Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:China and India alone have almost 3 billion citizens.

Chinese immigrants number about 2 million a year to the US. Immigrants from India have about the same numbers.

These immigrants come here for education and better quality of life. They are a tiny percentage of Asians but they are the most likely to be hardest working with some money and family connections.

I have a friend who came here from China as a child. We have children in the same grade and are close. The rest of her extended family will not allow their children to be friends with American children. They see Americans as lazy and a distraction.

It’s a different culture and with that amount of people the Asian population could easily fill MIT, Harvard, etc a thousand times over. What are they supposed to do, especially if most of them go back to their country of origin?

I don’t understand the question…what are they supposed to do about what?

Why should we be sympathetic to the families that won’t assimilate?

What are you talking about
They are the ones who assimilate to the American way and American dream - hardworking and competition

No, the American way (which is what has made this country historically such a great place)…is that you are proud of your heritage but you are now an American and you want to embrace the country in its entirety (foibles and all). If America evolved with just a bunch of ethnic cliques keeping to themselves, the country would have a much lower GDP and overall quality of life.

Help us really understand why you are immigrating here. Someone posted a list of top engineering schools and 13/20 were in Asia, so no need to go to college in the US (in fact why would you?). If you apparently hate the people and the system…help us understand.

What are you talking about
Working hard and fair competition is not just the American way, it should be applied to everywhere
Since you asked, personally I followed my parents when I was a minor, and my kids were born here like you I guess.
I don't hate anything. I just found that the college admission system has a lot of flaws and room for improvements.
It seems that the US Supreme Court would agree with me on some of them, and we'll see progress.
Systems evolve.

You are looking for a dictatorship. It is not here.

But go on with your tutoring.

It seems that you don't understand the meaning of the word, dictatorship.
The colleges are acting like dictators when they are receiving all sorts of government aid and support.

It is the colleges who get to decide who THEY want at THEIR school. NOT the pushy parents.

colleges shouldn't decide based on race, that's the point. It's illegal to base anything on race, a protected class.

You are correct, it should not be. Most people (except Asians) believe it currently is not, except for URMs - please look up the meaning of URM.

Point being, if all of one kind come to the U.S. at once, and most expect to be admitted, it is not going to happen. It has been this way for generations. You were given bad information, and now you want that information to be true, when it is not.

No one is "expecting" to be admitted to an elite college. People are "expecting" to not be discriminated against their race. I think black people would agree that no one should be discriminated against because of their race.

Black people wish you would be just as vocal when it comes to pay disparity........right crickets....

Paying someone less because of their race is illegal, as it should be. I'm glad you agree that they're both equally immoral.

AND YET IT STILL HAPPENS THERE IS DATA SHOWING IT AND I DONT HEAR ASIAN AMERICANS TAKING UP THE BANNER FOR OTHERS. So excuse me, while I make sure that my black son takes your kids' seat.

you don't have to take up the banner for Asian Americans. The lawsuit it doing that.

The NAACP rarely takes up the banner for other minorities other than black, other than platitudes.

You didn't get the pointed jab about how black kids are taking AA seats because that's what this comes down to. AA act like the seats in institutions are already theirs. And they are overrepresented as it were. So just look at it this way, your Asian kid will go to a T25-50 and can still make more than a black kid Ivy grad.
Thanks for playing!

don't know anyone who " act like the seats in institutions are already theirs.". These kids study hard, work hard. They don't "act like the seat is already theirs".

The point is not about whether they will be ok. The point is that they are discriminated against based on their race, just like how those colleges discriminated against Jews. Wrong then; wrong now.

When only 7% of the us population is asian, and 30% of Harvard's incoming class is asian, it seems hard to say they are discriminating.
Are you going to try to tell me that blacks and latinos are not as smart as asians?

Not necessarily smarter as a group, but one thing for sure: Asian parents are much harsher disciplinarians than Black, Hispanic, or even White patients in general. Have you read a book by Yale Law Professor Amy Chua, “Battle Hymn of Tiger Mother” published over a decade ago? Her own father, Leon Chua, was a famous professor of EE at UCB. Her dad and mom came to US basically penniless and her dad worked his xxx off to get his Ph.D. Intelligence is relevant, of course, but it’s really about hard work. That book is a bit depressing to read though—how she treated her own two daughters. But both went to Ivys. I believe her old daughter went to Yale Law and clerked for Justice Kavanaugh. One thing Amy Chua’s book is revealing—although it’s a pretty well known fact—if an Asian child breaks rules or is lazy, he/she is likely to face far harsher punishment in an Asian family than in a White, Black or Hispanic family. Of course, each family is different. But in general it’s true.

And they are drilled, drilled, drilled from early childhood to make sure they perform better than anyone else. So yeah, maybe not quite the secret sauce their target colleges are looking for.

If these kids are so so smart why do they have to work so hard? I'm much more impressed by the kid who didn't spend years prepping for the SAT who can get a near perfect score in one sitting. That kid is actually smart.

That’s the point. There is no scientific evidence that one race is smarter than another. Disparity in IQ scores does not prove that there is racial disparity in INNATE intelligence.

Btw my DS didn’t take ANY SAT prep course. Just bought a couple of books to study himself. Got 1590. Maybe that’s what you call “actually smart.”

"bought a couple of books to study"

Thats prepping

But not at the level for many privileged and asians. They spend 40 hour+ with 1-1 $150/hr tutoring to get that 1580. Very different than a self motivated kid who buys the books, studies for 10-15 hours and takes the test/gets a 1580.

Why do you care about other people's prepping?
Kids cant' spend 40 hour+ without motivation and dedication.
Do whatever fits you.

If a kid spend 40+ hours practicing and training to become a captain in a varsity football team, and eventually go to a college thanks to that, that's nothing different. I've never seen people complaining about kids practicing.
Very strange mindset.

But if the colleges and universities don't value getting the top SAT score for the sake of getting the best score, it's a waste of time. Being the best football player can get you recruited to play football. But if it doesn't nobody seems to be complaining about it. There isn't a lawsuit for washed up football players who didn't make it. The people spending all their free time on a test that doesn't matter as much as they think it should have a strange mindset.

It matters unless the school is test blind.
So kids should do their best getting top score.
It's a common sense.

Also common sense is not getting rascally discriminated.
Very very common sense stuff.

For all we know every other kid admitted to those schools for the same major had a 1600 and higher GPA. 1590 wasn't good enough.

Check your math.
Three are close to 2 million test takers each year, and only about 1,000 get the 1600 perfect score.
Harvard alone admits about 2000 students.

Clueless people are pending its not a big deal to get 1600 1590, and prepping would easily do that, but it's extremely hard and a big accomplishment.

But yet Harvard and the likes no longer care, once you hit the 1500+ it does not matter. And that is what these people are mad about. So rather than recognizing that it's only 1 small part of the admission picture, they get mad that their perfect/near perfect SAT kid did not gain admission to a highly rejective school. Most elite schools only care that you hit a certain mark (or just don't submit scores) and then they dont' look at SAT/ACT anymore. It's not the be all end all for deciding who is the best candidate. You may be mad about that, but it's reality. And IMO a good reality....many more indicators of who will be successful in life than an SAT test.

