Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t understand the problem.

A quick look at Harvard’s admissions data shows that 20.9 percent of admits were Asian American, which is far, far above the percentage of Americans identifying as such

Similarly, black admits were at 13.9 percent, which is a little above the national population. But there are fewer black students that do well academically in high school, so that’s a generous acceptance rate

Win-win for everyone fixated on race Asian Americans are over represented. Black Americans correspond to the national average. Most of the white kids are there because of rich kid privileges

Perfect

Not sure about the Native Americans though

again, since when does a college have to reflect the total population? Demographics of the total population doesn't have any bearing on Harvard admissions since the entire population isn't applying to Harvard.

Look at the total number of Asian American *applicants* compared to the total number admitted. That's the number you want to look at. There are waay more Asian Americans applying than URM. The rate of admissions is much lower for Asian Americans than URM, and the scores of the URM are much lower. So, it's not a win-win for Asian American applicants. Data analysis is important.

Yes, they can apply to other schools, but that is not the point of the lawsuit or the thread.

Ridiculous, outsized interest shouldn’t automatically translate to more seats. No doubt not only do more Asian Americans apply, they are more focused on STEM. Given that, the fact that they are over represented is very impressive, but these applicants are competing with themselves, and raising the bar in sub-categories like CS.

The over focus on STEM is much more likely one of the top reasons they do not get admitted. Harvard is not looking to have 60%+ of their class be engineering majors. So once the "slots for STEM/ENG are taken, they are looking to fill the English, art history, psychology, Spanish, women's studies, etc slots. Same for all T25 schools. So yes, if you are an asian stem major, you are competing against all the other STEM majors (white, black, Native American, latino, asian, you name it you are competing against it) for a space. Fact is more asians are applying for stem majors, therefore....once the slots are filled.... Not to mention that I know more top students/higher scoring/higher GPA intended STEM majors than humanities majors, so you are competing with kids with tip top scores as well

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This case is going nowhere. Those stats are run of the mill at those schools, regardless of ethnicity.

However 1450 kids get accepted with certain skin color or rich parents over 1590 kid because.... courage, kindness, and likability?

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.

I think the difference is big between 1450 and 1590. 1450 might be 99th percentile, but it's not good enough especially for those elite schools.
Now 1590 is what? like 99.99 percentile? Now we are talking.
We all know that courage, kindness, and likability score is bullshit.

They keep admitting them. They keep graduating. How is that even possible?

It's because the real threshold is 1400. Anything over that is perfectly fine. They can pull names from hats at that point.

that's the problem.
why pull names from hats when they can admit the 1590 kid who deserves more than the 1400 kid.

You are completely wrong and misunderstand this test and how it is used. It isn't "best score wins." It's "does the result show that this kid can handle college?" You aren't ranked by score. You get over the threshold, and it is enough for that small part of the application process.

This 1000%! The 1590 kid does not deserve anything anymore than a strong 1400 candidate. FYI--there are plenty with 1590 that do make the cut, but not everyone for good reasons (and no it's not the color of their skin---it's everything else added up)

That’s insane. What’s your basis for claiming that a 1400 kid and a 1590 kid are basically equivalent? Barring really strange personal factors, the 1590 kid is vastly more talented academically and it’s not even close. And how much time do you think admissions officers spend to evaluate the “intangibles” of a particular candidate relative to others? Not enough to allow a meaningful weighing. Holistic admissions is basically just a cover for demographic adjustments to the student body because expressly doing so is illegal. Everything else is just a rounding error.

That 1400 kid might also play the clarinet and tennis. Or have other talents the school is looking for that you, personally, don't value. We're never just going to have highest test score wins, without taking anything else into account. It's not the American way.

The Harvard data shows Asians applicants with higher test scores also have higher scores on ECs and Leadership overall.

Wrong.

You stating this over and over doesn't change the facts. The LORs and teacher recs were meh.

Good academic stats aren't enough for Harvard and elite oublics. Maybe for other state colleges.

I like to call it the "It factor"---most of the T10 schools are looking for "it", and that may be slightly different at each school. The kids I know who are at Harvard and other T10 schools just have a little bit extra when it comes to everything---they seem genuine and look to be game changers in life. Plenty of kids have the stats (SAT and GPA) but don't get in---likely because they don't have everything else and race has nothing to do with that. And yes, LOR, teacher rec and essays may show that. The T10-25 schools are looking for kids that are going to be game changers and who are naturally driven and intellectually curious---they can tell who has prepped their whole life for getting into college vs those who just have something natural/natural drive.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Looks very much like racial discrimination against Asian students.

