Some facts about Holistic Admissions Criteria from Stanford Daily

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The obsession with test scores and grades as a measure of meritocracy is laughable. What kind of merit do they measure? They don't aren't even very good predictors of college grades. (The College Board says all 3 SAT scores plus high school GPA have a correlation coefficient of just 0.48) There are a lot of factors that go into predicting whether a child will thrive at any given institution. There is no reason to privilege SAT and GPA over every other potential measure.

The silliest part of this never ending debate is to compare the US higher education system to India, China, S. Korea, and Japan. In all those countries, there is an very strong correlation between income and admission to the top schools, even though admission is strictly test-based. Wealthy students are more likely to get in to BeiDa and IIT and Tokyo than into HYP. And in every one of those countries, the education ministries are deeply concerned that their schools fail to produce innovative thinkers and want to overhaul their systems to reduce academic burdens and reliance on test scores. Since the vast majority of students are destined to fail in those systems (as defined as admission to a top school), the pressure is enormous and everything besides test taking is tossed aside.

Why in the world should the US imitate higher education system that other countries are trying to make more like ours?

This makes some sense to me. I think some folks seem to think the US system is based solely on test scores and that would be "merit." IMO, there is a lot more to merit than perfect test scores. Any reasonably intelligent kid could get them with the right amount of prep. The selective schools are looking for more than that. They want to see passion, leadership, etc. (and money probably helps).

"For the millionth time, this response will address the same issue so pay attention:

Asian Americans do not argue for test scores or gpas to trump over other factors. In fact, colleges can use all the objective and subjective criteria they want to use. That is fine and dandy.

The problem is, pay attention now, the various criteria are APPLIED DIFFERENTLY based on race. Again Asians DO NOT complain about the factors used in college admissions at all. Asians only want them APPLIED CONSISTENTLY without illegal racial discrimination where one race has to show higher test scores, higher gpas, more club activities, more awards, more officer positions, more volunteer hours etc. That is the problem, not that colleges use test scores or gpas. I am sure this will have to be repeated over and over since someone will come back and say exactly the same thing: Why should we only look at SAT scores?, SAT doesn't show creativity, SAT doesn't predict college success, we don't want rote memorization, higher income will boost SAT scores etc. "

This is exactly right. The problem is the criteria are being applied different. It is unabashed racism. When colleges are ADDING 150 to 175 points (per the Princeton review) to Black and Hispanic scores because they are Black and Hispanic, colleges are being racist. End of.

There is also the HUGE issue of Caucasian, Indian and Asian students having to work to super-human ideals in order to impress a bunch of admissions counselors who don't work nearly has hard as those they are judging. It's wholly disgusting.

NP here. I am an Asian. I know there is reverse racism in college admission, however would like to know if there is any irrefutable evidence for the above statement. If there is why cannot concerned parents band together to bring class action suit? Any Asian lawyers here?

I am tired of living like "second class" citizen in this country working extra hard for every opportunity, that other races can avail much easier because they were treated poorly in the past by certain race.

I'm the one who just posted the link. There is a class-action suit against Harvard. There is also a SC case from a white girl re: U. Texas Austin: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/30/us/supreme-court-will-reconsider-affirmative-action-case.html?_r=0

As a white Jewish woman with a white daughter who was systematically shut out of almost every college she applied to (non-Ivys but good schools nonetheless), even with stellar credentials (she is 'unhooked' though), I feel your outrage and completely support you.

I'm confused. So whites aren't getting in, Asians aren't getting in and the AA/Hispanic numbers aren't really that high. So who is getting the spots?

it's about admission criteria that are race based. pure form of racism and discrimination.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The obsession with test scores and grades as a measure of meritocracy is laughable. What kind of merit do they measure? They don't aren't even very good predictors of college grades. (The College Board says all 3 SAT scores plus high school GPA have a correlation coefficient of just 0.48) There are a lot of factors that go into predicting whether a child will thrive at any given institution. There is no reason to privilege SAT and GPA over every other potential measure.

The silliest part of this never ending debate is to compare the US higher education system to India, China, S. Korea, and Japan. In all those countries, there is an very strong correlation between income and admission to the top schools, even though admission is strictly test-based. Wealthy students are more likely to get in to BeiDa and IIT and Tokyo than into HYP. And in every one of those countries, the education ministries are deeply concerned that their schools fail to produce innovative thinkers and want to overhaul their systems to reduce academic burdens and reliance on test scores. Since the vast majority of students are destined to fail in those systems (as defined as admission to a top school), the pressure is enormous and everything besides test taking is tossed aside.

