How Harvard discriminates against Asian Americans in college admissions

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When I was in Asia was there a few times I was presenting and doing sales calls.

Interesting I could not fill my own drink, order my own food, someone handed me towel in bathroom and people of lower rank carried my briefcase and called my cab.

Your life is often decided in 8th grade. Bad grades off you go to a technical school to be a Janitior. Average grades in HS no college will want you. And you better have a prestigious college and high GPA to get a great job.

The pressure starts elementary school.

I once addressed a group of 200 international Asian MBA students and two actually said "you no study no good yet big job" it was actually a compliment as they wanted to know hiw I did it.

In Asia someone whose resume had a so so college would not be at my level.

I'll take "that didn't happen for $500", please.

What a gross, racist comment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is universally known that Jews and Asians place a high value on education so high achievement shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone. Other cultures couldn’t care less about education and likewise their substandard results shouldn’t be surprising. What is surprising is that bureaucrats are misguided enough to think they can socially engineer the latter groups to care.

That seems like a pretty uninformed stereotype. The yeshivas in ultra-orthodox communities teach nothing but religion. Boys often never even learn basic English, arithmetic or math and university education is highly discouraged. And what are the world-class university in Asia, outside the Indian technical institutes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if you people who think tutoring and prepping are bad are also the ones who tout how their schools have a high GPA/SAT score.

See the post 2 above yours. Apparently her kids can tour colleges and take test prep, but, she is upset that someone else's (Asian) kids did too.

No, I just think it's kind of abusive to take your 11 year old on a tour of the University of Rochester when everybody else gets to go to Disneyland. SAT prep and college tours are appropriate
for a sixteen year old. Taking Stanley Kaplan every year since you're 11 is a strange way to spend your time. Take your kid to the circus. Drive across the US. Sign up for a 5K. Experience
a little bit more of a life than the classroom on a Saturday afternoon for the eight years leading up to your college application year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if you people who think tutoring and prepping are bad are also the ones who tout how their schools have a high GPA/SAT score.

See the post 2 above yours. Apparently her kids can tour colleges and take test prep, but, she is upset that someone else's (Asian) kids did too.

No, I just think it's kind of abusive to take your 11 year old on a tour of the University of Rochester when everybody else gets to go to Disneyland. SAT prep and college tours are appropriate
for a sixteen year old. Taking Stanley Kaplan every year since you're 11 is a strange way to spend your time. Take your kid to the circus. Drive across the US. Sign up for a 5K. Experience
a little bit more of a life than the classroom on a Saturday afternoon for the eight years leading up to your college application year.

OK I'm laughing at you now. Touring University of Rochester is not abusive. Kaplan prep is not abusive. You are officially an imbecile.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if you people who think tutoring and prepping are bad are also the ones who tout how their schools have a high GPA/SAT score.

See the post 2 above yours. Apparently her kids can tour colleges and take test prep, but, she is upset that someone else's (Asian) kids did too.

No, I just think it's kind of abusive to take your 11 year old on a tour of the University of Rochester when everybody else gets to go to Disneyland. SAT prep and college tours are appropriate
for a sixteen year old. Taking Stanley Kaplan every year since you're 11 is a strange way to spend your time. Take your kid to the circus. Drive across the US. Sign up for a 5K. Experience
a little bit more of a life than the classroom on a Saturday afternoon for the eight years leading up to your college application year.

Yeah, you lost me there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:High-achieving Asian-American applicants who play a musical instrument and want to concentrate in a STEM field are a dime a dozen. Kids who fit that profile are competing against one another, and only the ones who are true outliers or offer something else distinctive will gain admission. Harvard offers a liberal arts curriculum at the UG level and consequently looks for an array of disciplinary interests and talents. They are looks for future award-winning anthropologists, authors, artists and history scholars as much as for future doctors and engineers. Statistically, the pool for each of the former categories is less deep.

Right. Many on this thread are not acknowledging the key point that Harvard's interest in diversity pertains to many areas, including field of study. There are only so many STEM kids Harvard will admit. My guess is that any quotas have just as much, or more, to do with this as with race or ethnicity.

Because every Asian applicant is a future STEM major?
Way to stereotype.