We'll see the outcome from the US Supreme Court.

If I was part of admissions committee and received the aggregate feedback of 2 LORs and guidance counselor ( from kid's own school!) and alumni interviewer about a given applicant, I'm not surprised that the personality score was low.

As the lower courts have ruled, this doesn't prove discrimination.

And...what in the heck does this have to do with affirmative action? Whites are being compared to Asians in the chart, not URMs.

?? why? Asian students are on par on LORs and have higher score on interview.

They were being nice, so only compared it to Whites.
Imagine comparing it to Blacks/Hispanics

The lower scores came from the applicant's own teachers and guidance counselor!

The alumni interviewer's score was low.

THREE relatively low scores from three different sources.

The admissions committee reviews thousands of applications: they are not going to meet most applications in person. Their scoring is based on the data received.

No discrimination.

Weak "evidence" and probably cherry picked.

You seem to have trouble reading data:



Alumni interviewer = much higher than white
Teacher rec1 = a bit higher than white
Teacher rec2 = a bit higher than white
Personal interviewer = a bit higher than white
Guidance counselor = a bit lower than white

AO = much lower than white


There is clearly racial discrimination going on.
WTF are you going on about?

So perhaps their essays were not as good/warm/fuzzy as the others.

I'm sure Harvard said the same about those Jews.

When 96%+ are rejected, it is not about race. It's about small nuances and yes, there will be asians who get in and have the "it" factor most T25 want. There will also be some asians with a mostly great package, but who seem a bit to "box check'ed style" and not genuinely intellectually curious/go change the world person. Guess what that person may not get in---the same person who is white/black/latino/asian/other may also not get in. Because the essays mean something---AO can tell who is genuine and who is "pay to play"/just clicking boxes. Does not mean they are racist. You keep arguing about the rejection, when 96%+ get rejected....people of all races get rejected.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t understand the problem.

A quick look at Harvard’s admissions data shows that 20.9 percent of admits were Asian American, which is far, far above the percentage of Americans identifying as such

Similarly, black admits were at 13.9 percent, which is a little above the national population. But there are fewer black students that do well academically in high school, so that’s a generous acceptance rate

Win-win for everyone fixated on race Asian Americans are over represented. Black Americans correspond to the national average. Most of the white kids are there because of rich kid privileges

Perfect

Not sure about the Native Americans though

again, since when does a college have to reflect the total population? Demographics of the total population doesn't have any bearing on Harvard admissions since the entire population isn't applying to Harvard.

Look at the total number of Asian American *applicants* compared to the total number admitted. That's the number you want to look at. There are waay more Asian Americans applying than URM. The rate of admissions is much lower for Asian Americans than URM, and the scores of the URM are much lower. So, it's not a win-win for Asian American applicants. Data analysis is important.

Yes, they can apply to other schools, but that is not the point of the lawsuit or the thread.

It IS about a demographic profile! How many young men want to attend a school with few women? Not many. Same with women; they want men. Gender has nothing to do with smarts, but it is an important criteria anyway. The same is true of ethnicity. Asians don’t seem to understand that American colleges are not just about smarts. What’s next? Do Asians want more Asian immigration because they’re smart? Should the US give immigrants IQ tests? You could make an argument for such, but that isn’t what’s done. Get over yourselves!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t understand the problem.

A quick look at Harvard’s admissions data shows that 20.9 percent of admits were Asian American, which is far, far above the percentage of Americans identifying as such

Similarly, black admits were at 13.9 percent, which is a little above the national population. But there are fewer black students that do well academically in high school, so that’s a generous acceptance rate

Win-win for everyone fixated on race Asian Americans are over represented. Black Americans correspond to the national average. Most of the white kids are there because of rich kid privileges

Perfect

Not sure about the Native Americans though

again, since when does a college have to reflect the total population? Demographics of the total population doesn't have any bearing on Harvard admissions since the entire population isn't applying to Harvard.

Look at the total number of Asian American *applicants* compared to the total number admitted. That's the number you want to look at. There are waay more Asian Americans applying than URM. The rate of admissions is much lower for Asian Americans than URM, and the scores of the URM are much lower. So, it's not a win-win for Asian American applicants. Data analysis is important.

