

If you don't understand how WWII changed america's role in the world, maybe you should pick up a book.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has this been mentioned yet? The total undergrad enrollment numbers for many of these colleges are so small that without an explicit or de facto quota system (AA functions as a de facto quota system even if actual quotas are explicitly not allowed) you are apt to see large and random fluctuations in demographics from year to year if race (or proxies for race) are truly not allowed to be considered. Simply because the classes are so small. You are talking about total class sizes of 1-2k and hundreds of thousands of applicants, a huge percentage of whom are academically qualified to attend. A truly race-blind admission process would result in random percentages because in any given year you could have a qualified class admitted of Amy one race category. You could absolutely have a class that was 70% black or 80% AAPI depending on what non-race factors the admissions committee focused on. And every admitted student would still have the high grades and test scores that are always minimally required.

Anyway I'm curious what would happen if they truly dropped diversity-of-class as a value and this happened. I think everyone would freak out. Sure, some members of the AAPI community would be enthusiastic about a class at Princeton or Yale that was over 50% AAPI. But would they be equally happy if the next year it was just 5% AAPI and 70% white? No.

People think they want true merit but I actually think the reality of eliminating diversity as a core value in admissions would freak everyone out and they'd hate it.

You missed the part about baseline numbers of applicants. There will be much larger numbers of some groups and much smaller numbers of others. So wild fluctuations are much less likely.

When you have a huge number of qualified applicants and a very small number of spots it's very easy to create heavily skewed classes. Due to the small size of the admitted class you are likely to have a certain amount of variation and you could accidentally wind up with a class that is not at all representative of the demographic mix of applicants. Also when schools look for other qualities in students any of these can wind up being an accidental proxy for race depending on demographic trends. A school could decide to emphasize demonstrated commitment to the arts or foreign language or athletics or charitable activity in their admitted class and if there is not counterbalance of diversity this could result in highly skewed classes (for both race and gender btw). Yes people will then seek to game those preferences but what if they change.

Because such a tiny percent of applicants receive spots and because a surprisingly high percent of applicants have the test scores and grades that will minimally qualify them for entry it is very easy to wind up with a class that is very unrepresentative of the population (either as a whole or of applicants) by accident.

Larger schools don't have this same risk because of mean reversion. Penn and Cornell both have much larger undergraduate classes and this makes it less likely they will wind up with a very skewed or non-diverse class even without emphasizing diversity. Though they could also see large swings in percentages. State universities that are many multiples the size of private colleges have even less risk especially if applicant classes are proportionally smaller.

But if you are Yale or Dartmouth and you get 300k applicants and of those 90k are minimally qualified and you need to select 1k to admit it is incredibly easy to wind up with a class that bears no resemblance to a normal demographic break down unless you introduce diversity in some way to the process (whether that's explicitly considering race as in AA or looking at proxies like geography or parents HHI or high school or whatever).

I just think that if you truly eliminated diversity as a value the people arguing about this might not like it as much as they think they would if some years the numbers cut against their demographics. There is obviously this assumption that if you don't use race or race-proxies that suddenly this will greatly favor AAPI candidates. But I feel confident this is not absolutely true at these tiny elite colleges. It is likely true at larger state universities (and the UC systems experience bears this out). But Yale is not UC Berkeley.

What the harvard litigation taught us was that the applicants are not equally qualified.
Harvard doesn't get hundreds of thousands of applications, they get like 50k. Most of them are woefully underqualified. Just people shooting in the dark because they were test optional.
If Harvard takes the most qualified candidates, they end up with students that mirror the SAT score distribution because SAT scores correlate with pretty much everything else they measure except skin color.

Almost no top college would agree with your comment that the majority of applicants are unqualified. They’d say the opposite, and the reason admissions standards have risen so much is because the profile of students is sharply increasing. Many students who don’t “qualify” for admission solely don’t qualify SAT/ACT wise, because test optional has increased the average sat for these institutions by 100 points.

Most people are much more critical of applicants than the AOs themselves. They just know the reality that there’s 40ishk very qualified applicants and they need a class of 2000.

The elite colleges are the arbiters of "qualified." The graduation rates are high as well. There are many good candidates,
but limited spots. Aggrieved people get mad when rejected. They need to find someone to blame, and as you can see in today's news, a group with dark skin pigmentation is usually the target.

It's not their skin color that disqualifies them, it's the test scores.

https://satsuite.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/sat-percentile-ranks-gender-race-ethnicity.pdf

Find graduation rates by race/ethnicity at Ivies and other top 25 schools and get back to me. Negligible difference. It's about getting IN the college and there are thousands of applicants that are qualified.

