Will Admissions Officers pick up on clues in application regarding URM?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those who think colleges already have a workaround in place, I did not see many URMs at my kid's ivy. Just walk around. This is admittedly a sample size of 1 ivy. However, I've not been able to verify published URM demographics.

Well, you will see significantly fewer URM kids in the future. Free gravy train is over.

What I meant was when colleges claim that nothing will change, my suspicious mind says they will simply exaggerate the percentage of black students on their campus. That's their workaround.

As far as I know no colleges have claimed that. They all say they will continue to work to find a different path. But as AP article (link up-thread) reported, they have not identified a workaround. Many have tried, none found.

The one who claim nothing will change are some DCUM posters here. I think many of them are still in denial and, it appears, many don't read news.

I think OP's question is off. Ivies publicly claim they will continue to try to diversify. The reality is that there aren't that many black students to begin with. What they say publicly may not be what they do in private.

I don't doubt they will continue to try that. This decision just makes it more difficult. The fact you didn't see too many of URMs on campus doesn't necessary mean the school didn't try hard enough. It just means that, even w/ help of AA, there just aren't enough URM kids to select from.

Keep believing that, while Ling Ling gets rejected.

There are enough high stats URMs to get to the 5-6% average at elite colleges for Blacks, 7-8% for Hispanics, and 0 5% for Native Americans.

Define "high stats"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The supreme court decision literally said, on page 39 paragraph 3, that NO proxies for race may be used if their effect is to make a preference for one race over another. So the short answer to this thread is that, no, admissions officers may not "pick up on clues" because it is unconstitutional and subject to additional litigation

So the SAT is now unconstitutional? SAT score is a pretty good proxy for race. It definitely “makes a preference for one race over another.”

The Court meant you can’t redline. It didn’t mean schools have to drop all admissions criteria that disproportionately favor members of particular groups.

No, that is not what the court meant. It specifically said "soft methods." The SAT is a meritorious and hard measure of academic achievement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The supreme court decision literally said, on page 39 paragraph 3, that NO proxies for race may be used if their effect is to make a preference for one race over another. So the short answer to this thread is that, no, admissions officers may not "pick up on clues" because it is unconstitutional and subject to additional litigation

So the SAT is now unconstitutional? SAT score is a pretty good proxy for race. It definitely “makes a preference for one race over another.”

The Court meant you can’t redline. It didn’t mean schools have to drop all admissions criteria that disproportionately favor members of particular groups.

No, that is not what the court meant. It specifically said "soft methods." The SAT is a meritorious and hard measure of academic achievement.

I cannot find the word “soft” or “methods” in the majority opinion, let alone the phrase “soft methods.” Do you have a pin cite?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The supreme court decision literally said, on page 39 paragraph 3, that NO proxies for race may be used if their effect is to make a preference for one race over another. So the short answer to this thread is that, no, admissions officers may not "pick up on clues" because it is unconstitutional and subject to additional litigation

So the SAT is now unconstitutional? SAT score is a pretty good proxy for race. It definitely “makes a preference for one race over another.”

The Court meant you can’t redline. It didn’t mean schools have to drop all admissions criteria that disproportionately favor members of particular groups.

No, that is not what the court meant. It specifically said "soft methods." The SAT is a meritorious and hard measure of academic achievement.

I cannot find the word “soft” or “methods” in the majority opinion, let alone the phrase “soft methods.” Do you have a pin cite?

You're, right. I'm sorry, it did not say that. Here is what it said on page 39:

But,despite the dissent’s assertion to the contrary, universities
may not simply establish through application essays or
other means the regime we hold unlawful today. (A dissent-
ing opinion is generally not the best source of legal advice
on how to comply with the majority opinion.) “[W]hat can-
not be done directly cannot be done indirectly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How are the uber-wealthy URMs, many of whom go to elite private schools in the DMV (we all know them), going to write essays talking about how disadvantaged they are? These are kids who have been getting into Ivies, etc., but I'm not sure they will be anymore. This is the group the USSC decision will impact most, not the first gen URMs or URMs at privates on financial aid.

The essays can come from inspiration as well. Read Justice Roberts concurring opinion.

[Anonymous]

^^^^ I think I was interpreting the "indirectly" part as meaning soft methods. But it may well be broader than that

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those who think colleges already have a workaround in place, I did not see many URMs at my kid's ivy. Just walk around. This is admittedly a sample size of 1 ivy. However, I've not been able to verify published URM demographics.

Well, you will see significantly fewer URM kids in the future. Free gravy train is over.

What I meant was when colleges claim that nothing will change, my suspicious mind says they will simply exaggerate the percentage of black students on their campus. That's their workaround.

As far as I know no colleges have claimed that. They all say they will continue to work to find a different path. But as AP article (link up-thread) reported, they have not identified a workaround. Many have tried, none found.

The one who claim nothing will change are some DCUM posters here. I think many of them are still in denial and, it appears, many don't read news.

I think OP's question is off. Ivies publicly claim they will continue to try to diversify. The reality is that there aren't that many black students to begin with. What they say publicly may not be what they do in private.

I don't doubt they will continue to try that. This decision just makes it more difficult. The fact you didn't see too many of URMs on campus doesn't necessary mean the school didn't try hard enough. It just means that, even w/ help of AA, there just aren't enough URM kids to select from.

Keep believing that, while Ling Ling gets rejected.

There are enough high stats URMs to get to the 5-6% average at elite colleges for Blacks, 7-8% for Hispanics, and 0 5% for Native Americans.