Why in the world should the US imitate higher education system that other countries are trying to make more like ours?

This makes some sense to me. I think some folks seem to think the US system is based solely on test scores and that would be "merit." IMO, there is a lot more to merit than perfect test scores. Any reasonably intelligent kid could get them with the right amount of prep. The selective schools are looking for more than that. They want to see passion, leadership, etc. (and money probably helps).

"For the millionth time, this response will address the same issue so pay attention:

Asian Americans do not argue for test scores or gpas to trump over other factors. In fact, colleges can use all the objective and subjective criteria they want to use. That is fine and dandy.

The problem is, pay attention now, the various criteria are APPLIED DIFFERENTLY based on race. Again Asians DO NOT complain about the factors used in college admissions at all. Asians only want them APPLIED CONSISTENTLY without illegal racial discrimination where one race has to show higher test scores, higher gpas, more club activities, more awards, more officer positions, more volunteer hours etc. That is the problem, not that colleges use test scores or gpas. I am sure this will have to be repeated over and over since someone will come back and say exactly the same thing: Why should we only look at SAT scores?, SAT doesn't show creativity, SAT doesn't predict college success, we don't want rote memorization, higher income will boost SAT scores etc. "

This is exactly right. The problem is the criteria are being applied different. It is unabashed racism. When colleges are ADDING 150 to 175 points (per the Princeton review) to Black and Hispanic scores because they are Black and Hispanic, colleges are being racist. End of.

There is also the HUGE issue of Caucasian, Indian and Asian students having to work to super-human ideals in order to impress a bunch of admissions counselors who don't work nearly has hard as those they are judging. It's wholly disgusting.

It's not racist. It's balancing the effects of a biased instrument so that that it reflects the actual performance of the test groups more honestly. Those tests underpredict the performance of black and Hispanic students. On the whole, when you look at how well black and Hispance students do in college, on actual college work, they do better than standardized tests predict. Giving those candidates an extra 150 - 175 points in the admissions criteria means that their test scores more accurately reflect how well they will do on the actual work.

Cultural expectations and cultural bias affecting outcomes on tests are a very real thing. When you have huge cultural messages about how certain groups do on tests, people tend to perform to the expectations of their group. Ie. if you take a group of Asian American women and remind them that Asians are good at math, they will do better on a math test than other people on the test. If you take a group fo Asian American women and remind that women are bad at math, they will do worse than other people on the test. Their performance matches the cultural expectations that they were primed with. This has been widely tested and works for all genders and races across a variety of situations. This mechanism doesn't even take into account any bias in the test itself, which can also create problems .

Since we know the tests underpredict actual performance for some groups and we know that the cultural bias mechanism is in play for those groups, I don't find anything unfair about adjusting the results across the group. Test scores are just used to predict performance. If they need to be adjusted to accurately predict performance than so be it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Want to see the jokesters who control your kids' futures? Note the AGE of some of these admissions counselors: 25? PLEASE!

From the Daily Beast article referenced below:

Former admissions officer at elite, small liberal arts college in the Northeast, age 25

“One year I had a student with a near-perfect SAT score and straight A’s. I’d originally put him in the submitted pile, but then we had to reduce the list. I reread his essays and frankly, they were just a little more boring than the other kids. So I cut him. Boring was the only justification that I needed and he was out.

Former admissions officer, elite, small liberal arts college in Massachusetts:

We were always looking for candidates from underrepresented groups. So if you are just a typical white girl from New Jersey and your application didn’t pass muster, it was relegated to the reject pile without a second thought. With a minority kid with the same stats, you just can’t do that. They always warrant a second or even third look.”

And my personal favorite from the same 25 year old above:

"One night, I got food poisoning at a restaurant in Buffalo. The next day, I rejected all the Buffalo applications."


http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2009/01/09/dirty-secrets-of-college-admissions.html

Boring is a good reason to eliminate that candidate. THe admissions counselor had a whole pile of qualified kids. Picking more interesting kids who have more interesting ideas or have more interesting experiences or more interesting interests over "perfect" score robots is entirely reasonable. Perfect score robots are a dime-a-dozen.

Treating a minority kid with perfect numbers with a little more consideraton is also reaosnable. They are more rare.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Want to see the jokesters who control your kids' futures? Note the AGE of some of these admissions counselors: 25? PLEASE!

