SFFA doesn't like the Asian American %

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wonder how people would feel if admissions was largely based on SAT score and this resulted in classes at top schools heavily skewed towards men and mem are significantly more likely to score higher on the SAT than women

As overall students, women are better than men, and it’d be interesting to see what these colleges’ classes would look like if they stopped their 50/50 gender policies and went blind.

STEM (except stuff that can get you into medical school) would be vastly more male, most other majors would be vastly more female.

Which is a cultural issue that should be fixed, not an admissions one. Many other countries have women more represented in all stem subjects, so it comes down to understanding why there’s such a massive gap in the US, and why our standardized exam results in women with worse scores across the board

I think the gap in stem is mostly cultural and not really a big concern considering there are more women in law schools and medical schools than men.

The gap in standardized test scores are at the tails. Women have slightly higher average test scores but there are more men at the very bottom and the very tops of the curve.

I'd prefer our brightest minds in engineering and chem grad schools, not in law school.

What if they would rather be ruth bader ginsburg than marie curie.
What if they would rather heal people than design gizmos?

Yeah PP doesn't get that this isn't a communist country that will force people into professions based on aptitude tests for the "good of the country." In the US people get to decide what to study and what careers to pursue and there is no government entity screening and selecting for them and this is actually something most Americans really like about being here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP. I agree, there should be a similar number of white and asian students at most of these schools except at the MOST selective schools because at the 1550+ level asians outnumber whites by 2::1

Schools are allowed to decide that, above a certain very high score, differences don't matter for admissions purposes.

But they are not allowed to select the white student over the asians student because they want more white kids.

But if the kind of diversity that they're seeking regarding geography or extracurricular activities has the coincidental effect of admitting white over Asian applicants, that's still allowed.

This.

I think some posters never contemplated that there are reasons why the super high scoring and high GPA Asian American applicants weren't getting spots at all the top schools that had nothing to do with race. Schools don't actually want classes of super intense heavily "pushed" academic achievers. They want a good mix of high achieving students who are naturally curious and intelligent and have a broad range of strengths and interests and also reflect a broad range of backgrounds and experiences. They used to use race explicitly to accomplish this and now they can't so they use other things but their priorities have not shifted.

Start seeing Asian Americans as people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP. I agree, there should be a similar number of white and asian students at most of these schools except at the MOST selective schools because at the 1550+ level asians outnumber whites by 2::1

Schools are allowed to decide that, above a certain very high score, differences don't matter for admissions purposes.

But they are not allowed to select the white student over the asians student because they want more white kids.

But if the kind of diversity that they're seeking regarding geography or extracurricular activities has the coincidental effect of admitting white over Asian applicants, that's still allowed.

This.

I think some posters never contemplated that there are reasons why the super high scoring and high GPA Asian American applicants weren't getting spots at all the top schools that had nothing to do with race. Schools don't actually want classes of super intense heavily "pushed" academic achievers. They want a good mix of high achieving students who are naturally curious and intelligent and have a broad range of strengths and interests and also reflect a broad range of backgrounds and experiences. They used to use race explicitly to accomplish this and now they can't so they use other things but their priorities have not shifted.

Start seeing Asian Americans as people.

No YOU start seeing them as people.

Do you actually know any Asian American students who attend top colleges? I do and guess what-- they are not universally top scoring hyper-achievers in academics. They are not all in STEM. They did not all attend "top" high schools. Like the kids if other races at these schools, they tend to be wickedly smart and hard working while also being well rounded with genuine curiosity in their areas of academic study as well as personal hobbies and passions. They are different from one another and from other students they went to HS with and from of at debts at their university. To my knowledge none if them had over a 1550 on the SAT.

These students -- these Asian American students -- were admitted to these schools not because they are the smartest kids in the country or got the highest test scores. They were admitted because they are the whole package. If say the same thing about the black and Hispanic and white and native and mixed race kids I know at these schools. If you spend a lot of time around students at top schools you come to recognize the type and it becomes obvious why these schools don't just base admissions on test scores.

Which is why your obsession with the test scores of Asian American applicants as compared to other applicants misguided. You are missing the forest for ONE tree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wonder how people would feel if admissions was largely based on SAT score and this resulted in classes at top schools heavily skewed towards men and mem are significantly more likely to score higher on the SAT than women

As overall students, women are better than men, and it’d be interesting to see what these colleges’ classes would look like if they stopped their 50/50 gender policies and went blind.

STEM (except stuff that can get you into medical school) would be vastly more male, most other majors would be vastly more female.

Which is a cultural issue that should be fixed, not an admissions one. Many other countries have women more represented in all stem subjects, so it comes down to understanding why there’s such a massive gap in the US, and why our standardized exam results in women with worse scores across the board

I think the gap in stem is mostly cultural and not really a big concern considering there are more women in law schools and medical schools than men.