Again and again and gain and gain.
Of course they have high test scores, but also they have high scores on ECs, leadership, interview, essay, etc.
Now likability score is invented.
So now these people get mad.

A hiring manager once told me that when she calls someone in for an interview they already have the job. They have been vetted and pre-qualified. The interview is just to see whether or not they want to spend 8 hours a day with them almost every day of the year.

So while I agree that "likability scores" are borderline and suspicious its not like they aren't a real thing.

LOL Asians actually scored higher on likability by interviewers who actually talked to the student one on one.

There's really no excuse.

+1 again, the issue I have with Harvard's admission is the BS "likeability' where the AO marks Asian Americans as "low likeability" without ever having met them, yet the Interviewer, who has met them, marked them "likeable".

I stated up thread, using the job analogy... imagine applying for a job, where you meet all the checkmarks, but the hiring team categorizes you as "not likeable" having never met you all because you are black. How does that not scream racial discrimination?

If 30% of the employees are black, then no it does not. It says, we have a better candidate. Fact is many reasons why people don't get hires is very nuanced and the reasons might be only slightly different in some way. Heck, it might just be you didn't hit it off with the big boss and someone else did and they bonded over their kid's soccer or something. Many highly qualified get rejected, but you don't get to scream racism every time

That's BS. If you were a black person, and the hiring team stated you were not likeable without ever having met you, you'd scream "racism".

a federal investigation of Harvard revealed that Asian-American applicants were frequently described by admissions officers as “science/math oriented, quiet, shy, reserved, self-contained, and soft spoken.”

How on earth do they judge a person to be this way if they've never met them in person, and if the interviewer rated them "likeable"?

Imagine if the AO described black people as "too loud, prone to obnoxious behavior, terrible at math". There would be massive protests at Harvard.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:China and India alone have almost 3 billion citizens.

Chinese immigrants number about 2 million a year to the US. Immigrants from India have about the same numbers.

These immigrants come here for education and better quality of life. They are a tiny percentage of Asians but they are the most likely to be hardest working with some money and family connections.

I have a friend who came here from China as a child. We have children in the same grade and are close. The rest of her extended family will not allow their children to be friends with American children. They see Americans as lazy and a distraction.

It’s a different culture and with that amount of people the Asian population could easily fill MIT, Harvard, etc a thousand times over. What are they supposed to do, especially if most of them go back to their country of origin?

I don’t understand the question…what are they supposed to do about what?

Why should we be sympathetic to the families that won’t assimilate?

What are you talking about
They are the ones who assimilate to the American way and American dream - hardworking and competition

No, the American way (which is what has made this country historically such a great place)…is that you are proud of your heritage but you are now an American and you want to embrace the country in its entirety (foibles and all). If America evolved with just a bunch of ethnic cliques keeping to themselves, the country would have a much lower GDP and overall quality of life.

Help us really understand why you are immigrating here. Someone posted a list of top engineering schools and 13/20 were in Asia, so no need to go to college in the US (in fact why would you?). If you apparently hate the people and the system…help us understand.

What are you talking about
Working hard and fair competition is not just the American way, it should be applied to everywhere
Since you asked, personally I followed my parents when I was a minor, and my kids were born here like you I guess.
I don't hate anything. I just found that the college admission system has a lot of flaws and room for improvements.
It seems that the US Supreme Court would agree with me on some of them, and we'll see progress.
Systems evolve.

You are looking for a dictatorship. It is not here.

But go on with your tutoring.

It seems that you don't understand the meaning of the word, dictatorship.
The colleges are acting like dictators when they are receiving all sorts of government aid and support.

It is the colleges who get to decide who THEY want at THEIR school. NOT the pushy parents.

colleges shouldn't decide based on race, that's the point. It's illegal to base anything on race, a protected class.

You are correct, it should not be. Most people (except Asians) believe it currently is not, except for URMs - please look up the meaning of URM.

Point being, if all of one kind come to the U.S. at once, and most expect to be admitted, it is not going to happen. It has been this way for generations. You were given bad information, and now you want that information to be true, when it is not.

No one is "expecting" to be admitted to an elite college. People are "expecting" to not be discriminated against their race. I think black people would agree that no one should be discriminated against because of their race.

Black people wish you would be just as vocal when it comes to pay disparity........right crickets....

Paying someone less because of their race is illegal, as it should be. I'm glad you agree that they're both equally immoral.

AND YET IT STILL HAPPENS THERE IS DATA SHOWING IT AND I DONT HEAR ASIAN AMERICANS TAKING UP THE BANNER FOR OTHERS. So excuse me, while I make sure that my black son takes your kids' seat.

you don't have to take up the banner for Asian Americans. The lawsuit it doing that.

The NAACP rarely takes up the banner for other minorities other than black, other than platitudes.

You didn't get the pointed jab about how black kids are taking AA seats because that's what this comes down to. AA act like the seats in institutions are already theirs. And they are overrepresented as it were. So just look at it this way, your Asian kid will go to a T25-50 and can still make more than a black kid Ivy grad.
Thanks for playing!

don't know anyone who " act like the seats in institutions are already theirs.". These kids study hard, work hard. They don't "act like the seat is already theirs".

The point is not about whether they will be ok. The point is that they are discriminated against based on their race, just like how those colleges discriminated against Jews. Wrong then; wrong now.

When only 7% of the us population is asian, and 30% of Harvard's incoming class is asian, it seems hard to say they are discriminating.
Are you going to try to tell me that blacks and latinos are not as smart as asians?

Not necessarily smarter as a group, but one thing for sure: Asian parents are much harsher disciplinarians than Black, Hispanic, or even White patients in general. Have you read a book by Yale Law Professor Amy Chua, “Battle Hymn of Tiger Mother” published over a decade ago? Her own father, Leon Chua, was a famous professor of EE at UCB. Her dad and mom came to US basically penniless and her dad worked his xxx off to get his Ph.D. Intelligence is relevant, of course, but it’s really about hard work. That book is a bit depressing to read though—how she treated her own two daughters. But both went to Ivys. I believe her old daughter went to Yale Law and clerked for Justice Kavanaugh. One thing Amy Chua’s book is revealing—although it’s a pretty well known fact—if an Asian child breaks rules or is lazy, he/she is likely to face far harsher punishment in an Asian family than in a White, Black or Hispanic family. Of course, each family is different. But in general it’s true.

And they are drilled, drilled, drilled from early childhood to make sure they perform better than anyone else. So yeah, maybe not quite the secret sauce their target colleges are looking for.

If these kids are so so smart why do they have to work so hard? I'm much more impressed by the kid who didn't spend years prepping for the SAT who can get a near perfect score in one sitting. That kid is actually smart.

That’s the point. There is no scientific evidence that one race is smarter than another. Disparity in IQ scores does not prove that there is racial disparity in INNATE intelligence.

Btw my DS didn’t take ANY SAT prep course. Just bought a couple of books to study himself. Got 1590. Maybe that’s what you call “actually smart.”

"bought a couple of books to study"

Thats prepping

But not at the level for many privileged and asians. They spend 40 hour+ with 1-1 $150/hr tutoring to get that 1580. Very different than a self motivated kid who buys the books, studies for 10-15 hours and takes the test/gets a 1580.