Check out the MD Middle School magnet discrimination thread. Full of Asian parents outraged their STEM focused children were not invited to the Takoma Park MS magnet under the new admissions process. NOT ONE complained about lack of admission to the humanities program at Eastern. Every single Asian American kid I knew at Harvard was a STEM major who wanted to become a doctor or engineer. Nothing wrong with that, but they were competing against a pool of very similar kids for admission. This is anecdotal evidence of course but I've encountered few Asians with a serious interest in the humanities or social sciences. Would love to see the stats on the breakdown of intended majors by race and ethnicity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:High-achieving Asian-American applicants who play a musical instrument and want to concentrate in a STEM field are a dime a dozen. Kids who fit that profile are competing against one another, and only the ones who are true outliers or offer something else distinctive will gain admission. Harvard offers a liberal arts curriculum at the UG level and consequently looks for an array of disciplinary interests and talents. They are looks for future award-winning anthropologists, authors, artists and history scholars as much as for future doctors and engineers. Statistically, the pool for each of the former categories is less deep.

Right. Many on this thread are not acknowledging the key point that Harvard's interest in diversity pertains to many areas, including field of study. There are only so many STEM kids Harvard will admit. My guess is that any quotas have just as much, or more, to do with this as with race or ethnicity.

Because every Asian applicant is a future STEM major?
Way to stereotype.

Check out the MD Middle School magnet discrimination thread. Full of Asian parents outraged their STEM focused children were not invited to the Takoma Park MS magnet under the new admissions process. NOT ONE complained about lack of admission to the humanities program at Eastern. Every single Asian American kid I knew at Harvard was a STEM major who wanted to become a doctor or engineer. Nothing wrong with that, but they were competing against a pool of very similar kids for admission. This is anecdotal evidence of course but I've encountered few Asians with a serious interest in the humanities or social sciences[u]. Would love to see the stats on the breakdown of intended majors by race and ethnicity.

When the playing field becomes more level in humanities and social sciences you will see more Asians in those fields as well. By the way, it is anecdotal of course, why did you go to Harvard in particular when there are hundreds of other colleges/universities in the US? Like wise, if you see Asians in STEM majors don't be so shocked. They chose to major in STEM subjects. When the old boy system wanes by next generation your children will scramble just as Asian children do now, that is if they want a decent financial ability in their lives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When I was in Asia was there a few times I was presenting and doing sales calls.

Interesting I could not fill my own drink, order my own food, someone handed me towel in bathroom and people of lower rank carried my briefcase and called my cab.

Your life is often decided in 8th grade. Bad grades off you go to a technical school to be a Janitior. Average grades in HS no college will want you. And you better have a prestigious college and high GPA to get a great job.

The pressure starts elementary school.

I once addressed a group of 200 international Asian MBA students and two actually said "you no study no good yet big job" it was actually a compliment as they wanted to know hiw I did it.

In Asia someone whose resume had a so so college would not be at my level.

I'll take "that didn't happen for $500", please.


What a gross, racist comment.

Actually it did they took my card and connected linked in. I hooked them up with my connections and got some comp networking things for them. I am a big supporter of B student Asians.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am not Asian but grew up in a neighborhood with lots of rich asians and had tons of asians work for me over the years. I have been to asia a few times for work.

They really study hard and even their hobbies are work. Piano, Photography, Violin etc. Skilled level, hours and hours and hours of study and thousands in cost.

While I was in Asia at a business meeting my boss almost killed me when I was asked what my hobbies were and I said I like going to football games and, I enjoy going to parks and beaches with my kids.

He was like you need hobbies that impress. You should talk about Art, Opera, Science etc. I was like how about I like fast cars, rock concerts and chicken wings. No does not work that way.

Even going to a restaurant was an ordeal with where to sit, who orders, explanations of food. I am like hey lets grab a burger and beer.

There are definitely cultural differences in values, which may be part of the disconnect in this situation. As a strong academic institution, one would assume Harvard is all about high test scores. But it values different things as well, which may not be understood in a culture that may have different values.

These are classes differences not cultural ones.

It is universally known that Jews and Asians place a high value on education so high achievement shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone. Other cultures couldn’t care less about education and likewise their substandard results shouldn’t be surprising. What is surprising is that bureaucrats are misguided enough to think they can socially engineer the latter groups to care.

Really? Plenty of other cultures value education. Wait, are you the one calling everyone else racist and complaining about stereotypes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:High-achieving Asian-American applicants who play a musical instrument and want to concentrate in a STEM field are a dime a dozen. Kids who fit that profile are competing against one another, and only the ones who are true outliers or offer something else distinctive will gain admission. Harvard offers a liberal arts curriculum at the UG level and consequently looks for an array of disciplinary interests and talents. They are looks for future award-winning anthropologists, authors, artists and history scholars as much as for future doctors and engineers. Statistically, the pool for each of the former categories is less deep.

Right. Many on this thread are not acknowledging the key point that Harvard's interest in diversity pertains to many areas, including field of study. There are only so many STEM kids Harvard will admit. My guess is that any quotas have just as much, or more, to do with this as with race or ethnicity.

