Should Asians boycott some elite universities that practice holistic admissions?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, again, where does the 22% come from?

Again, as was stated above, it's the percentage of Asians admitted to Harvard the last two years.

Which, again, prompts my question of what rationale (reason, principle) makes this number the dividing line between fair and unfair admissions?

define fair

If non-Asian students with equal credentials are admitted, refusing admission to Asian students with identical credentials is giving less consideration of interest to Asians. Fairness requires giving equal consideration of interest to all students.

No such thing. Do you understand what holistic admissions means? Some are legacies, some have sports, some have parents who are big donors, some are URMs. Asians are not URMs.

"Holistic admission" historically had been used to discriminate against Jewish students and to keep them out of Ivy League. It's a code word for a racist policy.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.businessinsider.com/the-ivy-leagues-history-of-discriminating-against-jews-2014-12

sounds like you disagree with affirmative action too.

[Anonymous]

(A) No two candidates have “identical” credentials, given the variety of factors that highly selective private universities use to make admissions decisions. (B) Any given highly selective private university in the US rejects some white applicants (as well as some Asian applicants) with perfect grades and scores. (C) Some Asian students with lower scores and grades ARE admitted even as some Asian students in the same applicant pool with perfect scores and grades are not admitted. (D) There’s a social and educational interest in having a diverse student body.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, again, where does the 22% come from?

Again, as was stated above, it's the percentage of Asians admitted to Harvard the last two years.

Which, again, prompts my question of what rationale (reason, principle) makes this number the dividing line between fair and unfair admissions?

define fair

If non-Asian students with equal credentials are admitted, refusing admission to Asian students with identical credentials is giving less consideration of interest to Asians. Fairness requires giving equal consideration of interest to all students.

No such thing. Do you understand what holistic admissions means? Some are legacies, some have sports, some have parents who are big donors, some are URMs. Asians are not URMs.

"Holistic admission" historically had been used to discriminate against Jewish students and to keep them out of Ivy League. It's a code word for a racist policy.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.businessinsider.com/the-ivy-leagues-history-of-discriminating-against-jews-2014-12

sounds like you oppose affirmative action as well. (as does the plaintiff making the accusations in that link you supplied). They lost the last time they tried in 2016.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, again, where does the 22% come from?

Again, as was stated above, it's the percentage of Asians admitted to Harvard the last two years.

Which, again, prompts my question of what rationale (reason, principle) makes this number the dividing line between fair and unfair admissions?

define fair

If non-Asian students with equal credentials are admitted, refusing admission to Asian students with identical credentials is giving less consideration of interest to Asians. Fairness requires giving equal consideration of interest to all students.

No such thing. Do you understand what holistic admissions means? Some are legacies, some have sports, some have parents who are big donors, some are URMs. Asians are not URMs.

"Holistic admission" historically had been used to discriminate against Jewish students and to keep them out of Ivy League. It's a code word for a racist policy.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.businessinsider.com/the-ivy-leagues-history-of-discriminating-against-jews-2014-12

and completely legal.

So keeping Jews out was completely legal? The above article also suggests the Harvard president who came out with this idea back in 1930s also had some other "solutions" to the Jewish issues as well.

[Anonymous]

In the past Blacks were prevented from progressing by applying laws that made slavery legal and later on racial discrimination legal. But the Jewish, Italian, Irish, Polish etc. people could not be stopped for long from achieving success. Now the laws in force leveled the playing field. Overt discrimination is not so easy anymore. There is only subtle discrimination in practice, although it can hinder someone from achieving their true potential it can't prevent them from progressing completely. Hence Asians may be slowed, as the law suit against Harvard indicates, but they will realize their true potential in due course and nobody can stop them. Better get used to them on the playing field and learn to compete with all than to nurture animus towards them. In our country everyone has the right to approach the courts to seek redress iif they feel they are wronged. That is what the lawsuit against Harvard is about. Let it play out in courts, possibly all the way to the Supreme Court. We all will, including Harvard and Asians, will live with the Supreme Court decision.

As an aside, refresh my memory as to how many non-WASP POTUS have we had since the independence? JFK and BHO. Only two. Should women and non-Christians, boycott presidential elections or migrate to some other country/ies as some people here on suggesting Asians should boycott Harvard and enroll in other colleges?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, again, where does the 22% come from?

Again, as was stated above, it's the percentage of Asians admitted to Harvard the last two years.

Which, again, prompts my question of what rationale (reason, principle) makes this number the dividing line between fair and unfair admissions?

define fair

If non-Asian students with equal credentials are admitted, refusing admission to Asian students with identical credentials is giving less consideration of interest to Asians. Fairness requires giving equal consideration of interest to all students.

No such thing. Do you understand what holistic admissions means? Some are legacies, some have sports, some have parents who are big donors, some are URMs. Asians are not URMs.