The gap in standardized test scores are at the tails. Women have slightly higher average test scores but there are more men at the very bottom and the very tops of the curve.

I'd prefer our brightest minds in engineering and chem grad schools, not in law school.

No one cares what you'd prefer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP. I agree, there should be a similar number of white and asian students at most of these schools except at the MOST selective schools because at the 1550+ level asians outnumber whites by 2::1

Schools are allowed to decide that, above a certain very high score, differences don't matter for admissions purposes.

But they are not allowed to select the white student over the asians student because they want more white kids.

But if the kind of diversity that they're seeking regarding geography or extracurricular activities has the coincidental effect of admitting white over Asian applicants, that's still allowed.

This.

I think some posters never contemplated that there are reasons why the super high scoring and high GPA Asian American applicants weren't getting spots at all the top schools that had nothing to do with race. Schools don't actually want classes of super intense heavily "pushed" academic achievers. They want a good mix of high achieving students who are naturally curious and intelligent and have a broad range of strengths and interests and also reflect a broad range of backgrounds and experiences. They used to use race explicitly to accomplish this and now they can't so they use other things but their priorities have not shifted.

Plus a mix of degrees/majors. They can't have 1600 CS majors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP. I agree, there should be a similar number of white and asian students at most of these schools except at the MOST selective schools because at the 1550+ level asians outnumber whites by 2::1

Schools are allowed to decide that, above a certain very high score, differences don't matter for admissions purposes.

But they are not allowed to select the white student over the asians student because they want more white kids.

But if the kind of diversity that they're seeking regarding geography or extracurricular activities has the coincidental effect of admitting white over Asian applicants, that's still allowed.

This.

I think some posters never contemplated that there are reasons why the super high scoring and high GPA Asian American applicants weren't getting spots at all the top schools that had nothing to do with race. Schools don't actually want classes of super intense heavily "pushed" academic achievers. They want a good mix of high achieving students who are naturally curious and intelligent and have a broad range of strengths and interests and also reflect a broad range of backgrounds and experiences. They used to use race explicitly to accomplish this and now they can't so they use other things but their priorities have not shifted.

Start seeing Asian Americans as people.

No YOU start seeing them as people.

Do you actually know any Asian American students who attend top colleges? I do and guess what-- they are not universally top scoring hyper-achievers in academics. They are not all in STEM. They did not all attend "top" high schools. Like the kids if other races at these schools, they tend to be wickedly smart and hard working while also being well rounded with genuine curiosity in their areas of academic study as well as personal hobbies and passions. They are different from one another and from other students they went to HS with and from of at debts at their university. To my knowledge none if them had over a 1550 on the SAT.

These students -- these Asian American students -- were admitted to these schools not because they are the smartest kids in the country or got the highest test scores. They were admitted because they are the whole package. If say the same thing about the black and Hispanic and white and native and mixed race kids I know at these schools. If you spend a lot of time around students at top schools you come to recognize the type and it becomes obvious why these schools don't just base admissions on test scores.

Which is why your obsession with the test scores of Asian American applicants as compared to other applicants misguided. You are missing the forest for ONE tree.

Most Asian Americans go to community college dude.

Don't believe the hype.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wonder how people would feel if admissions was largely based on SAT score and this resulted in classes at top schools heavily skewed towards men and mem are significantly more likely to score higher on the SAT than women

As overall students, women are better than men, and it’d be interesting to see what these colleges’ classes would look like if they stopped their 50/50 gender policies and went blind.

STEM (except stuff that can get you into medical school) would be vastly more male, most other majors would be vastly more female.

Which is a cultural issue that should be fixed, not an admissions one. Many other countries have women more represented in all stem subjects, so it comes down to understanding why there’s such a massive gap in the US, and why our standardized exam results in women with worse scores across the board

I think the gap in stem is mostly cultural and not really a big concern considering there are more women in law schools and medical schools than men.

The gap in standardized test scores are at the tails. Women have slightly higher average test scores but there are more men at the very bottom and the very tops of the curve.

I'd prefer our brightest minds in engineering and chem grad schools, not in law school.

No one cares what you'd prefer.

That’s a great way to shut down our society from discourse bozo. No one asked for your opinion on my comment either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP. I agree, there should be a similar number of white and asian students at most of these schools except at the MOST selective schools because at the 1550+ level asians outnumber whites by 2::1

Schools are allowed to decide that, above a certain very high score, differences don't matter for admissions purposes.

But they are not allowed to select the white student over the asians student because they want more white kids.

But if the kind of diversity that they're seeking regarding geography or extracurricular activities has the coincidental effect of admitting white over Asian applicants, that's still allowed.

This.