Because every Asian applicant is a future STEM major?
Way to stereotype.

Check out the MD Middle School magnet discrimination thread. Full of Asian parents outraged their STEM focused children were not invited to the Takoma Park MS magnet under the new admissions process. NOT ONE complained about lack of admission to the humanities program at Eastern. Every single Asian American kid I knew at Harvard was a STEM major who wanted to become a doctor or engineer. Nothing wrong with that, but they were competing against a pool of very similar kids for admission. This is anecdotal evidence of course but I've encountered few Asians with a serious interest in the humanities or social sciences[u]. Would love to see the stats on the breakdown of intended majors by race and ethnicity.

When the playing field becomes more level in humanities and social sciences you will see more Asians in those fields as well. By the way, it is anecdotal of course, why did you go to Harvard in particular when there are hundreds of other colleges/universities in the US? Like wise, if you see Asians in STEM majors don't be so shocked. They chose to major in STEM subjects. When the old boy system wanes by next generation your children will scramble just as Asian children do now, that is if they want a decent financial ability in their lives.

Curious about what you mean when the playing field becomes more level (see bolded portion). It seems because so few Asians are interested in these fields, those that are would have an advantage for admissions and would be recruited for positions (kind of like women in Engineering).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When I was in Asia was there a few times I was presenting and doing sales calls.

Interesting I could not fill my own drink, order my own food, someone handed me towel in bathroom and people of lower rank carried my briefcase and called my cab.

Your life is often decided in 8th grade. Bad grades off you go to a technical school to be a Janitior. Average grades in HS no college will want you. And you better have a prestigious college and high GPA to get a great job.

The pressure starts elementary school.

I once addressed a group of 200 international Asian MBA students and two actually said "you no study no good yet big job" it was actually a compliment as they wanted to know hiw I did it.

In Asia someone whose resume had a so so college would not be at my level.

I'll take "that didn't happen for $500", please.

What a gross, racist comment.

Don't know how poorly the actual person spoke, but I'm guessing it wasn't perfect English if he was addressing students who are actually in China or something. That said, the post did come across as hilariously bad/racist.

It reminded of me this cringe-worthy video of this lady singing a racist song in a fake Asian accent with an Asian lady in the crowd.... ugh hard to watch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kgSS1pDkMgQ

It is true that your life path is determined very early in those countries... Really shitty.... If you don't get into the top schools, you're screwed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When I was in Asia was there a few times I was presenting and doing sales calls.

Interesting I could not fill my own drink, order my own food, someone handed me towel in bathroom and people of lower rank carried my briefcase and called my cab.

Your life is often decided in 8th grade. Bad grades off you go to a technical school to be a Janitior. Average grades in HS no college will want you. And you better have a prestigious college and high GPA to get a great job.

The pressure starts elementary school.

I once addressed a group of 200 international Asian MBA students and two actually said "you no study no good yet big job" it was actually a compliment as they wanted to know hiw I did it.

In Asia someone whose resume had a so so college would not be at my level.

I'll take "that didn't happen for $500", please.

What a gross, racist comment.

Don't know how poorly the actual person spoke, but I'm guessing it wasn't perfect English if he was addressing students who are actually in China or something. That said, the post did come across as hilariously bad/racist.

It reminded of me this cringe-worthy video of this lady singing a racist song in a fake Asian accent with an Asian lady in the crowd.... ugh hard to watch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kgSS1pDkMgQ

It is true that your life path is determined very early in those countries... Really shitty.... If you don't get into the top schools, you're screwed.[u]

So true, right! Well said like an all knowing and yet a humble human being. Whereas in our good old US of A, one can go to any shitty college/university and yet climb to the highest positions, as for example the following US Supreme Court Justices did:
Scalia graduated valedictorian of Georgetown in 1957 with a degree in history. He continued on to Harvard Law School where he graduated in 1960. Kennedy graduated from Stanford in 1958 with a degree in political science. He graduated cum laude from Harvard Law School in 1961. Thomas graduated cum laude from College of the Holy Cross in 1971 with a degree in English literature. He graduated from Yale Law School in 1974. Ginsburg graduated from Cornell University in 1954 with a degree in government. She started at Harvard Law School in 1956, before transferring to Columbia Law School when her husband took a job in New York. She graduated from Columbia in 1959, tying for first in her class. Breyer graduated from Stanford University in 1959 with a degree in philosophy. He graduated from Harvard Law School in 1964. Roberts graduated summa cum laude from Harvard College in 1976 with a degree in history. He graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law School in 1979. Alito graduated from Princeton University in 1972 with a degree from the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs. He graduated from Yale Law School in 1975. Sotomayor graduated summa cum laude from Princeton University in 1976 with a degree in history. She graduated from Yale Law School in 1979. Kagan graduated summa cum laude from Princeton University in 1981 with a degree in history. She graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law School in 1986. Gorsuch received his Bachelor of Arts degree in Political Science from Columbia University in 1988, where he was inducted into Phi Beta Kappa. He graduated cum laude from Harvard Law School in 1991 with a Juris Doctor. In 2004 he was awarded a DPhil in law (legal philosophy) from the University of Oxford.
Just as you and many other commenters here on this forum, I am also puzzled why Asian parents and Asian students value Ivy education so much. They could aim for any of the shitty colleges/universities the above mentioned justices studied at and achieve heights of their chosen careers. After all they are living in the same good old US of A just as we commenters do!