From the Daily Beast article referenced below:

Former admissions officer at elite, small liberal arts college in the Northeast, age 25

“One year I had a student with a near-perfect SAT score and straight A’s. I’d originally put him in the submitted pile, but then we had to reduce the list. I reread his essays and frankly, they were just a little more boring than the other kids. So I cut him. Boring was the only justification that I needed and he was out.

Former admissions officer, elite, small liberal arts college in Massachusetts:

We were always looking for candidates from underrepresented groups. So if you are just a typical white girl from New Jersey and your application didn’t pass muster, it was relegated to the reject pile without a second thought. With a minority kid with the same stats, you just can’t do that. They always warrant a second or even third look.”

And my personal favorite from the same 25 year old above:

"One night, I got food poisoning at a restaurant in Buffalo. The next day, I rejected all the Buffalo applications."


http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2009/01/09/dirty-secrets-of-college-admissions.html

Boring is a good reason to eliminate that candidate. THe admissions counselor had a whole pile of qualified kids. Picking more interesting kids who have more interesting ideas or have more interesting experiences or more interesting interests over "perfect" score robots is entirely reasonable. Perfect score robots are a dime-a-dozen.

Treating a minority kid with perfect numbers with a little more consideraton is also reaosnable. They are more rare.

"Boring" is too subjective. Why is it ok to say something like "perfect score robots" but not ok to say something like "Athletic but not sharp" ?

Asian American is a minority along with blacks and Hispanics. Also, the point is we are not only discussing the scores. ALL of the admissions criteria are tilted against Asians not just the SAT scores or the GPA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My advice is to stop giving colleges this much power to begin with.

Their power only works on the "Ivy or bust" mindset.

Not true. A lot of colleges now use the holistics process. My daughter did not apply to one Ivy and was rejected by most colleges she applied to, and she hit all their hot buttons and then some. She didn't have a hook though, and is white.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:more asians need to focus on sports instead. I am one of 4 asian siblings and I was the only one not to get into an elite college even though I had similar or better stats than my younger siblings.

I'm much older than them - I played sports but never trained in them with the mindset of using it as a 'hook' - we didn't understand that stuff. After I went through the process, I realized the best hook is getting recruited for sports so my younger siblings were all put in sports that they were good at - but the key difference is they were then pushed to excel in them by putting them in the best teams and sacrificing for them to play in the best competitions.

the results speak for themselves.

So my advice to tj/asian kids parents - make your kid focus on a sport and then make it like it is the 4th section of the SAT's.

My advice would be to stop trying to find a formula and let your kid be who they are. Colleges can spot the paint-by-number robots a mile away.

My advice is to stop giving colleges this much power to begin with.

Exactly. Nobody with means is "shut out" of college. If you can't go to Harvard or Stanford or Williams or Amherst or UVA, go to Emory or Tulane or American or Kenyon or Kalamazoo or Occidental or JMU or Mary Washington.

Bingo. A college is as good as the work you are willing to put in.

However that does NOT give the right for college to blatantly discriminate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The obsession with test scores and grades as a measure of meritocracy is laughable. What kind of merit do they measure? They don't aren't even very good predictors of college grades. (The College Board says all 3 SAT scores plus high school GPA have a correlation coefficient of just 0.48) There are a lot of factors that go into predicting whether a child will thrive at any given institution. There is no reason to privilege SAT and GPA over every other potential measure.

The silliest part of this never ending debate is to compare the US higher education system to India, China, S. Korea, and Japan. In all those countries, there is an very strong correlation between income and admission to the top schools, even though admission is strictly test-based. Wealthy students are more likely to get in to BeiDa and IIT and Tokyo than into HYP. And in every one of those countries, the education ministries are deeply concerned that their schools fail to produce innovative thinkers and want to overhaul their systems to reduce academic burdens and reliance on test scores. Since the vast majority of students are destined to fail in those systems (as defined as admission to a top school), the pressure is enormous and everything besides test taking is tossed aside.

Why in the world should the US imitate higher education system that other countries are trying to make more like ours?

This makes some sense to me. I think some folks seem to think the US system is based solely on test scores and that would be "merit." IMO, there is a lot more to merit than perfect test scores. Any reasonably intelligent kid could get them with the right amount of prep. The selective schools are looking for more than that. They want to see passion, leadership, etc. (and money probably helps).

"For the millionth time, this response will address the same issue so pay attention:

Asian Americans do not argue for test scores or gpas to trump over other factors. In fact, colleges can use all the objective and subjective criteria they want to use. That is fine and dandy.