Why do you care about other people's prepping?
Kids cant' spend 40 hour+ without motivation and dedication.
Do whatever fits you.

If a kid spend 40+ hours practicing and training to become a captain in a varsity football team, and eventually go to a college thanks to that, that's nothing different. I've never seen people complaining about kids practicing.
Very strange mindset.

But if the colleges and universities don't value getting the top SAT score for the sake of getting the best score, it's a waste of time. Being the best football player can get you recruited to play football. But if it doesn't nobody seems to be complaining about it. There isn't a lawsuit for washed up football players who didn't make it. The people spending all their free time on a test that doesn't matter as much as they think it should have a strange mindset.

It matters unless the school is test blind.
So kids should do their best getting top score.
It's a common sense.

Also common sense is not getting rascally discriminated.
Very very common sense stuff.

For all we know every other kid admitted to those schools for the same major had a 1600 and higher GPA. 1590 wasn't good enough.

Check your math.
Three are close to 2 million test takers each year, and only about 1,000 get the 1600 perfect score.
Harvard alone admits about 2000 students.

Clueless people are pending its not a big deal to get 1600 1590, and prepping would easily do that, but it's extremely hard and a big accomplishment.

But yet Harvard and the likes no longer care, once you hit the 1500+ it does not matter. And that is what these people are mad about. So rather than recognizing that it's only 1 small part of the admission picture, they get mad that their perfect/near perfect SAT kid did not gain admission to a highly rejective school. Most elite schools only care that you hit a certain mark (or just don't submit scores) and then they dont' look at SAT/ACT anymore. It's not the be all end all for deciding who is the best candidate. You may be mad about that, but it's reality. And IMO a good reality....many more indicators of who will be successful in life than an SAT test.

Again and again and gain and gain.
Of course they have high test scores, but also they have high scores on ECs, leadership, interview, essay, etc.
Now likability score is invented.
So now these people get mad.

A hiring manager once told me that when she calls someone in for an interview they already have the job. They have been vetted and pre-qualified. The interview is just to see whether or not they want to spend 8 hours a day with them almost every day of the year.

So while I agree that "likability scores" are borderline and suspicious its not like they aren't a real thing.

LOL Asians actually scored higher on likability by interviewers who actually talked to the student one on one.

There's really no excuse.

+1 again, the issue I have with Harvard's admission is the BS "likeability' where the AO marks Asian Americans as "low likeability" without ever having met them, yet the Interviewer, who has met them, marked them "likeable".

I stated up thread, using the job analogy... imagine applying for a job, where you meet all the checkmarks, but the hiring team categorizes you as "not likeable" having never met you all because you are black. How does that not scream racial discrimination?

If 30% of the employees are black, then no it does not. It says, we have a better candidate. Fact is many reasons why people don't get hires is very nuanced and the reasons might be only slightly different in some way. Heck, it might just be you didn't hit it off with the big boss and someone else did and they bonded over their kid's soccer or something. Many highly qualified get rejected, but you don't get to scream racism every time

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like we have some newbies. Welcome!

Again before this law suit, I blindly thought that Asian students are probably weaker in ECs, Interview, leadership, etc. with the stereotyping.

However that's not the case, and it's actually the opposite. Asian students actually have better scores on those.

Asians have every right to get mad and the law suit makes perfect sense.

This is a compelling argument that Asians should be admitted to Harvard at a higher rate than they are. It is not a remotely compelling argument that every kid with a 1590 is entitled to admission. Which is the claim at the foundation of this thread.

That is why the entire lawsuit is ridiculous. Many many many (over 95%) of applicants are rejected. So screaming "racism" as a reason is just a tad ridiculous. There are so many other reasons for the rejection, including the simple fact, yeah you are a good candidate but we can only take 3.4% so you didn't win the lottery

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IMO, the reason why Harvard wants to keep affirmative action is because otherwise, they'd have to get rid of ALDC to get a more diverse student body. If they got rid of ALDC, they could use SES based affirmative action to get a diverse student body. But, they want to hoard the opportunity to mostly wealthy white families, so they pit Asian Americans against URM.

Harvard and most colleges want to keep AA because it supports its mission of diversity.

Its Ed Blum and his SFFA that wants to maintain the ALDC status quo that benefits whites AND he wants to ban more access to blacks. Hes been at it since the 1970s. Using Asians is just a means to an end.

+1000

The world will be a better place if Harvard has more than just rich white and asian kids attending. Going to an elite university can change a first gen/low income kids trajectory in life ---not sure why so many are opposed to that (I don't care what color their skin is---I want kids to be on a path to succeed that might not otherwise--and yes studies show these kids do get more advantages than the rich already elite kid does from elite schools)

-1000

Harvard started using holistic admission as a means to keep the number of Jews at Harvard low. They are doing the same today to Asian Americans.

I really don't care what Blum's motive is. I care that Harvard is using discriminatory practices much like they did a hundred years ago.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:China and India alone have almost 3 billion citizens.

Chinese immigrants number about 2 million a year to the US. Immigrants from India have about the same numbers.

These immigrants come here for education and better quality of life. They are a tiny percentage of Asians but they are the most likely to be hardest working with some money and family connections.

I have a friend who came here from China as a child. We have children in the same grade and are close. The rest of her extended family will not allow their children to be friends with American children. They see Americans as lazy and a distraction.

It’s a different culture and with that amount of people the Asian population could easily fill MIT, Harvard, etc a thousand times over. What are they supposed to do, especially if most of them go back to their country of origin?

I don’t understand the question…what are they supposed to do about what?

Why should we be sympathetic to the families that won’t assimilate?

What are you talking about
They are the ones who assimilate to the American way and American dream - hardworking and competition

No, the American way (which is what has made this country historically such a great place)…is that you are proud of your heritage but you are now an American and you want to embrace the country in its entirety (foibles and all). If America evolved with just a bunch of ethnic cliques keeping to themselves, the country would have a much lower GDP and overall quality of life.

Help us really understand why you are immigrating here. Someone posted a list of top engineering schools and 13/20 were in Asia, so no need to go to college in the US (in fact why would you?). If you apparently hate the people and the system…help us understand.

What are you talking about
Working hard and fair competition is not just the American way, it should be applied to everywhere
Since you asked, personally I followed my parents when I was a minor, and my kids were born here like you I guess.
I don't hate anything. I just found that the college admission system has a lot of flaws and room for improvements.
It seems that the US Supreme Court would agree with me on some of them, and we'll see progress.
Systems evolve.

You are looking for a dictatorship. It is not here.

But go on with your tutoring.

It seems that you don't understand the meaning of the word, dictatorship.
The colleges are acting like dictators when they are receiving all sorts of government aid and support.

It is the colleges who get to decide who THEY want at THEIR school. NOT the pushy parents.

colleges shouldn't decide based on race, that's the point. It's illegal to base anything on race, a protected class.

You are correct, it should not be. Most people (except Asians) believe it currently is not, except for URMs - please look up the meaning of URM.

Point being, if all of one kind come to the U.S. at once, and most expect to be admitted, it is not going to happen. It has been this way for generations. You were given bad information, and now you want that information to be true, when it is not.