I think some posters never contemplated that there are reasons why the super high scoring and high GPA Asian American applicants weren't getting spots at all the top schools that had nothing to do with race. Schools don't actually want classes of super intense heavily "pushed" academic achievers. They want a good mix of high achieving students who are naturally curious and intelligent and have a broad range of strengths and interests and also reflect a broad range of backgrounds and experiences. They used to use race explicitly to accomplish this and now they can't so they use other things but their priorities have not shifted.

Start seeing Asian Americans as people.

No YOU start seeing them as people.

Do you actually know any Asian American students who attend top colleges? I do and guess what-- they are not universally top scoring hyper-achievers in academics. They are not all in STEM. They did not all attend "top" high schools. Like the kids if other races at these schools, they tend to be wickedly smart and hard working while also being well rounded with genuine curiosity in their areas of academic study as well as personal hobbies and passions. They are different from one another and from other students they went to HS with and from of at debts at their university. To my knowledge none if them had over a 1550 on the SAT.

These students -- these Asian American students -- were admitted to these schools not because they are the smartest kids in the country or got the highest test scores. They were admitted because they are the whole package. If say the same thing about the black and Hispanic and white and native and mixed race kids I know at these schools. If you spend a lot of time around students at top schools you come to recognize the type and it becomes obvious why these schools don't just base admissions on test scores.

Which is why your obsession with the test scores of Asian American applicants as compared to other applicants misguided. You are missing the forest for ONE tree.

That was kind of my point

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wonder how people would feel if admissions was largely based on SAT score and this resulted in classes at top schools heavily skewed towards men and mem are significantly more likely to score higher on the SAT than women

As overall students, women are better than men, and it’d be interesting to see what these colleges’ classes would look like if they stopped their 50/50 gender policies and went blind.

STEM (except stuff that can get you into medical school) would be vastly more male, most other majors would be vastly more female.

Which is a cultural issue that should be fixed, not an admissions one. Many other countries have women more represented in all stem subjects, so it comes down to understanding why there’s such a massive gap in the US, and why our standardized exam results in women with worse scores across the board

I think the gap in stem is mostly cultural and not really a big concern considering there are more women in law schools and medical schools than men.

The gap in standardized test scores are at the tails. Women have slightly higher average test scores but there are more men at the very bottom and the very tops of the curve.

Correct about distribution of test scores which is precisely why the poster who keeps insisting that if a school doesn't just auto-admit everyone with above a 1550 on the SAT they are racist is not making sense. Schools know some students have outlier test scores and that is why they tend to view test scores as a threshhold factor instead of a ranking factor. They will look at students who have scores and GPAs above a specific threshhold but once you are in this group they will look at the totality of the application not simply rank the students by scores. And that includes "squishy" factors like whether the student brings a unique perspective or skill set to the school that could benefit the school as a whole. Thus it is generally not in a school's interest to simply admit all the highest scoring students who also often tend to share a lot of the same characteristics -- they lean male and and Asian and tend to have similar backgrounds. Well schools don't want a bunch of identical kids so they recruit kids with lower scores in order ot keep it diverse. This is legal even under the SC ruling and considered beneficial by most people applying to these schools.

By "considered beneficial [for] most people applying to these schools" you mean the people that have sh!tty SAT scores are the ones who like the policy that includes them. Rephrase this as, "people that have superior GPA/SAT scores don't agree with letting dumber people jump in front of them." Or else, why even take classes in high school? Should just spend all that wasted time trying to be holistic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wonder how people would feel if admissions was largely based on SAT score and this resulted in classes at top schools heavily skewed towards men and mem are significantly more likely to score higher on the SAT than women

As overall students, women are better than men, and it’d be interesting to see what these colleges’ classes would look like if they stopped their 50/50 gender policies and went blind.

STEM (except stuff that can get you into medical school) would be vastly more male, most other majors would be vastly more female.

Which is a cultural issue that should be fixed, not an admissions one. Many other countries have women more represented in all stem subjects, so it comes down to understanding why there’s such a massive gap in the US, and why our standardized exam results in women with worse scores across the board

I think the gap in stem is mostly cultural and not really a big concern considering there are more women in law schools and medical schools than men.

The gap in standardized test scores are at the tails. Women have slightly higher average test scores but there are more men at the very bottom and the very tops of the curve.

I'd prefer our brightest minds in engineering and chem grad schools, not in law school.

What if they would rather be ruth bader ginsburg than marie curie.
What if they would rather heal people than design gizmos?

Yeah PP doesn't get that this isn't a communist country that will force people into professions based on aptitude tests for the "good of the country." In the US people get to decide what to study and what careers to pursue and there is no government entity screening and selecting for them and this is actually something most Americans really like about being here.