The problem is, pay attention now, the various criteria are APPLIED DIFFERENTLY based on race. Again Asians DO NOT complain about the factors used in college admissions at all. Asians only want them APPLIED CONSISTENTLY without illegal racial discrimination where one race has to show higher test scores, higher gpas, more club activities, more awards, more officer positions, more volunteer hours etc. That is the problem, not that colleges use test scores or gpas. I am sure this will have to be repeated over and over since someone will come back and say exactly the same thing: Why should we only look at SAT scores?, SAT doesn't show creativity, SAT doesn't predict college success, we don't want rote memorization, higher income will boost SAT scores etc. "

This is exactly right. The problem is the criteria are being applied different. It is unabashed racism. When colleges are ADDING 150 to 175 points (per the Princeton review) to Black and Hispanic scores because they are Black and Hispanic, colleges are being racist. End of.

There is also the HUGE issue of Caucasian, Indian and Asian students having to work to super-human ideals in order to impress a bunch of admissions counselors who don't work nearly has hard as those they are judging. It's wholly disgusting.

NP here. I am an Asian. I know there is reverse racism in college admission, however would like to know if there is any irrefutable evidence for the above statement. If there is why cannot concerned parents band together to bring class action suit? Any Asian lawyers here?

I am tired of living like "second class" citizen in this country working extra hard for every opportunity, that other races can avail much easier because they were treated poorly in the past by certain race.

I'm the one who just posted the link. There is a class-action suit against Harvard. There is also a SC case from a white girl re: U. Texas Austin: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/30/us/supreme-court-will-reconsider-affirmative-action-case.html?_r=0

As a white Jewish woman with a white daughter who was systematically shut out of almost every college she applied to (non-Ivys but good schools nonetheless), even with stellar credentials (she is 'unhooked' though), I feel your outrage and completely support you.

I'm confused. So whites aren't getting in, Asians aren't getting in and the AA/Hispanic numbers aren't really that high. So who is getting the spots?

The point is that there are blatant rejections from students who have much higher qualifications in favor of other races. This is why the Fisher case is being re-visited by the SC. You think it's fair to take points off an Asian kid's test score and add points to a Black or Hispanic kid's simply due to race?

My husband said the other day "Oh, good, to women are graduating from Ranger school" My response was 'tell that to the guys that she has to pull off the battlefield". Then I asked him if he really wants a woman firefighter my size to be the one to get him out of a burning building. Crickets. He knows there's no way I could physically do that if he was passed out from smoke inhalation.

Sometimes what seems 'fair' is not at all fair and for multiple good reasons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The obsession with test scores and grades as a measure of meritocracy is laughable. What kind of merit do they measure? They don't aren't even very good predictors of college grades. (The College Board says all 3 SAT scores plus high school GPA have a correlation coefficient of just 0.48) There are a lot of factors that go into predicting whether a child will thrive at any given institution. There is no reason to privilege SAT and GPA over every other potential measure.

The silliest part of this never ending debate is to compare the US higher education system to India, China, S. Korea, and Japan. In all those countries, there is an very strong correlation between income and admission to the top schools, even though admission is strictly test-based. Wealthy students are more likely to get in to BeiDa and IIT and Tokyo than into HYP. And in every one of those countries, the education ministries are deeply concerned that their schools fail to produce innovative thinkers and want to overhaul their systems to reduce academic burdens and reliance on test scores. Since the vast majority of students are destined to fail in those systems (as defined as admission to a top school), the pressure is enormous and everything besides test taking is tossed aside.

Why in the world should the US imitate higher education system that other countries are trying to make more like ours?

This makes some sense to me. I think some folks seem to think the US system is based solely on test scores and that would be "merit." IMO, there is a lot more to merit than perfect test scores. Any reasonably intelligent kid could get them with the right amount of prep. The selective schools are looking for more than that. They want to see passion, leadership, etc. (and money probably helps).

"For the millionth time, this response will address the same issue so pay attention:

Asian Americans do not argue for test scores or gpas to trump over other factors. In fact, colleges can use all the objective and subjective criteria they want to use. That is fine and dandy.