No one is "expecting" to be admitted to an elite college. People are "expecting" to not be discriminated against their race. I think black people would agree that no one should be discriminated against because of their race.

Black people wish you would be just as vocal when it comes to pay disparity........right crickets....

Paying someone less because of their race is illegal, as it should be. I'm glad you agree that they're both equally immoral.

AND YET IT STILL HAPPENS THERE IS DATA SHOWING IT AND I DONT HEAR ASIAN AMERICANS TAKING UP THE BANNER FOR OTHERS. So excuse me, while I make sure that my black son takes your kids' seat.

you don't have to take up the banner for Asian Americans. The lawsuit it doing that.

The NAACP rarely takes up the banner for other minorities other than black, other than platitudes.

You didn't get the pointed jab about how black kids are taking AA seats because that's what this comes down to. AA act like the seats in institutions are already theirs. And they are overrepresented as it were. So just look at it this way, your Asian kid will go to a T25-50 and can still make more than a black kid Ivy grad.
Thanks for playing!

don't know anyone who " act like the seats in institutions are already theirs.". These kids study hard, work hard. They don't "act like the seat is already theirs".

The point is not about whether they will be ok. The point is that they are discriminated against based on their race, just like how those colleges discriminated against Jews. Wrong then; wrong now.

When only 7% of the us population is asian, and 30% of Harvard's incoming class is asian, it seems hard to say they are discriminating.
Are you going to try to tell me that blacks and latinos are not as smart as asians?

Not necessarily smarter as a group, but one thing for sure: Asian parents are much harsher disciplinarians than Black, Hispanic, or even White patients in general. Have you read a book by Yale Law Professor Amy Chua, “Battle Hymn of Tiger Mother” published over a decade ago? Her own father, Leon Chua, was a famous professor of EE at UCB. Her dad and mom came to US basically penniless and her dad worked his xxx off to get his Ph.D. Intelligence is relevant, of course, but it’s really about hard work. That book is a bit depressing to read though—how she treated her own two daughters. But both went to Ivys. I believe her old daughter went to Yale Law and clerked for Justice Kavanaugh. One thing Amy Chua’s book is revealing—although it’s a pretty well known fact—if an Asian child breaks rules or is lazy, he/she is likely to face far harsher punishment in an Asian family than in a White, Black or Hispanic family. Of course, each family is different. But in general it’s true.

And they are drilled, drilled, drilled from early childhood to make sure they perform better than anyone else. So yeah, maybe not quite the secret sauce their target colleges are looking for.

If these kids are so so smart why do they have to work so hard? I'm much more impressed by the kid who didn't spend years prepping for the SAT who can get a near perfect score in one sitting. That kid is actually smart.

That’s the point. There is no scientific evidence that one race is smarter than another. Disparity in IQ scores does not prove that there is racial disparity in INNATE intelligence.

Btw my DS didn’t take ANY SAT prep course. Just bought a couple of books to study himself. Got 1590. Maybe that’s what you call “actually smart.”

"bought a couple of books to study"

Thats prepping

But not at the level for many privileged and asians. They spend 40 hour+ with 1-1 $150/hr tutoring to get that 1580. Very different than a self motivated kid who buys the books, studies for 10-15 hours and takes the test/gets a 1580.

Why do you care about other people's prepping?
Kids cant' spend 40 hour+ without motivation and dedication.
Do whatever fits you.

If a kid spend 40+ hours practicing and training to become a captain in a varsity football team, and eventually go to a college thanks to that, that's nothing different. I've never seen people complaining about kids practicing.
Very strange mindset.

But if the colleges and universities don't value getting the top SAT score for the sake of getting the best score, it's a waste of time. Being the best football player can get you recruited to play football. But if it doesn't nobody seems to be complaining about it. There isn't a lawsuit for washed up football players who didn't make it. The people spending all their free time on a test that doesn't matter as much as they think it should have a strange mindset.

It matters unless the school is test blind.
So kids should do their best getting top score.
It's a common sense.

Also common sense is not getting rascally discriminated.
Very very common sense stuff.

For all we know every other kid admitted to those schools for the same major had a 1600 and higher GPA. 1590 wasn't good enough.

Check your math.
Three are close to 2 million test takers each year, and only about 1,000 get the 1600 perfect score.
Harvard alone admits about 2000 students.

Clueless people are pending its not a big deal to get 1600 1590, and prepping would easily do that, but it's extremely hard and a big accomplishment.

But yet Harvard and the likes no longer care, once you hit the 1500+ it does not matter. And that is what these people are mad about. So rather than recognizing that it's only 1 small part of the admission picture, they get mad that their perfect/near perfect SAT kid did not gain admission to a highly rejective school. Most elite schools only care that you hit a certain mark (or just don't submit scores) and then they dont' look at SAT/ACT anymore. It's not the be all end all for deciding who is the best candidate. You may be mad about that, but it's reality. And IMO a good reality....many more indicators of who will be successful in life than an SAT test.

Again and again and gain and gain.
Of course they have high test scores, but also they have high scores on ECs, leadership, interview, essay, etc.
Now likability score is invented.
So now these people get mad.

Just like Harvard wants kids from all states/regions and not just 2000 kids from the NE, they also want ethnic and socioeconomic and major and outside interest diversity. They are admitting tons of Asians---almost 30% of the freshman class are asians this fall. So a smart kid from Montana has a better chance than one from MA because there are less of them applying. If I want to be a CS major, I'm competing for X slots. If I'm poor and write about it, I have an advantage over a rich kid (but they have the ultimate advantage as they have had so many privileges in life to get to this point) Everything is about balance.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If affirmative action is banned, many students who represent the incredible diversity of Asia-Pacific nations and cultures will no longer have a URM hook (e.g., Hmong students). It's really self-defeating.

True. Many Asian-Pacific organizations oppose the lawsuit. And have indeed filed amici briefs in opposition.

Prop 209 and 16 in CA shows that many organizations are out of touch with individuals. Majority of Hispanics and Asian Americans there support a ban on affirmative action.

Dems may not want to make this a will they want to die on.

Don't be silly. In terms of college admissions- topic at hand- CA already banned AA AND the main public colleges are primarily test blind, so it really doesn't matter what they think about AA in that state anymore. In terms of politics ( you referred to Dems), CA is solid blue and will remain that way because of the same Hispanics and Asian Americans.

I'm not referring to just CA. You know that there are other blue states, too, right? And some purple states that may turn blue if Dems keep picking fights for things that most of their constituents don't care about so much.

Wrong. States are pretty much set. Just getting "redder" or "bluer".

Blame Trump.

But you can go to the Politics forum if you want to about Dems more.

This is very much tied to politics.

No party can win without the Independents, and Dems can easily lose voters if they keep trying to push affirmative action on the American people, where the majority of people don't support race based affirmative action.

Most people support affirmative action based on SES, but not race. Using SES will automatically help a lot of black kids, but the wealthy black kid doesn't need a leg up over a middle class Asian American kid.

I am an independent and think AA has been taken to an extreme...but if you think it ranks in my top 5 political issues...or maybe even top 10...you will be sadly disappointed.

Honestly, it is a hard issue to get energized about unless you really think it directly impacts you in your day-to-day.