Yes, they can apply to other schools, but that is not the point of the lawsuit or the thread.

Ridiculous, outsized interest shouldn’t automatically translate to more seats. No doubt not only do more Asian Americans apply, they are more focused on STEM. Given that, the fact that they are over represented is very impressive, but these applicants are competing with themselves, and raising the bar in sub-categories like CS.

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:This case is going nowhere. Those stats are run of the mill at those schools, regardless of ethnicity.

However 1450 kids get accepted with certain skin color or rich parents over 1590 kid because.... courage, kindness, and likability?

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.

I think the difference is big between 1450 and 1590. 1450 might be 99th percentile, but it's not good enough especially for those elite schools.
Now 1590 is what? like 99.99 percentile? Now we are talking.
We all know that courage, kindness, and likability score is bullshit.

They keep admitting them. They keep graduating. How is that even possible?

It's because the real threshold is 1400. Anything over that is perfectly fine. They can pull names from hats at that point.

that's the problem.
why pull names from hats when they can admit the 1590 kid who deserves more than the 1400 kid.

You are completely wrong and misunderstand this test and how it is used. It isn't "best score wins." It's "does the result show that this kid can handle college?" You aren't ranked by score. You get over the threshold, and it is enough for that small part of the application process.

This 1000%! The 1590 kid does not deserve anything anymore than a strong 1400 candidate. FYI--there are plenty with 1590 that do make the cut, but not everyone for good reasons (and no it's not the color of their skin---it's everything else added up)

That’s insane. What’s your basis for claiming that a 1400 kid and a 1590 kid are basically equivalent? Barring really strange personal factors, the 1590 kid is vastly more talented academically and it’s not even close. And how much time do you think admissions officers spend to evaluate the “intangibles” of a particular candidate relative to others? Not enough to allow a meaningful weighing. Holistic admissions is basically just a cover for demographic adjustments to the student body because expressly doing so is illegal. Everything else is just a rounding error.

That 1400 kid might also play the clarinet and tennis. Or have other talents the school is looking for that you, personally, don't value. We're never just going to have highest test score wins, without taking anything else into account. It's not the American way.

The Harvard data shows Asians applicants with higher test scores also have higher scores on ECs and Leadership overall.

Wrong.

You stating this over and over doesn't change the facts. The LORs and teacher recs were meh.

Good academic stats aren't enough for Harvard and elite oublics. Maybe for other state colleges.

Data shows the LOR were slightly higher than white applicants. It may be "meh", but along with everything else, those students have a stellar application.

It's also interesting that they didn't show a comparison with URM kids. I wonder how the data would look compared to them.

Vast majority of applicants to Harvard have "stellar" applications. With a 3-4% acceptance rate, rejections are the norm.

The fact that SFFA compared Asians and whites demonstrates that this case has nothing to do with affirmative action, but the SFFA is being slick wrapping this into the case with a conservative SCOTUS majority.

But the data shows that the Asian American applicants have *much* higher stats, activities, and leadership than the next highest group (white), so yes, Asian American applicants have much more *stellar* applications.

Where's the data? Have a link?

Crickets....

? maybe read through the posts before posting. The data was posted several times in this thread.

Nope.

Babbling posts does not equal data. Nice try. Lawyer wannabes want to add conjecture, " the data says.....!" without citing....the data.

SHM

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:This case is going nowhere. Those stats are run of the mill at those schools, regardless of ethnicity.

However 1450 kids get accepted with certain skin color or rich parents over 1590 kid because.... courage, kindness, and likability?

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.

I think the difference is big between 1450 and 1590. 1450 might be 99th percentile, but it's not good enough especially for those elite schools.
Now 1590 is what? like 99.99 percentile? Now we are talking.
We all know that courage, kindness, and likability score is bullshit.

They keep admitting them. They keep graduating. How is that even possible?

It's because the real threshold is 1400. Anything over that is perfectly fine. They can pull names from hats at that point.

that's the problem.
why pull names from hats when they can admit the 1590 kid who deserves more than the 1400 kid.

You are completely wrong and misunderstand this test and how it is used. It isn't "best score wins." It's "does the result show that this kid can handle college?" You aren't ranked by score. You get over the threshold, and it is enough for that small part of the application process.