When all the graduation rates are ~100%, the graduation rates are meaningless. They carry everyone over that finish line.

80% of the white men admitted to STEM majors graduate with STEM degrees.
80% of the black men admitted into STEM majors do NOT graduate with STEM degrees.

They would likely have graduated with a STEM degree from a lower ranked school but they are in over their heads when you accept them with SAT scores so much lower than their classmates, their primary role at these colleges seems to be to fill up the bottom end of the curve.

And to your original (but misguided) point, it's skin color that caused the systemic discrimination in the first place....

And what discrimination did hispanics suffer that asians did not?

And affirmative action in college admissions is specifically NOT supposed to be about correcting for past or current discrimination.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like this is what people thought would happen…that it would benefit whites the most…yet how many Asians were on this forum celebrating the end of AA.

Asians complain about model minority and them totally believe in it when convenient.

Those darn Asians, believing in transparent policies with fair standards for all

Why can’t they accept that maybe they aren’t the best applicants…

I know you have trouble comprehending this, but actually we are not all the same

+1 There is so much Asian bashing on this forum. I hope it's just a few ignorant losers, but I suspect it's more than that.

Some Blacks are bitter because they see immigrant group after immigrant group leapfrog their community to prosperity and now they are losing racial preferences too.

Some Whites are bitter because they're losing their privilege with access to exclusive places and high paying jobs and now people cross the street when they see a bunch of young white men hanging out on the sidewalk.

Hispanics are just angling for the fastest climb up that ladder, they know they are going to get there but they'd like to see it for their children rather than their grandchildren or great grand children. They are on a typical generational immigrant pathway to the american dream.

Asians are just tired of being used as the pressure valve for the costs of progressive social policies to remedy injustices they had no hand in creating

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Now Ed Blum's group doesn't like the decrease in admitted Asian American students at Yale, Princeton, and Duke.

This is getting ridiculous.

Excerpt from a New York Times article from today:

"The group that successfully sued Harvard to end affirmative action in university admissions last year is now threatening to investigate whether schools are complying with the new rules and to file lawsuits if it believes that they are not.

The group, Students for Fair Admissions, has focused on three universities — Princeton, Yale and Duke — where there were notable declines in Asian American enrollment this year compared with the last year, which the group said defied expectations.

On Tuesday, Students for Fair Admissions sent letters to the schools questioning whether they were complying with the rules laid out by the Supreme Court. Princeton, Duke and Yale also saw minor differences in Black and Hispanic enrollment in the first class of students admitted since the court struck down race-conscious admissions.

The group, a nonprofit that opposes race-based admissions and that represented Asian students in the lawsuit against Harvard, suggested that it was setting itself up as an enforcer of the new rules."

It's not ridiculous at all. SFFA brought the action which was successful. Scotus said stop discriminating based upon race. Colleges and universities sent out letters asserting to alumni that, nevertheless, they remained committed to diversity (but only one kind) and started playing games in the essays. Not smart to thimb your nose at SCOTUS. The numbers of asian students went down! that wasn't supposed to happen. I hope they brong a second suit for clarification. The schools are defying the ruling and putting themselves in charge of race based admissions in America.

Colleges (except MIT) know Americans don't want to go to Shanghai University. Pack Universities with a bunch of Asians and everyone else will stop going which will mess with the money and the prestige.

This sounds a lot like what Lawrence Lowell said when he introduced holistic admissions as a method of keeping out the jews.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The reality is that white people, and really people of all races, mostly dont want to go to schools that are dominated by asians. This is why Asian universities, despite the fact that they are some of the best/most competitive in the world, are mostly no names. For whatever reason, people of all kinds flock to historically white institutions and all desperately want to be included. The same desire to be surrounded by asians does not exist in the reverse for white people, and there are so many examples of this phenomenon: https://psmag.com/news/ghosts-of-white-people-past-witnessing-white-flight-from-an-asian-ethnoburb/

MIT is about to learn this the hard way. Many intellectually gifted white students passed it up before and will do so even more now that their Asian numbers have increased. Why go to #1 with a bunch of Asians when you can go to #2 with a more balanced representation of America.

See bolded for your answer.