Just my honest $.02 as an independent voter.

Indeed, so then why are Dems so hell bent on pushing affirmative action if it's not a top 5 issue for most people?

You literally answered your own question...if most people could care less about it, then why do we care how much anyone supports it (or not).

If most people don't care about it, then why are Dems pushing it so much? They spent millions on Prop 16 to overturn Prop 209 in CA, a blue state, and it was defeated. That should be a clear message to Dems that even a very blue state like CA does not support affirmative action.

Not caring about it much is far different than voting on a ballot proposition. Hence, why republicans in Ohio and elsewhere are fighting putting a thumbs up or down vote on abortion on the ballot.

Even a significant minority to slim majority of republicans in Kansas and elsewhere voted to keep access, even though candidates strongly against access were elected by wide margins.

So, using your CA example...if I am forced to vote up or down on a single issue, I no longer have to consider any other issues in my vote. So, voters may vote down that issue, even though the politician supporting that issue may win by a wide margin...because now all the other issues matter.

Another good example is raising the minimum wage and expanding medicaid in Red States. Both of those issues were put to ballot initiatives in places like South Dakota and Oklahoma...and both were overwhelmingly supported...even though candidates that oppose those initiatives easily won.

Brexit is another great example of what happens when you distill something down to a simple Yes or No vote on a single issue.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IMO, the reason why Harvard wants to keep affirmative action is because otherwise, they'd have to get rid of ALDC to get a more diverse student body. If they got rid of ALDC, they could use SES based affirmative action to get a diverse student body. But, they want to hoard the opportunity to mostly wealthy white families, so they pit Asian Americans against URM.

Harvard and most colleges want to keep AA because it supports its mission of diversity.

Its Ed Blum and his SFFA that wants to maintain the ALDC status quo that benefits whites AND he wants to ban more access to blacks. Hes been at it since the 1970s. Using Asians is just a means to an end.

+1000

The world will be a better place if Harvard has more than just rich white and asian kids attending. Going to an elite university can change a first gen/low income kids trajectory in life ---not sure why so many are opposed to that (I don't care what color their skin is---I want kids to be on a path to succeed that might not otherwise--and yes studies show these kids do get more advantages than the rich already elite kid does from elite schools)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If affirmative action is banned, many students who represent the incredible diversity of Asia-Pacific nations and cultures will no longer have a URM hook (e.g., Hmong students). It's really self-defeating.

True. Many Asian-Pacific organizations oppose the lawsuit. And have indeed filed amici briefs in opposition.

Prop 209 and 16 in CA shows that many organizations are out of touch with individuals. Majority of Hispanics and Asian Americans there support a ban on affirmative action.

Dems may not want to make this a will they want to die on.

Don't be silly. In terms of college admissions- topic at hand- CA already banned AA AND the main public colleges are primarily test blind, so it really doesn't matter what they think about AA in that state anymore. In terms of politics ( you referred to Dems), CA is solid blue and will remain that way because of the same Hispanics and Asian Americans.

I'm not referring to just CA. You know that there are other blue states, too, right? And some purple states that may turn blue if Dems keep picking fights for things that most of their constituents don't care about so much.

Wrong. States are pretty much set. Just getting "redder" or "bluer".

Blame Trump.

But you can go to the Politics forum if you want to about Dems more.

This is very much tied to politics.

No party can win without the Independents, and Dems can easily lose voters if they keep trying to push affirmative action on the American people, where the majority of people don't support race based affirmative action.

Most people support affirmative action based on SES, but not race. Using SES will automatically help a lot of black kids, but the wealthy black kid doesn't need a leg up over a middle class Asian American kid.

I am an independent and think AA has been taken to an extreme...but if you think it ranks in my top 5 political issues...or maybe even top 10...you will be sadly disappointed.

Honestly, it is a hard issue to get energized about unless you really think it directly impacts you in your day-to-day.

Just my honest $.02 as an independent voter.

Indeed, so then why are Dems so hell bent on pushing affirmative action if it's not a top 5 issue for most people?

You literally answered your own question...if most people could care less about it, then why do we care how much anyone supports it (or not).

If most people don't care about it, then why are Dems pushing it so much? They spent millions on Prop 16 to overturn Prop 209 in CA, a blue state, and it was defeated. That should be a clear message to Dems that even a very blue state like CA does not support affirmative action.

Not caring about it much is far different than voting on a ballot proposition. Hence, why republicans in Ohio and elsewhere are fighting putting a thumbs up or down vote on abortion on the ballot.

Even a significant minority to slim majority of republicans in Kansas and elsewhere voted to keep access, even though candidates strongly against access were elected by wide margins.

So, using your CA example...if I am forced to vote up or down on a single issue, I no longer have to consider any other issues in my vote. So, voters may vote down that issue, even though the politician supporting that issue may win by a wide margin...because now all the other issues matter.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If affirmative action is banned, many students who represent the incredible diversity of Asia-Pacific nations and cultures will no longer have a URM hook (e.g., Hmong students). It's really self-defeating.

True. Many Asian-Pacific organizations oppose the lawsuit. And have indeed filed amici briefs in opposition.

Prop 209 and 16 in CA shows that many organizations are out of touch with individuals. Majority of Hispanics and Asian Americans there support a ban on affirmative action.

Dems may not want to make this a will they want to die on.

Don't be silly. In terms of college admissions- topic at hand- CA already banned AA AND the main public colleges are primarily test blind, so it really doesn't matter what they think about AA in that state anymore. In terms of politics ( you referred to Dems), CA is solid blue and will remain that way because of the same Hispanics and Asian Americans.

I'm not referring to just CA. You know that there are other blue states, too, right? And some purple states that may turn blue if Dems keep picking fights for things that most of their constituents don't care about so much.

Wrong. States are pretty much set. Just getting "redder" or "bluer".

Blame Trump.

But you can go to the Politics forum if you want to about Dems more.

This is very much tied to politics.

No party can win without the Independents, and Dems can easily lose voters if they keep trying to push affirmative action on the American people, where the majority of people don't support race based affirmative action.

Most people support affirmative action based on SES, but not race. Using SES will automatically help a lot of black kids, but the wealthy black kid doesn't need a leg up over a middle class Asian American kid.

I am an independent and think AA has been taken to an extreme...but if you think it ranks in my top 5 political issues...or maybe even top 10...you will be sadly disappointed.

Honestly, it is a hard issue to get energized about unless you really think it directly impacts you in your day-to-day.

Just my honest $.02 as an independent voter.

Indeed, so then why are Dems so hell bent on pushing affirmative action if it's not a top 5 issue for most people?

You literally answered your own question...if most people could care less about it, then why do we care how much anyone supports it (or not).

If most people don't care about it, then why are Dems pushing it so much? They spent millions on Prop 16 to overturn Prop 209 in CA, a blue state, and it was defeated. That should be a clear message to Dems that even a very blue state like CA does not support affirmative action.

And thanks to HISPANIC voters who overwhelmingly voted AGAINST Prop 16, which would have restored AA. Also, according to NYT, groups behind Prop 16 overspent groups against it by 19 to 1.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:China and India alone have almost 3 billion citizens.