But Harvard is already 14-15% black acceptance rate. You mean they're going to go down?

Harvard is Harvard. 14-15% is above the 13% average. Great. It'll probably come down to 12-13%.

The 5-6% is the average for elite colleges- plural.

I'd be skeptical of the 14-15% black rate at Harvard. I've not been to its campus but I'd like to know if anyone here has, and whether they saw that many black students at Harvard.

Harvard has been lying about Jews and Asians. Why wouldn't they lie about blacks? When Karens are called out, the first thing they say is, "I have a black friend, a black nanny, a landscaper..."

Trust the 14-15% stat - but verify.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How are the uber-wealthy URMs, many of whom go to elite private schools in the DMV (we all know them), going to write essays talking about how disadvantaged they are? These are kids who have been getting into Ivies, etc., but I'm not sure they will be anymore. This is the group the USSC decision will impact most, not the first gen URMs or URMs at privates on financial aid.

The essays can come from inspiration as well. Read Justice Roberts concurring opinion.

Robert's opinion states the following regarding essays:

But,despite the dissent’s assertion to the contrary, universities
may not simply establish through application essays or
other means the regime we hold unlawful today. (A dissent-
ing opinion is generally not the best source of legal advice
on how to comply with the majority opinion.) “[W]hat can-
not be done directly cannot be done indirectly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Students are allowed to say whatever they want to say in an essay. As far as I know, schools are fully entitled to ask applicants to voluntarily identify their race. Schools will easily—and appropriately—be able to give URMs a boost, if necessary. The decision provides a road map for colleges to follow. As a practical matter, little will change.

No, schools cannot do that per court decision. I don't know why you believe little will change. Read CA school system's failed effort.

Actually I think in the last year or two CA schools have definitely made changes that increase URM populations. They’ve eliminated standardized testing, and in the last admissions cycle clearly gave boosts to some heavily URM HSs. This mostly benefited Hispanics from what I remember.

This is true...the reports talking about how diverse the UCs are now, it's because of Hispanics. The number of black students at UCs is very small.

The black population in CA is very small. And?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are ALOT of white kids who genuinely believe they are part of the minority. Some examples:

Kids who have a second cousin who is Muslim.

Some Jewish kids.

Kids who lived in a third world country when their diplomat parent’s job required a move.

These are just examples, but I could easily se an essay that could confuse an AO.

Seeing how Jewish people make up at most 2 percent of the population, that seems like a valid claim to minority status.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How are the uber-wealthy URMs, many of whom go to elite private schools in the DMV (we all know them), going to write essays talking about how disadvantaged they are? These are kids who have been getting into Ivies, etc., but I'm not sure they will be anymore. This is the group the USSC decision will impact most, not the first gen URMs or URMs at privates on financial aid.

My fcps kids have had both encountered racism at their school. One lunchroom experience was blatantly racist with vile, disgusting words spewed at my middle school child. They’ve faced racial challenges in their ECs as well - in one fcps EC, the teacher in charge had to lecture the kids multiple times to cut out their racist remarks. My wealthy-ish nephews, in a state further south have been called the n-word, to their faces during their sports MULTIPLE times. And yay, now they all are lucky enough to have to re-live and capture these moments (including the grit, endurance, and determination they needed to push ahead and continue to prevail) in their college essays to prove racist experiences still exist to the courts & people like you!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All you constitutional scholars should recognize that applicants still have their First Amendment rights. No one needs to "hint" anything.

Exactly.

[Anonymous]

This Supreme Court decision is a nothing burger in so many ways. The self soothing fantasy that someone (who?) will be carefully scrutinizing colleges as they use Roberts’ loophole for all it’s worth is laughable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How are the uber-wealthy URMs, many of whom go to elite private schools in the DMV (we all know them), going to write essays talking about how disadvantaged they are? These are kids who have been getting into Ivies, etc., but I'm not sure they will be anymore. This is the group the USSC decision will impact most, not the first gen URMs or URMs at privates on financial aid.

The essays can come from inspiration as well. Read Justice Roberts concurring opinion.

Robert's opinion states the following regarding essays:

But,despite the dissent’s assertion to the contrary, universities
may not simply establish through application essays or
other means the regime we hold unlawful today. (A dissent-
ing opinion is generally not the best source of legal advice
on how to comply with the majority opinion.) “[W]hat can-
not be done directly cannot be done indirectly.

You missed this part:

“Nothing in this opinion should be construed as prohibiting universities from considering an applicant’s discussion of how race affected his or her life, be it through discrimination, inspiration or otherwise.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Students are allowed to say whatever they want to say in an essay. As far as I know, schools are fully entitled to ask applicants to voluntarily identify their race. Schools will easily—and appropriately—be able to give URMs a boost, if necessary. The decision provides a road map for colleges to follow. As a practical matter, little will change.

You have not been following what has transpired in states that implemented this policy. Bottom line is Black admits will sharply decline and Asian admits will increase.

I know people like to point to California here, but there are some key differences. The first is that California has many many more Asian American residents than most of the rest of the country, so the numbers will look different for in-state schools no matter what. The second is that the California figures look at the entire state, across all UC and Cal State systems. For a variety of reasons, including systemic racism, there may not be enough "highly qualified" URMs for admissions to match demographics for Black and Latino applicants.

But this conversation is about "elite colleges," which we can assume means T25, and some of which are very small at the undergraduate level. If a college decides racial diversity, and avoiding a substantial drop in Black and Latino candidates, is important to them, there are absolutely enough "highly qualified" URMs to make sure that happens.

+1