The problem is, pay attention now, the various criteria are APPLIED DIFFERENTLY based on race. Again Asians DO NOT complain about the factors used in college admissions at all. Asians only want them APPLIED CONSISTENTLY without illegal racial discrimination where one race has to show higher test scores, higher gpas, more club activities, more awards, more officer positions, more volunteer hours etc. That is the problem, not that colleges use test scores or gpas. I am sure this will have to be repeated over and over since someone will come back and say exactly the same thing: Why should we only look at SAT scores?, SAT doesn't show creativity, SAT doesn't predict college success, we don't want rote memorization, higher income will boost SAT scores etc. "

This is exactly right. The problem is the criteria are being applied different. It is unabashed racism. When colleges are ADDING 150 to 175 points (per the Princeton review) to Black and Hispanic scores because they are Black and Hispanic, colleges are being racist. End of.

There is also the HUGE issue of Caucasian, Indian and Asian students having to work to super-human ideals in order to impress a bunch of admissions counselors who don't work nearly has hard as those they are judging. It's wholly disgusting.

It's not racist. It's balancing the effects of a biased instrument so that that it reflects the actual performance of the test groups more honestly. Those tests underpredict the performance of black and Hispanic students. On the whole, when you look at how well black and Hispance students do in college, on actual college work, they do better than standardized tests predict. Giving those candidates an extra 150 - 175 points in the admissions criteria means that their test scores more accurately reflect how well they will do on the actual work.

Cultural expectations and cultural bias affecting outcomes on tests are a very real thing. When you have huge cultural messages about how certain groups do on tests, people tend to perform to the expectations of their group. Ie. if you take a group of Asian American women and remind them that Asians are good at math, they will do better on a math test than other people on the test. If you take a group fo Asian American women and remind that women are bad at math, they will do worse than other people on the test. Their performance matches the cultural expectations that they were primed with. This has been widely tested and works for all genders and races across a variety of situations. This mechanism doesn't even take into account any bias in the test itself, which can also create problems .

Since we know the tests underpredict actual performance for some groups and we know that the cultural bias mechanism is in play for those groups, I don't find anything unfair about adjusting the results across the group. Test scores are just used to predict performance. If they need to be adjusted to accurately predict performance than so be it.

Sorry, not buying it. My daughter said it best: The problem is the public schools are failing these kids, and the colleges are now actively discriminating to cover up for government failure on multiple levels. She is 100% correct.

Fix it at that level - don't penalize other races.

[Anonymous]

The point is that there are blatant rejections from students who have much higher qualifications in favor of other races. This is why the Fisher case is being re-visited by the SC. You think it's fair to take points off an Asian kid's test score and add points to a Black or Hispanic kid's simply due to race?

My husband said the other day "Oh, good, to women are graduating from Ranger school" My response was 'tell that to the guys that she has to pull off the battlefield". Then I asked him if he really wants a woman firefighter my size to be the one to get him out of a burning building. Crickets. He knows there's no way I could physically do that if he was passed out from smoke inhalation.

Sometimes what seems 'fair' is not at all fair and for multiple good reasons.

The Fisher case is a TERRIBLE example. TERRIBLE. Fisher didn't make the cut for automatic admission (top 10% of her high school class) and UT filled 92% of its Freshman slots that year with the 10% kids. She had a mediocre high school GPA and fine but not great SAT scores (1180 out of 1600).

So she was competing for the remaining 8% of the spots, which was insanely competitive. Of the kids who were accepted to fill that 8%, only 47 had worse scores than Fisher, but 42 of those were white.

Finally, 168 Black and Latino students with better scores than Fisher were also denied that year.

To recap, a mediocre student doesn't manage to get one of the guaranteed spots by doing better in high school, then loses out to a bunch of White kids with worse scores for the remaining spots, but blames race.

[Anonymous]

The problem is that too many parents and students are focused on getting into the most elite schools. For most, even with the highest scores and perfect GPAs, the odds of getting in are rather slim. HYP accept 5%, 6% and 7% of applicants. The other 93 - 95 percent are rejected. Among the rejected applicants, I would be the majority all had the test scores and grades to match the applicants who were accepted. The test scores and grades get you in the door, after that the schools needs to start looking how to differentiate all the Lake Wobegon children from one another and to determine who will be the best fit for their incoming freshman class. There are limited spaces, and the decision needs to be made at some point about who will be in and who will be out. How would you differentiate, say, 20 applicants with perfect SATs and a perfect GPA. Should they all be admitted?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The problem is that too many parents and students are focused on getting into the most elite schools. For most, even with the highest scores and perfect GPAs, the odds of getting in are rather slim. HYP accept 5%, 6% and 7% of applicants. The other 93 - 95 percent are rejected. Among the rejected applicants, I would be the majority all had the test scores and grades to match the applicants who were accepted. The test scores and grades get you in the door, after that the schools needs to start looking how to differentiate all the Lake Wobegon children from one another and to determine who will be the best fit for their incoming freshman class. There are limited spaces, and the decision needs to be made at some point about who will be in and who will be out. How would you differentiate, say, 20 applicants with perfect SATs and a perfect GPA. Should they all be admitted?