Also #2 is probably just as asian as #1. You'd probably have to go down to #50 or so to really get away from the asians in anything MIT is good at.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The reality is that white people, and really people of all races, mostly dont want to go to schools that are dominated by asians. This is why Asian universities, despite the fact that they are some of the best/most competitive in the world, are mostly no names. For whatever reason, people of all kinds flock to historically white institutions and all desperately want to be included. The same desire to be surrounded by asians does not exist in the reverse for white people, and there are so many examples of this phenomenon: https://psmag.com/news/ghosts-of-white-people-past-witnessing-white-flight-from-an-asian-ethnoburb/

MIT is about to learn this the hard way. Many intellectually gifted white students passed it up before and will do so even more now that their Asian numbers have increased. Why go to #1 with a bunch of Asians when you can go to #2 with a more balanced representation of America.

Colleges should follow the laws of America and whatever happens will happen.
Things will eventually get to an equilibrium, maybe 50% Asians.

Sure, until the nigerians show up in large numbers and then it will be their turn.

We say asian enrollment is high, but what this disguises is that east asians (and everyone else) is being crowded out by south asians and when the south asians get fat and complacent, the next group of hungry immigrants will crowd them out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And what are the "laws of America"?

The Supreme Court's ruling is not a "law." They are part of the judicial branch, which interprets laws. The legislative branch makes laws.

14th amendment is a law of america.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like this is what people thought would happen…that it would benefit whites the most…yet how many Asians were on this forum celebrating the end of AA.

Asians complain about model minority and them totally believe in it when convenient.

Those darn Asians, believing in transparent policies with fair standards for all

Why can’t they accept that maybe they aren’t the best applicants…

I know you have trouble comprehending this, but actually we are not all the same

+1 There is so much Asian bashing on this forum. I hope it's just a few ignorant losers, but I suspect it's more than that.

+1. The amt of Asian hate that is spewed on this forum is disturbing. But not all together surprising.

Meh, a lot of it comes from the same place as anti-semitism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And what are the "laws of America"?

The Supreme Court's ruling is not a "law." They are part of the judicial branch, which interprets laws. The legislative branch makes laws.

How about no racial discrimination

Cite the statute.

The 14th amendment of the Constitution of the united states.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Quit trying to play the argumentum ad ignorantiam card. You're the one claiming they're the same. The burden of proof is on you.

The argument was that diversity is this great thing that is essential to education. Why isn't it also essential to education at an HBCU?

The burden is on you to explain when I point out how your rationale is fukken stupid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like this is what people thought would happen…that it would benefit whites the most…yet how many Asians were on this forum celebrating the end of AA.

Asians complain about model minority and them totally believe in it when convenient.

Those darn Asians, believing in transparent policies with fair standards for all

Why can’t they accept that maybe they aren’t the best applicants…

I know you have trouble comprehending this, but actually we are not all the same

+1 There is so much Asian bashing on this forum. I hope it's just a few ignorant losers, but I suspect it's more than that.

Some Blacks are bitter because they see immigrant group after immigrant group leapfrog their community to prosperity and now they are losing racial preferences too.

Some Whites are bitter because they're losing their privilege with access to exclusive places and high paying jobs and now people cross the street when they see a bunch of young white men hanging out on the sidewalk.

Hispanics are just angling for the fastest climb up that ladder, they know they are going to get there but they'd like to see it for their children rather than their grandchildren or great grand children. They are on a typical generational immigrant pathway to the american dream.

Asians are just tired of being used as the pressure valve for the costs of progressive social policies to remedy injustices they had no hand in creating

This forum lets you say what ever about black people and nothing at all about Asian people…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The reality is that white people, and really people of all races, mostly dont want to go to schools that are dominated by asians. This is why Asian universities, despite the fact that they are some of the best/most competitive in the world, are mostly no names. For whatever reason, people of all kinds flock to historically white institutions and all desperately want to be included. The same desire to be surrounded by asians does not exist in the reverse for white people, and there are so many examples of this phenomenon: https://psmag.com/news/ghosts-of-white-people-past-witnessing-white-flight-from-an-asian-ethnoburb/

MIT is about to learn this the hard way. Many intellectually gifted white students passed it up before and will do so even more now that their Asian numbers have increased. Why go to #1 with a bunch of Asians when you can go to #2 with a more balanced representation of America.

Colleges should follow the laws of America and whatever happens will happen.
Things will eventually get to an equilibrium, maybe 50% Asians.

No one will want to go there. Not white people, black people, Hispanic people. Nope!

Cry MOAR!!!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Noone cares what you want. Unless you can repeal the 14th amendment, you have to stop discriminating against asians or face restraints on your discretion.

That's not what the Fourteenth Amendment says. Voluntary affirmative action is still legal in many contexts outside college admissions.

So in what contexts does the 14th amendment permit discrimination against asians?