Chinese immigrants number about 2 million a year to the US. Immigrants from India have about the same numbers.

These immigrants come here for education and better quality of life. They are a tiny percentage of Asians but they are the most likely to be hardest working with some money and family connections.

I have a friend who came here from China as a child. We have children in the same grade and are close. The rest of her extended family will not allow their children to be friends with American children. They see Americans as lazy and a distraction.

It’s a different culture and with that amount of people the Asian population could easily fill MIT, Harvard, etc a thousand times over. What are they supposed to do, especially if most of them go back to their country of origin?

I don’t understand the question…what are they supposed to do about what?

Why should we be sympathetic to the families that won’t assimilate?

What are you talking about
They are the ones who assimilate to the American way and American dream - hardworking and competition

No, the American way (which is what has made this country historically such a great place)…is that you are proud of your heritage but you are now an American and you want to embrace the country in its entirety (foibles and all). If America evolved with just a bunch of ethnic cliques keeping to themselves, the country would have a much lower GDP and overall quality of life.

Help us really understand why you are immigrating here. Someone posted a list of top engineering schools and 13/20 were in Asia, so no need to go to college in the US (in fact why would you?). If you apparently hate the people and the system…help us understand.

What are you talking about
Working hard and fair competition is not just the American way, it should be applied to everywhere
Since you asked, personally I followed my parents when I was a minor, and my kids were born here like you I guess.
I don't hate anything. I just found that the college admission system has a lot of flaws and room for improvements.
It seems that the US Supreme Court would agree with me on some of them, and we'll see progress.
Systems evolve.

You are looking for a dictatorship. It is not here.

But go on with your tutoring.

It seems that you don't understand the meaning of the word, dictatorship.
The colleges are acting like dictators when they are receiving all sorts of government aid and support.

It is the colleges who get to decide who THEY want at THEIR school. NOT the pushy parents.

colleges shouldn't decide based on race, that's the point. It's illegal to base anything on race, a protected class.

You are correct, it should not be. Most people (except Asians) believe it currently is not, except for URMs - please look up the meaning of URM.

Point being, if all of one kind come to the U.S. at once, and most expect to be admitted, it is not going to happen. It has been this way for generations. You were given bad information, and now you want that information to be true, when it is not.

No one is "expecting" to be admitted to an elite college. People are "expecting" to not be discriminated against their race. I think black people would agree that no one should be discriminated against because of their race.

Black people wish you would be just as vocal when it comes to pay disparity........right crickets....

Paying someone less because of their race is illegal, as it should be. I'm glad you agree that they're both equally immoral.

AND YET IT STILL HAPPENS THERE IS DATA SHOWING IT AND I DONT HEAR ASIAN AMERICANS TAKING UP THE BANNER FOR OTHERS. So excuse me, while I make sure that my black son takes your kids' seat.

you don't have to take up the banner for Asian Americans. The lawsuit it doing that.

The NAACP rarely takes up the banner for other minorities other than black, other than platitudes.

You didn't get the pointed jab about how black kids are taking AA seats because that's what this comes down to. AA act like the seats in institutions are already theirs. And they are overrepresented as it were. So just look at it this way, your Asian kid will go to a T25-50 and can still make more than a black kid Ivy grad.
Thanks for playing!

don't know anyone who " act like the seats in institutions are already theirs.". These kids study hard, work hard. They don't "act like the seat is already theirs".

The point is not about whether they will be ok. The point is that they are discriminated against based on their race, just like how those colleges discriminated against Jews. Wrong then; wrong now.

When only 7% of the us population is asian, and 30% of Harvard's incoming class is asian, it seems hard to say they are discriminating.
Are you going to try to tell me that blacks and latinos are not as smart as asians?

Not necessarily smarter as a group, but one thing for sure: Asian parents are much harsher disciplinarians than Black, Hispanic, or even White patients in general. Have you read a book by Yale Law Professor Amy Chua, “Battle Hymn of Tiger Mother” published over a decade ago? Her own father, Leon Chua, was a famous professor of EE at UCB. Her dad and mom came to US basically penniless and her dad worked his xxx off to get his Ph.D. Intelligence is relevant, of course, but it’s really about hard work. That book is a bit depressing to read though—how she treated her own two daughters. But both went to Ivys. I believe her old daughter went to Yale Law and clerked for Justice Kavanaugh. One thing Amy Chua’s book is revealing—although it’s a pretty well known fact—if an Asian child breaks rules or is lazy, he/she is likely to face far harsher punishment in an Asian family than in a White, Black or Hispanic family. Of course, each family is different. But in general it’s true.

And they are drilled, drilled, drilled from early childhood to make sure they perform better than anyone else. So yeah, maybe not quite the secret sauce their target colleges are looking for.

If these kids are so so smart why do they have to work so hard? I'm much more impressed by the kid who didn't spend years prepping for the SAT who can get a near perfect score in one sitting. That kid is actually smart.

That’s the point. There is no scientific evidence that one race is smarter than another. Disparity in IQ scores does not prove that there is racial disparity in INNATE intelligence.

Btw my DS didn’t take ANY SAT prep course. Just bought a couple of books to study himself. Got 1590. Maybe that’s what you call “actually smart.”

"bought a couple of books to study"

Thats prepping

But not at the level for many privileged and asians. They spend 40 hour+ with 1-1 $150/hr tutoring to get that 1580. Very different than a self motivated kid who buys the books, studies for 10-15 hours and takes the test/gets a 1580.

Why do you care about other people's prepping?
Kids cant' spend 40 hour+ without motivation and dedication.
Do whatever fits you.

If a kid spend 40+ hours practicing and training to become a captain in a varsity football team, and eventually go to a college thanks to that, that's nothing different. I've never seen people complaining about kids practicing.
Very strange mindset.

But if the colleges and universities don't value getting the top SAT score for the sake of getting the best score, it's a waste of time. Being the best football player can get you recruited to play football. But if it doesn't nobody seems to be complaining about it. There isn't a lawsuit for washed up football players who didn't make it. The people spending all their free time on a test that doesn't matter as much as they think it should have a strange mindset.

It matters unless the school is test blind.
So kids should do their best getting top score.
It's a common sense.

Also common sense is not getting rascally discriminated.
Very very common sense stuff.

For all we know every other kid admitted to those schools for the same major had a 1600 and higher GPA. 1590 wasn't good enough.

Check your math.
Three are close to 2 million test takers each year, and only about 1,000 get the 1600 perfect score.
Harvard alone admits about 2000 students.

Clueless people are pending its not a big deal to get 1600 1590, and prepping would easily do that, but it's extremely hard and a big accomplishment.

But yet Harvard and the likes no longer care, once you hit the 1500+ it does not matter. And that is what these people are mad about. So rather than recognizing that it's only 1 small part of the admission picture, they get mad that their perfect/near perfect SAT kid did not gain admission to a highly rejective school. Most elite schools only care that you hit a certain mark (or just don't submit scores) and then they dont' look at SAT/ACT anymore. It's not the be all end all for deciding who is the best candidate. You may be mad about that, but it's reality. And IMO a good reality....many more indicators of who will be successful in life than an SAT test.