This 1000%! The 1590 kid does not deserve anything anymore than a strong 1400 candidate. FYI--there are plenty with 1590 that do make the cut, but not everyone for good reasons (and no it's not the color of their skin---it's everything else added up)

That’s insane. What’s your basis for claiming that a 1400 kid and a 1590 kid are basically equivalent? Barring really strange personal factors, the 1590 kid is vastly more talented academically and it’s not even close. And how much time do you think admissions officers spend to evaluate the “intangibles” of a particular candidate relative to others? Not enough to allow a meaningful weighing. Holistic admissions is basically just a cover for demographic adjustments to the student body because expressly doing so is illegal. Everything else is just a rounding error.

That 1400 kid might also play the clarinet and tennis. Or have other talents the school is looking for that you, personally, don't value. We're never just going to have highest test score wins, without taking anything else into account. It's not the American way.

The Harvard data shows Asians applicants with higher test scores also have higher scores on ECs and Leadership overall.

Wrong.

You stating this over and over doesn't change the facts. The LORs and teacher recs were meh.

Good academic stats aren't enough for Harvard and elite oublics. Maybe for other state colleges.

Data shows the LOR were slightly higher than white applicants. It may be "meh", but along with everything else, those students have a stellar application.

It's also interesting that they didn't show a comparison with URM kids. I wonder how the data would look compared to them.

Vast majority of applicants to Harvard have "stellar" applications. With a 3-4% acceptance rate, rejections are the norm.

The fact that SFFA compared Asians and whites demonstrates that this case has nothing to do with affirmative action, but the SFFA is being slick wrapping this into the case with a conservative SCOTUS majority.

But the data shows that the Asian American applicants have *much* higher stats, activities, and leadership than the next highest group (white), so yes, Asian American applicants have much more *stellar* applications.

Where's the data? Have a link?

Crickets....

? maybe read through the posts before posting. The data was posted several times in this thread.

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:This case is going nowhere. Those stats are run of the mill at those schools, regardless of ethnicity.

However 1450 kids get accepted with certain skin color or rich parents over 1590 kid because.... courage, kindness, and likability?

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.

I think the difference is big between 1450 and 1590. 1450 might be 99th percentile, but it's not good enough especially for those elite schools.
Now 1590 is what? like 99.99 percentile? Now we are talking.
We all know that courage, kindness, and likability score is bullshit.

They keep admitting them. They keep graduating. How is that even possible?

It's because the real threshold is 1400. Anything over that is perfectly fine. They can pull names from hats at that point.

that's the problem.
why pull names from hats when they can admit the 1590 kid who deserves more than the 1400 kid.

You are completely wrong and misunderstand this test and how it is used. It isn't "best score wins." It's "does the result show that this kid can handle college?" You aren't ranked by score. You get over the threshold, and it is enough for that small part of the application process.

This 1000%! The 1590 kid does not deserve anything anymore than a strong 1400 candidate. FYI--there are plenty with 1590 that do make the cut, but not everyone for good reasons (and no it's not the color of their skin---it's everything else added up)

That’s insane. What’s your basis for claiming that a 1400 kid and a 1590 kid are basically equivalent? Barring really strange personal factors, the 1590 kid is vastly more talented academically and it’s not even close. And how much time do you think admissions officers spend to evaluate the “intangibles” of a particular candidate relative to others? Not enough to allow a meaningful weighing. Holistic admissions is basically just a cover for demographic adjustments to the student body because expressly doing so is illegal. Everything else is just a rounding error.

That 1400 kid might also play the clarinet and tennis. Or have other talents the school is looking for that you, personally, don't value. We're never just going to have highest test score wins, without taking anything else into account. It's not the American way.

The Harvard data shows Asians applicants with higher test scores also have higher scores on ECs and Leadership overall.

Wrong.

You stating this over and over doesn't change the facts. The LORs and teacher recs were meh.

Good academic stats aren't enough for Harvard and elite oublics. Maybe for other state colleges.

Data shows the LOR were slightly higher than white applicants. It may be "meh", but along with everything else, those students have a stellar application.

It's also interesting that they didn't show a comparison with URM kids. I wonder how the data would look compared to them.

Vast majority of applicants to Harvard have "stellar" applications. With a 3-4% acceptance rate, rejections are the norm.

The fact that SFFA compared Asians and whites demonstrates that this case has nothing to do with affirmative action, but the SFFA is being slick wrapping this into the case with a conservative SCOTUS majority.