We boosted stem education and its importance of those fields historically…to beat communism. A degree choice is a social one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP. I agree, there should be a similar number of white and asian students at most of these schools except at the MOST selective schools because at the 1550+ level asians outnumber whites by 2::1

Schools are allowed to decide that, above a certain very high score, differences don't matter for admissions purposes.

But they are not allowed to select the white student over the asians student because they want more white kids.

But if the kind of diversity that they're seeking regarding geography or extracurricular activities has the coincidental effect of admitting white over Asian applicants, that's still allowed.

This.

I think some posters never contemplated that there are reasons why the super high scoring and high GPA Asian American applicants weren't getting spots at all the top schools that had nothing to do with race. Schools don't actually want classes of super intense heavily "pushed" academic achievers. They want a good mix of high achieving students who are naturally curious and intelligent and have a broad range of strengths and interests and also reflect a broad range of backgrounds and experiences. They used to use race explicitly to accomplish this and now they can't so they use other things but their priorities have not shifted.

Plus a mix of degrees/majors. They can't have 1600 CS majors.

The 1600 CS majors most likely will run laps around the liberal arts majors in their majors. Or else why are LA majors allowed to take dumbed down versions of science and math classes to fulfill requirements? Should science majors be taking phonics classes then?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wonder how people would feel if admissions was largely based on SAT score and this resulted in classes at top schools heavily skewed towards men and mem are significantly more likely to score higher on the SAT than women

As overall students, women are better than men, and it’d be interesting to see what these colleges’ classes would look like if they stopped their 50/50 gender policies and went blind.

STEM (except stuff that can get you into medical school) would be vastly more male, most other majors would be vastly more female.

Which is a cultural issue that should be fixed, not an admissions one. Many other countries have women more represented in all stem subjects, so it comes down to understanding why there’s such a massive gap in the US, and why our standardized exam results in women with worse scores across the board

I think the gap in stem is mostly cultural and not really a big concern considering there are more women in law schools and medical schools than men.

The gap in standardized test scores are at the tails. Women have slightly higher average test scores but there are more men at the very bottom and the very tops of the curve.

Correct about distribution of test scores which is precisely why the poster who keeps insisting that if a school doesn't just auto-admit everyone with above a 1550 on the SAT they are racist is not making sense. Schools know some students have outlier test scores and that is why they tend to view test scores as a threshhold factor instead of a ranking factor. They will look at students who have scores and GPAs above a specific threshhold but once you are in this group they will look at the totality of the application not simply rank the students by scores. And that includes "squishy" factors like whether the student brings a unique perspective or skill set to the school that could benefit the school as a whole. Thus it is generally not in a school's interest to simply admit all the highest scoring students who also often tend to share a lot of the same characteristics -- they lean male and and Asian and tend to have similar backgrounds. Well schools don't want a bunch of identical kids so they recruit kids with lower scores in order ot keep it diverse. This is legal even under the SC ruling and considered beneficial by most people applying to these schools.

By "considered beneficial [for] most people applying to these schools" you mean the people that have sh!tty SAT scores are the ones who like the policy that includes them. Rephrase this as, "people that have superior GPA/SAT scores don't agree with letting dumber people jump in front of them." Or else, why even take classes in high school? Should just spend all that wasted time trying to be holistic.

You’re categorizing a 1540 as a sh!tty score. No college agrees with you. And yes, pretty much all of them will tell a kid who already has a 1540 that he would be better off getting involved in his community than grinding over SAT prep.

[Anonymous]

It's all relative. I didn't give a cutoff number, that was someone else. Standard deviations exist for a reason and so do percentiles. Let's say there are 5000 people above your 1540 (hypothetical score) and only 1000 spots open, of which some percentage of spots are set aside for athletes or legacy or whomever. Then yes, that "1540" is sh!tty. Go find another school where the "1540" is on the other side of the equation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP. I agree, there should be a similar number of white and asian students at most of these schools except at the MOST selective schools because at the 1550+ level asians outnumber whites by 2::1

Schools are allowed to decide that, above a certain very high score, differences don't matter for admissions purposes.

A score of 700 on each section of the SAT is enough to do predictably well at the best schools, assuming a solid high GPA.

No it's not. That's a standard deviation below the best students.

Both result in college GPA above the mean.

It depends on the college.

if the college gives everybody an A then sure. But try it at a real college like MIT as see what happens to your GPA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP. I agree, there should be a similar number of white and asian students at most of these schools except at the MOST selective schools because at the 1550+ level asians outnumber whites by 2::1

Schools are allowed to decide that, above a certain very high score, differences don't matter for admissions purposes.

But they are not allowed to select the white student over the asians student because they want more white kids.

But if the kind of diversity that they're seeking regarding geography or extracurricular activities has the coincidental effect of admitting white over Asian applicants, that's still allowed.

Yes as long as they can't prove you were using geography as an artifice for racial discrimination.