Again and again and gain and gain.
Of course they have high test scores, but also they have high scores on ECs, leadership, interview, essay, etc.
Now likability score is invented.
So now these people get mad.

A hiring manager once told me that when she calls someone in for an interview they already have the job. They have been vetted and pre-qualified. The interview is just to see whether or not they want to spend 8 hours a day with them almost every day of the year.

So while I agree that "likability scores" are borderline and suspicious its not like they aren't a real thing.

LOL Asians actually scored higher on likability by interviewers who actually talked to the student one on one.

There's really no excuse.

+1 again, the issue I have with Harvard's admission is the BS "likeability' where the AO marks Asian Americans as "low likeability" without ever having met them, yet the Interviewer, who has met them, marked them "likeable".

I stated up thread, using the job analogy... imagine applying for a job, where you meet all the checkmarks, but the hiring team categorizes you as "not likeable" having never met you all because you are black. How does that not scream racial discrimination?

Of course there is racial discrimination in hiring already. Some people help the firm meet diversity initiatives and goals and some don't and hiring decisions are made accordingly.

So you are agree that this type of categorization is discrimination, both in the workplace and college admissions, yes?

When you pick one thing over another you are discriminating. It doesn't make it illegal. If I pick a blue shirt over a green shirt I have discriminated. There are only so many spots, they can't take everyone, so choices are made.

you seem confused about the law.

Picking a person with a blue shirt = not discrimination
Picking a person due to race = discrimination.

So CalTech and Berkeley denied him because his race due to affirmative action? Explain that one. Face it, this kid just wasn't good enough for admission to his top choices.

I don't necessarily agree with this person's lawsuit, but I do think Harvard uses discriminatory practices against Asian Americans. Who knows how many other colleges are using the same tactic.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Picking socks to match an outfit and picking candidates to build an incoming class are not remotely equivalent.

Why not? That's how choices are made. The 1590 kid was never guaranteed that spot. He has no idea who took "his" spot. Could have been any number of factors. He was male, from the wrong state, bested by applicants with a 1600, not well rounded enough, had a lower GPA, weaker essays, etc etc. Why this guy decided it was solely based on his race is just his best guess which excludes a number of other likely reasons.

We'll see what the US Supreme Court found out soon.

Anonymous wrote:
1450 is still 99th percentile. There's essentially no difference in their test-taking ability from someone with 1590. If all else was equal and the 1450 was significantly more courageous, kind and likeable, I'm not sure why you wouldn't choose them regardless of skin color.

serious question: how so? please, make me understand. then what do they differ in? dumb immigrant tiger mom here thinking her DC is not as successful as others that boast near perfect scores, I know s/he's as smart as those top students, s/he's just not that into it, taking mock test after mock every Sat morning for months and making associations between common questions and correct answers as I hear others do
I know you cannot teach me 101 stats but try, you seem smart enough to come up with 'no difference in their test-taking ability' despite over 100 point difference ... I mean, the score is practically some measure of the ability in taking that specific test and similar tests for that matter

SAT cannot be an intelligence measure as long as there is no standard definition of intelligence

even Dr. Frey had to admit that they found "correlations between intelligence and the SAT of roughly 0.5 to 0.9" depending on their way of defining intelligence
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6963451/

and her 'evidence' that only modest changes are possible with test prep is from 20 years ago when test prep was very much different and from couple of low impact publications ... just in my small circle of acquaintances there were several able to boost their score with between 50-100 points between two test dates few months apart

as to her claim of 'no conflict of interest', how about the fact that she is so adamant on defending her earlier career-boosting publication while ignoring latest evidence?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:China and India alone have almost 3 billion citizens.

Chinese immigrants number about 2 million a year to the US. Immigrants from India have about the same numbers.

These immigrants come here for education and better quality of life. They are a tiny percentage of Asians but they are the most likely to be hardest working with some money and family connections.

I have a friend who came here from China as a child. We have children in the same grade and are close. The rest of her extended family will not allow their children to be friends with American children. They see Americans as lazy and a distraction.

It’s a different culture and with that amount of people the Asian population could easily fill MIT, Harvard, etc a thousand times over. What are they supposed to do, especially if most of them go back to their country of origin?

I don’t understand the question…what are they supposed to do about what?

Why should we be sympathetic to the families that won’t assimilate?

What are you talking about
They are the ones who assimilate to the American way and American dream - hardworking and competition

No, the American way (which is what has made this country historically such a great place)…is that you are proud of your heritage but you are now an American and you want to embrace the country in its entirety (foibles and all). If America evolved with just a bunch of ethnic cliques keeping to themselves, the country would have a much lower GDP and overall quality of life.

Help us really understand why you are immigrating here. Someone posted a list of top engineering schools and 13/20 were in Asia, so no need to go to college in the US (in fact why would you?). If you apparently hate the people and the system…help us understand.

What are you talking about
Working hard and fair competition is not just the American way, it should be applied to everywhere
Since you asked, personally I followed my parents when I was a minor, and my kids were born here like you I guess.
I don't hate anything. I just found that the college admission system has a lot of flaws and room for improvements.
It seems that the US Supreme Court would agree with me on some of them, and we'll see progress.
Systems evolve.

You are looking for a dictatorship. It is not here.

But go on with your tutoring.

It seems that you don't understand the meaning of the word, dictatorship.
The colleges are acting like dictators when they are receiving all sorts of government aid and support.

It is the colleges who get to decide who THEY want at THEIR school. NOT the pushy parents.

colleges shouldn't decide based on race, that's the point. It's illegal to base anything on race, a protected class.

You are correct, it should not be. Most people (except Asians) believe it currently is not, except for URMs - please look up the meaning of URM.

Point being, if all of one kind come to the U.S. at once, and most expect to be admitted, it is not going to happen. It has been this way for generations. You were given bad information, and now you want that information to be true, when it is not.

No one is "expecting" to be admitted to an elite college. People are "expecting" to not be discriminated against their race. I think black people would agree that no one should be discriminated against because of their race.

Black people wish you would be just as vocal when it comes to pay disparity........right crickets....

Paying someone less because of their race is illegal, as it should be. I'm glad you agree that they're both equally immoral.

AND YET IT STILL HAPPENS THERE IS DATA SHOWING IT AND I DONT HEAR ASIAN AMERICANS TAKING UP THE BANNER FOR OTHERS. So excuse me, while I make sure that my black son takes your kids' seat.

you don't have to take up the banner for Asian Americans. The lawsuit it doing that.

The NAACP rarely takes up the banner for other minorities other than black, other than platitudes.

You didn't get the pointed jab about how black kids are taking AA seats because that's what this comes down to. AA act like the seats in institutions are already theirs. And they are overrepresented as it were. So just look at it this way, your Asian kid will go to a T25-50 and can still make more than a black kid Ivy grad.
Thanks for playing!

don't know anyone who " act like the seats in institutions are already theirs.". These kids study hard, work hard. They don't "act like the seat is already theirs".

The point is not about whether they will be ok. The point is that they are discriminated against based on their race, just like how those colleges discriminated against Jews. Wrong then; wrong now.

When only 7% of the us population is asian, and 30% of Harvard's incoming class is asian, it seems hard to say they are discriminating.
Are you going to try to tell me that blacks and latinos are not as smart as asians?