But the data shows that the Asian American applicants have *much* higher stats, activities, and leadership than the next highest group (white), so yes, Asian American applicants have much more *stellar* applications.

Where's the data? Have a link?

Crickets....

Anonymous wrote:I don’t understand the problem.

A quick look at Harvard’s admissions data shows that 20.9 percent of admits were Asian American, which is far, far above the percentage of Americans identifying as such

Similarly, black admits were at 13.9 percent, which is a little above the national population. But there are fewer black students that do well academically in high school, so that’s a generous acceptance rate

Win-win for everyone fixated on race Asian Americans are over represented. Black Americans correspond to the national average. Most of the white kids are there because of rich kid privileges

Perfect

Not sure about the Native Americans though

again, since when does a college have to reflect the total population? Demographics of the total population doesn't have any bearing on Harvard admissions since the entire population isn't applying to Harvard.

Look at the total number of Asian American *applicants* compared to the total number admitted. That's the number you want to look at. There are waay more Asian Americans applying than URM. The rate of admissions is much lower for Asian Americans than URM, and the scores of the URM are much lower. So, it's not a win-win for Asian American applicants. Data analysis is important.

Yes, they can apply to other schools, but that is not the point of the lawsuit or the thread.

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:This case is going nowhere. Those stats are run of the mill at those schools, regardless of ethnicity.

However 1450 kids get accepted with certain skin color or rich parents over 1590 kid because.... courage, kindness, and likability?

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.

I think the difference is big between 1450 and 1590. 1450 might be 99th percentile, but it's not good enough especially for those elite schools.
Now 1590 is what? like 99.99 percentile? Now we are talking.
We all know that courage, kindness, and likability score is bullshit.

They keep admitting them. They keep graduating. How is that even possible?

It's because the real threshold is 1400. Anything over that is perfectly fine. They can pull names from hats at that point.

that's the problem.
why pull names from hats when they can admit the 1590 kid who deserves more than the 1400 kid.

You are completely wrong and misunderstand this test and how it is used. It isn't "best score wins." It's "does the result show that this kid can handle college?" You aren't ranked by score. You get over the threshold, and it is enough for that small part of the application process.

This 1000%! The 1590 kid does not deserve anything anymore than a strong 1400 candidate. FYI--there are plenty with 1590 that do make the cut, but not everyone for good reasons (and no it's not the color of their skin---it's everything else added up)

That’s insane. What’s your basis for claiming that a 1400 kid and a 1590 kid are basically equivalent? Barring really strange personal factors, the 1590 kid is vastly more talented academically and it’s not even close. And how much time do you think admissions officers spend to evaluate the “intangibles” of a particular candidate relative to others? Not enough to allow a meaningful weighing. Holistic admissions is basically just a cover for demographic adjustments to the student body because expressly doing so is illegal. Everything else is just a rounding error.

That 1400 kid might also play the clarinet and tennis. Or have other talents the school is looking for that you, personally, don't value. We're never just going to have highest test score wins, without taking anything else into account. It's not the American way.

The Harvard data shows Asians applicants with higher test scores also have higher scores on ECs and Leadership overall.

Wrong.

You stating this over and over doesn't change the facts. The LORs and teacher recs were meh.

Good academic stats aren't enough for Harvard and elite oublics. Maybe for other state colleges.

Data shows the LOR were slightly higher than white applicants. It may be "meh", but along with everything else, those students have a stellar application.

It's also interesting that they didn't show a comparison with URM kids. I wonder how the data would look compared to them.

Vast majority of applicants to Harvard have "stellar" applications. With a 3-4% acceptance rate, rejections are the norm.

The fact that SFFA compared Asians and whites demonstrates that this case has nothing to do with affirmative action, but the SFFA is being slick wrapping this into the case with a conservative SCOTUS majority.

But the data shows that the Asian American applicants have *much* higher stats, activities, and leadership than the next highest group (white), so yes, Asian American applicants have much more *stellar* applications.

I don’t understand the problem.

A quick look at Harvard’s admissions data shows that 20.9 percent of admits were Asian American, which is far, far above the percentage of Americans identifying as such

Similarly, black admits were at 13.9 percent, which is a little above the national population. But there are fewer black students that do well academically in high school, so that’s a generous acceptance rate

Win-win for everyone fixated on race Asian Americans are over represented. Black Americans correspond to the national average. Most of the white kids are there because of rich kid privileges

Perfect

Not sure about the Native Americans though

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With all but MIT, the colleges cited are either test optional or test blind.