Not buying this either.

Yes, colleges will have to exercise discretion and apply mix of objective and subjective criteria for admission, That is reasonable but these criteria are applied differently based on race. The criticism is not that college admissions office use discretion or have subjective criteria. THEY ARE FINE as long as they are applied consistently and not racially discriminatory.

For example, if AA is given additional consideration for overcoming obstacles, some Asian Americans should be given additional consideration for overcoming obstacles as well such as language barrier, lack of support from parents due to language and cultural issues, being bullied in school, working after school, etc. The problem is AA will be given a bump for overcoming "obstacles" but Asians will not be given a bump and probably will be held to a higher standard even with demonstrated obstacles and viewed as "robots, drones, lacking creativity and one-dimensional etc." and other descriptions commonly thrown around on this forum without a second though.

The bottom line that people can get away with name calling and marginalizing Asian Americans because there won't be protests/riots whereas it is more "politically correct" to give AA a leg up and avoid marginalizing AA.

[Anonymous]

There is no evidence that Asian-American students have more and better extra-curriculars and leadership experience and other factors that go into a holistic admissions review. The only basis anyone claims that Asian-American students are more qualified is because of test scores. By definition, a non-holistic admissions process relies exclusively on grades and test scores. So if you argue that a holistic review is unfair, then you are demanding a numbers based process. And as I wrote earlier, every Asian education ministry says their test-based process is screwed up and unfair and produces bad results for learning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is no evidence that Asian-American students have more and better extra-curriculars and leadership experience and other factors that go into a holistic admissions review. The only basis anyone claims that Asian-American students are more qualified is because of test scores. By definition, a non-holistic admissions process relies exclusively on grades and test scores. So if you argue that a holistic review is unfair, then you are demanding a numbers based process. And as I wrote earlier, every Asian education ministry says their test-based process is screwed up and unfair and produces bad results for learning.

We don't have the evidence because colleges refuse to release the information and actively block release of any information that will shed light on this issue. Harvard is even refusing to comply with the discovery requests made in the legal action brought by Asian Americans alleging racial discrimination using every trick not to release any relevant information.

Refusing to release relevant information and then saying there is no evidence for such allegation is self serving. There are plenty of anecdotal evidence of Asian Americans with "better extra-curriculars and leadership experience and other factors that go into a holistic admissions" compared to AA and Hispanics getting unfavorable assessments.

[Anonymous]

You are competing against people that are your similar profile
There are many many many people with perfect or near perfect scores. If you think that is going to distinguish you at an elite institution well lol
Think about TJ and then multiply the number of applicants by a factor of 1,000 and then you will start to see the picture

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The point is that there are blatant rejections from students who have much higher qualifications in favor of other races. This is why the Fisher case is being re-visited by the SC. You think it's fair to take points off an Asian kid's test score and add points to a Black or Hispanic kid's simply due to race?

My husband said the other day "Oh, good, to women are graduating from Ranger school" My response was 'tell that to the guys that she has to pull off the battlefield". Then I asked him if he really wants a woman firefighter my size to be the one to get him out of a burning building. Crickets. He knows there's no way I could physically do that if he was passed out from smoke inhalation.

Sometimes what seems 'fair' is not at all fair and for multiple good reasons.

The Fisher case is a TERRIBLE example. TERRIBLE. Fisher didn't make the cut for automatic admission (top 10% of her high school class) and UT filled 92% of its Freshman slots that year with the 10% kids. She had a mediocre high school GPA and fine but not great SAT scores (1180 out of 1600).

So she was competing for the remaining 8% of the spots, which was insanely competitive. Of the kids who were accepted to fill that 8%, only 47 had worse scores than Fisher, but 42 of those were white.

Finally, 168 Black and Latino students with better scores than Fisher were also denied that year.

To recap, a mediocre student doesn't manage to get one of the guaranteed spots by doing better in high school, then loses out to a bunch of White kids with worse scores for the remaining spots, but blames race.

PP here that is an active poster on affirmative action threads on dcum.

Fisher is THE WORST plaintiff ever for a scotus case on this matter.

She actively puts the whole anti-affirmative action in college admissions movement in bad light.

Seriously there are tons of way better plaintiffs out there.