Not necessarily smarter as a group, but one thing for sure: Asian parents are much harsher disciplinarians than Black, Hispanic, or even White patients in general. Have you read a book by Yale Law Professor Amy Chua, “Battle Hymn of Tiger Mother” published over a decade ago? Her own father, Leon Chua, was a famous professor of EE at UCB. Her dad and mom came to US basically penniless and her dad worked his xxx off to get his Ph.D. Intelligence is relevant, of course, but it’s really about hard work. That book is a bit depressing to read though—how she treated her own two daughters. But both went to Ivys. I believe her old daughter went to Yale Law and clerked for Justice Kavanaugh. One thing Amy Chua’s book is revealing—although it’s a pretty well known fact—if an Asian child breaks rules or is lazy, he/she is likely to face far harsher punishment in an Asian family than in a White, Black or Hispanic family. Of course, each family is different. But in general it’s true.

And they are drilled, drilled, drilled from early childhood to make sure they perform better than anyone else. So yeah, maybe not quite the secret sauce their target colleges are looking for.

If these kids are so so smart why do they have to work so hard? I'm much more impressed by the kid who didn't spend years prepping for the SAT who can get a near perfect score in one sitting. That kid is actually smart.

That’s the point. There is no scientific evidence that one race is smarter than another. Disparity in IQ scores does not prove that there is racial disparity in INNATE intelligence.

Btw my DS didn’t take ANY SAT prep course. Just bought a couple of books to study himself. Got 1590. Maybe that’s what you call “actually smart.”

"bought a couple of books to study"

Thats prepping

But not at the level for many privileged and asians. They spend 40 hour+ with 1-1 $150/hr tutoring to get that 1580. Very different than a self motivated kid who buys the books, studies for 10-15 hours and takes the test/gets a 1580.

Why do you care about other people's prepping?
Kids cant' spend 40 hour+ without motivation and dedication.
Do whatever fits you.

If a kid spend 40+ hours practicing and training to become a captain in a varsity football team, and eventually go to a college thanks to that, that's nothing different. I've never seen people complaining about kids practicing.
Very strange mindset.

But if the colleges and universities don't value getting the top SAT score for the sake of getting the best score, it's a waste of time. Being the best football player can get you recruited to play football. But if it doesn't nobody seems to be complaining about it. There isn't a lawsuit for washed up football players who didn't make it. The people spending all their free time on a test that doesn't matter as much as they think it should have a strange mindset.

It matters unless the school is test blind.
So kids should do their best getting top score.
It's a common sense.

Also common sense is not getting rascally discriminated.
Very very common sense stuff.

For all we know every other kid admitted to those schools for the same major had a 1600 and higher GPA. 1590 wasn't good enough.

Check your math.
Three are close to 2 million test takers each year, and only about 1,000 get the 1600 perfect score.
Harvard alone admits about 2000 students.

Clueless people are pending its not a big deal to get 1600 1590, and prepping would easily do that, but it's extremely hard and a big accomplishment.

But yet Harvard and the likes no longer care, once you hit the 1500+ it does not matter. And that is what these people are mad about. So rather than recognizing that it's only 1 small part of the admission picture, they get mad that their perfect/near perfect SAT kid did not gain admission to a highly rejective school. Most elite schools only care that you hit a certain mark (or just don't submit scores) and then they dont' look at SAT/ACT anymore. It's not the be all end all for deciding who is the best candidate. You may be mad about that, but it's reality. And IMO a good reality....many more indicators of who will be successful in life than an SAT test.

Again and again and gain and gain.
Of course they have high test scores, but also they have high scores on ECs, leadership, interview, essay, etc.
Now likability score is invented.
So now these people get mad.

A hiring manager once told me that when she calls someone in for an interview they already have the job. They have been vetted and pre-qualified. The interview is just to see whether or not they want to spend 8 hours a day with them almost every day of the year.

So while I agree that "likability scores" are borderline and suspicious its not like they aren't a real thing.

LOL Asians actually scored higher on likability by interviewers who actually talked to the student one on one.

There's really no excuse.

+1 again, the issue I have with Harvard's admission is the BS "likeability' where the AO marks Asian Americans as "low likeability" without ever having met them, yet the Interviewer, who has met them, marked them "likeable".

I stated up thread, using the job analogy... imagine applying for a job, where you meet all the checkmarks, but the hiring team categorizes you as "not likeable" having never met you all because you are black. How does that not scream racial discrimination?

Of course there is racial discrimination in hiring already. Some people help the firm meet diversity initiatives and goals and some don't and hiring decisions are made accordingly.

So you are agree that this type of categorization is discrimination, both in the workplace and college admissions, yes?

When you pick one thing over another you are discriminating. It doesn't make it illegal. If I pick a blue shirt over a green shirt I have discriminated. There are only so many spots, they can't take everyone, so choices are made.

you seem confused about the law.

Picking a person with a blue shirt = not discrimination
Picking a person due to race = discrimination.

So CalTech and Berkeley denied him because his race due to affirmative action? Explain that one. Face it, this kid just wasn't good enough for admission to his top choices.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If affirmative action is banned, many students who represent the incredible diversity of Asia-Pacific nations and cultures will no longer have a URM hook (e.g., Hmong students). It's really self-defeating.

True. Many Asian-Pacific organizations oppose the lawsuit. And have indeed filed amici briefs in opposition.

Prop 209 and 16 in CA shows that many organizations are out of touch with individuals. Majority of Hispanics and Asian Americans there support a ban on affirmative action.

Dems may not want to make this a will they want to die on.

Don't be silly. In terms of college admissions- topic at hand- CA already banned AA AND the main public colleges are primarily test blind, so it really doesn't matter what they think about AA in that state anymore. In terms of politics ( you referred to Dems), CA is solid blue and will remain that way because of the same Hispanics and Asian Americans.

I'm not referring to just CA. You know that there are other blue states, too, right? And some purple states that may turn blue if Dems keep picking fights for things that most of their constituents don't care about so much.

Wrong. States are pretty much set. Just getting "redder" or "bluer".

Blame Trump.

But you can go to the Politics forum if you want to about Dems more.

This is very much tied to politics.

No party can win without the Independents, and Dems can easily lose voters if they keep trying to push affirmative action on the American people, where the majority of people don't support race based affirmative action.

Most people support affirmative action based on SES, but not race. Using SES will automatically help a lot of black kids, but the wealthy black kid doesn't need a leg up over a middle class Asian American kid.

I am an independent and think AA has been taken to an extreme...but if you think it ranks in my top 5 political issues...or maybe even top 10...you will be sadly disappointed.

Honestly, it is a hard issue to get energized about unless you really think it directly impacts you in your day-to-day.

Just my honest $.02 as an independent voter.

Indeed, so then why are Dems so hell bent on pushing affirmative action if it's not a top 5 issue for most people?

You literally answered your own question...if most people could care less about it, then why do we care how much anyone supports it (or not).

If most people don't care about it, then why are Dems pushing it so much? They spent millions on Prop 16 to overturn Prop 209 in CA, a blue state, and it was defeated. That should be a clear message to Dems that even a very blue state like CA does not support affirmative action.