Any of those colleges could have picked anyone with a better overall application under TO that they wanted. The colleges pick who they want.

He didn't get in MIT ( SAT mandated) OR Berkeley (test blind).

T20s are REALLY competitive.

Stop whining!

+1000

Schools have never stated "we want the kids with the highest SAT and the most APs". They want well rounded kids. So that means, anyone with over ~1450-1500 (if not test blind) has made the "first cut" Then they want to see what the kid has done---academically, socially, volunteering, ECs, etc. Write a compelling essay and you can get it, if the right person reads it. Fact is 90-95% of kids will be REJECTED at T25 schools, so it's not discriminatory---they are just picking "anyone they like better/think is a better fit for their freshman class". And yes, my 1490, 3.9UW, only 7 APs can be a "better fit" than your 1600/4.0/14 APs because of the rest of the application.

What we're hearing actually is that top schools don't want well-rounded either. They want top stats across the board, yes, but you also have to be a superstar in some area, not "well rounded". They want well-rounded classes comprised of superstars in their respective fields

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:This case is going nowhere. Those stats are run of the mill at those schools, regardless of ethnicity.

However 1450 kids get accepted with certain skin color or rich parents over 1590 kid because.... courage, kindness, and likability?

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.

I think the difference is big between 1450 and 1590. 1450 might be 99th percentile, but it's not good enough especially for those elite schools.
Now 1590 is what? like 99.99 percentile? Now we are talking.
We all know that courage, kindness, and likability score is bullshit.

They keep admitting them. They keep graduating. How is that even possible?

It's because the real threshold is 1400. Anything over that is perfectly fine. They can pull names from hats at that point.

that's the problem.
why pull names from hats when they can admit the 1590 kid who deserves more than the 1400 kid.

You are completely wrong and misunderstand this test and how it is used. It isn't "best score wins." It's "does the result show that this kid can handle college?" You aren't ranked by score. You get over the threshold, and it is enough for that small part of the application process.

This 1000%! The 1590 kid does not deserve anything anymore than a strong 1400 candidate. FYI--there are plenty with 1590 that do make the cut, but not everyone for good reasons (and no it's not the color of their skin---it's everything else added up)

That’s insane. What’s your basis for claiming that a 1400 kid and a 1590 kid are basically equivalent? Barring really strange personal factors, the 1590 kid is vastly more talented academically and it’s not even close. And how much time do you think admissions officers spend to evaluate the “intangibles” of a particular candidate relative to others? Not enough to allow a meaningful weighing. Holistic admissions is basically just a cover for demographic adjustments to the student body because expressly doing so is illegal. Everything else is just a rounding error.

That 1400 kid might also play the clarinet and tennis. Or have other talents the school is looking for that you, personally, don't value. We're never just going to have highest test score wins, without taking anything else into account. It's not the American way.

The Harvard data shows Asians applicants with higher test scores also have higher scores on ECs and Leadership overall.

Overall doesn't matter. There are specific slots that will be filled. I knew a girl in high school who went to Harvard to play softball. She was not very smart. But, she played softball well enough. No way she had a 1400 or 1590 on her SAT.

yea sounds very stupid.
1400 with Softball over 1500.
WTF

It's GPA, class rigor, test scores etc etc etc etc etc combined

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Everyone calm down - satire

Website:
https://www.theonion.com/perfect-4-0-student-rejected-from-university-just-for-b-1850544909

Ig:
https://www.instagram.com/p/CtrLYqxMN0q/?igshid=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==

This is actually interesting.
These schools are saying they look at the whole person and characters like courage, kindness, etc..
I wonder the crime rate of Asian students relative to other races in like T25 school.

ZERO

Pretty infamous exception in VA, though.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Everyone calm down - satire

Website:
https://www.theonion.com/perfect-4-0-student-rejected-from-university-just-for-b-1850544909

Ig:
https://www.instagram.com/p/CtrLYqxMN0q/?igshid=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==

This is actually interesting.
These schools are saying they look at the whole person and characters like courage, kindness, etc..
I wonder the crime rate of Asian students relative to other races in like T25 school.

ZERO

So??

sounds like they are kind and likable