"Holistic admission" historically had been used to discriminate against Jewish students and to keep them out of Ivy League. It's a code word for a racist policy.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.businessinsider.com/the-ivy-leagues-history-of-discriminating-against-jews-2014-12

and completely legal.

So keeping Jews out was completely legal? The above article also suggests the Harvard president who came out with this idea back in 1930s also had some other "solutions" to the Jewish issues as well.

That's all you got?

[Anonymous]

Sounds like the solution to this issue for Asian - or any - students is to apply to "fit" schools, to colleges where they define their success in terms of their students' success.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In the past Blacks were prevented from progressing by applying laws that made slavery legal and later on racial discrimination legal. But the Jewish, Italian, Irish, Polish etc. people could not be stopped for long from achieving success. Now the laws in force leveled the playing field. Overt discrimination is not so easy anymore. There is only subtle discrimination in practice, although it can hinder someone from achieving their true potential it can't prevent them from progressing completely. Hence Asians may be slowed, as the law suit against Harvard indicates, but they will realize their true potential in due course and nobody can stop them. Better get used to them on the playing field and learn to compete with all than to nurture animus towards them. In our country everyone has the right to approach the courts to seek redress iif they feel they are wronged. That is what the lawsuit against Harvard is about. Let it play out in courts, possibly all the way to the Supreme Court. We all will, including Harvard and Asians, will live with the Supreme Court decision.

As an aside, refresh my memory as to how many non-WASP POTUS have we had since the independence? JFK and BHO. Only two. Should women and non-Christians, boycott presidential elections or migrate to some other country/ies as some people here on suggesting Asians should boycott Harvard and enroll in other colleges?

Not applying to Harvard is not like migrating to other countries, lol. Harvard ain't the only game in town. There are great many schools in the US - and abroad - where Asians students are valued. Realistically, a student can apply to approximately 10 colleges. It's a matter of coming up with a short list of "fit" schools.

[Anonymous]

The last I checked Asian students don't need anyone's permission before they apply to any college/university. So get off the band wagon of don't apply to Harvard, there are many colleges, find your fit, find where you are valued, etc. If everyone who has a problem with anyone else or a particular institution/situation they go somewhere else and not use the court system why do we have laws and courts for? I don't think you learned much in school/college let alone critical reasoning or your racial animus is clouding your intellectual ability whatever extent you may have.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The scare in the non-Asians is so palpable it is manifesting in the form of denigrating the Asians. If you can't take the heat now just wait and see how hot t gets when your children get to be of your present age and the world they will live in then will be so different from the world you are currently living in. Just think about how the world has changed since your parents were of your current age to the present time. The rate of change going forward will be exponential due to technological advances and increased globalization. If you want to bring up your children to give them the best skills to succeed in their lives, have them love and pursue with passion acquiring knowledge, developing skills and self-learning. Bashing Asians may sooth your anxieties but it will only be temporary.

Asians don't have the best skills. They simply have a cultural norm of slavish studying.

The people who really succeed in this world aren't the ones with the best test scores. Instead they are the creative thinkers. .

Tiger Mom missed the memo on this fact. An education is no guarantee of success in the real world, creativity and soft (people) skills are hugely important, but those are not things you learn in a book.

Ill +1 this emphatically. I am white and have 2 Ivy league degrees. I have had some career success, but have met people over and over again who come from a range of college (state schools, small SLACs but not elite east coast ones) who have people skills, good work ethic, get lucky, who are career superstars; for a variety of reasons they have far outstripped me and my accomplishments. Book smarts and tests scores is not enough in the real world.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The last I checked Asian students don't need anyone's permission before they apply to any college/university. So get off the band wagon of don't apply to Harvard, there are many colleges, find your fit, find where you are valued, etc. If everyone who has a problem with anyone else or a particular institution/situation they go somewhere else and not use the court system why do we have laws and courts for? I don't think you learned much in school/college let alone critical reasoning or your racial animus is clouding your intellectual ability whatever extent you may have.

Not sure what your interest in Harvard is is. You might be an alum or a parent - and that's great. However, Harvard isn't for everyone. And Harvard ain't all that. It's all about fit. There are great many colleges in this country - and most students quickly come to love the college that loves them back.

[Anonymous]

Sorry, but cram shops, tutors, essay consultants and forcing your kid to study 6 hours a day after school != genius

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, but cram shops, tutors, essay consultants and forcing your kid to study 6 hours a day after school != genius

Cal Tech, UCLA, and UC Berkeley at 40%+ Asian students because AA is not practiced must be mistakes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, but cram shops, tutors, essay consultants and forcing your kid to study 6 hours a day after school != genius

Cal Tech, UCLA, and UC Berkeley at 40%+ Asian students because AA is not practiced must be mistakes.

publics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, but cram shops, tutors, essay consultants and forcing your kid to study 6 hours a day after school != genius

Cal Tech, UCLA, and UC Berkeley at 40%+ Asian students because AA is not practiced must be mistakes.

publics.

Cal Tech, private. Their graduates are more successful than Harvard grads by any measure.