[Anonymous]

^^^ yet none of those justices were STEM majors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:low personality scores? That's gotta be one of the most racist factors, ever. Yet, somehow it's OK to tolerate this-- Asians are the victims of discrimination the same way Catholics are bashed on this site. Not acceptable. I'm not Asian.

Personality scores are determined through the interview. That's why students are interviewed. I think it's a fair metric. You can't just go by test scores to admit an entire class. Life is based on personal interaction...not a number.

Appears that the interview scores are higher than what admissions used,so not personal interaction at all. These are kids that will be successful anyway, but, the racial markdown is not at all OK.

The personality score is based on recommendations, essays, and interviews. The interviews are the lowest weighted part. There is no evidence of a racial markdown, just that on average, Asian-Americans had lower scores. And averages tell you nothing about individuals. Asian-Americans as a group had higher extracurricular scores exclusively because they were more likely to participate in math/science clubs and playing musical instruments -- they were less likely to participate in everything else. These aren't activities that give opportunity to demonstrate leadership, empathy, and the other traits the personality score is trying to capture.

Damn what a fantastic analysis. Lets do this for Blacks

There is no evidence of a racial discrimination, just that on average, Blacks tend to commit more crimes. And averages tell you nothing about individuals. Blacks as a group had higher participation in crimes because they were more likely to value gangsterism-- they were less likely to participate in everything else like education. These aren't activities that give opportunity to demonstrate good citizenship, empathy, and the other traits that upright individuals possess.

I think your comment makes your biases perfectly clear and disqualifying.

Huh? I am sure that was a sarcastic comment, to show how racist the earlier post was when it came to Asians, which apparently many here don't realize because they keep making group characteristic comments on all Asians

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:High-achieving Asian-American applicants who play a musical instrument and want to concentrate in a STEM field are a dime a dozen. Kids who fit that profile are competing against one another, and only the ones who are true outliers or offer something else distinctive will gain admission. Harvard offers a liberal arts curriculum at the UG level and consequently looks for an array of disciplinary interests and talents. They are looks for future award-winning anthropologists, authors, artists and history scholars as much as for future doctors and engineers. Statistically, the pool for each of the former categories is less deep.

Right. Many on this thread are not acknowledging the key point that Harvard's interest in diversity pertains to many areas, including field of study. There are only so many STEM kids Harvard will admit. My guess is that any quotas have just as much, or more, to do with this as with race or ethnicity.

Because every Asian applicant is a future STEM major?
Way to stereotype.

Check out the MD Middle School magnet discrimination thread. Full of Asian parents outraged their STEM focused children were not invited to the Takoma Park MS magnet under the new admissions process. NOT ONE complained about lack of admission to the humanities program at Eastern. Every single Asian American kid I knew at Harvard was a STEM major who wanted to become a doctor or engineer. Nothing wrong with that, but they were competing against a pool of very similar kids for admission. This is anecdotal evidence of course but I've encountered few Asians with a serious interest in the humanities or social sciences[u]. Would love to see the stats on the breakdown of intended majors by race and ethnicity.

When the playing field becomes more level in humanities and social sciences you will see more Asians in those fields as well. By the way, it is anecdotal of course, why did you go to Harvard in particular when there are hundreds of other colleges/universities in the US? Like wise, if you see Asians in STEM majors don't be so shocked. They chose to major in STEM subjects. When the old boy system wanes by next generation your children will scramble just as Asian children do now, that is if they want a decent financial ability in their lives.

Curious about what you mean when the playing field becomes more level (see bolded portion). It seems because so few Asians are interested in these fields, those that are would have an advantage for admissions and would be recruited for positions (kind of like women in Engineering).

DP.. the reason a lot of Asians go into STEM fields is because there is less subjective criteria, and therefore, less discrimination, and more job security.