Anonymous wrote:

Asian American admission rates are the same as overall admission rates. That's not evidence of racial discrimination or a quota.

Absolutely irrelevant. What matters is the comparative admission rates of kids at a same level of preparedness.

And casting the argument in these terms really suggests that the grievance is not that Asian Americans are kept out of Harvard but that African Americans and Hispanics are let in.

I don't see how. (And I am Hispanic, btw, so please don't try to speak on my behalf). What I see Asian Americans doing now is similar to what Jewish Americans had to do decades ago, this is, to prevent discrimination against them. If they deserve more seats, they should get them.

And, those seats could come from multiple sources, from legacy to sports preferences to mainstream admissions to, why not, affirmative action policies.

It is you the one transforming "Asians fighting for their rights" into "Asians attacking blacks."

Asian American admission rates are the same as overall admission rates. That's not evidence of racial discrimination or a quota.

And casting the argument in these terms really suggests that the grievance is not that Asian Americans are kept out of Harvard but that African Americans and Hispanics are let in.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oops, I was going off of what you said. If we go over the corrected data it's even more uniform:

Black - 3,731 applied - 241 accepted - 6.4% accepted
Hispanic - 4,663 applied - 265 accepted - 5.7% accepted
Asian - 7,871 applied - 418 accepted - 5.3% accepted
Overall - 37,305 applied - 1,990 accepted - 5.3% accepted

You are obsessing over between a .4% and a 1.1% difference in acceptance rates.

Actually, these stats seem to support complaints Asian-Americans.

1.1% out of 5.3% is 20%.

Can someone seriously claim that, from the overall pool of applicants, AAs are at least 20% better qualified than Asians?

If anything, it is probably the opposite.

The sample size is tiny and the percentages are small. You expect some variation. It's not a big difference.

Anonymous wrote:There are more Asian American undergrads at Chapel Hill than at Harvard.

What surprised me about the white plaintiff was that commentary about the lawsuits has been framed in terms of racial discrimination against Asian-Americans. What the presence of the white plaintiff suggests is that the goal here is really to get rid of race conscious admissions policies designed to give historically under-represented minorities access to elite universities.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are more Asian American undergrads at Chapel Hill than at Harvard.

What surprised me about the white plaintiff was that commentary about the lawsuits has been framed in terms of racial discrimination against Asian-Americans. What the presence of the white plaintiff suggests is that the goal here is really to get rid of race conscious admissions policies designed to give historically under-represented minorities access to elite universities.

But work done by Tom Espenshade (Princeton) suggests that getting rid of affirmative action really wouldn't change anything for white applicants.

http://www.princeton.edu/main/news/archive/S11/80/78Q19/index.xml?section=newsreleases

Removing consideration of race would have little effect on white students, the report concludes, as their acceptance rate would rise by merely 0.5 percentage points. Espenshade noted that when one group loses ground, another has to gain -- in this case it would be Asian applicants. Asian students would fill nearly four out of every five places in the admitted class not taken by African-American and Hispanic students

Now, granted at places like UNC and flagship state schools things would be different because racial demographics are widely different in various states.

Anonymous wrote:There are more Asian American undergrads at Chapel Hill than at Harvard.

What surprised me about the white plaintiff was that commentary about the lawsuits has been framed in terms of racial discrimination against Asian-Americans. What the presence of the white plaintiff suggests is that the goal here is really to get rid of race conscious admissions policies designed to give historically under-represented minorities access to elite universities.

Removing consideration of race would have little effect on white students, the report concludes, as their acceptance rate would rise by merely 0.5 percentage points. Espenshade noted that when one group loses ground, another has to gain -- in this case it would be Asian applicants. Asian students would fill nearly four out of every five places in the admitted class not taken by African-American and Hispanic students

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just noticed that the plaintiff in the UNC case is white -- not Asian.

Re the Asian-American population increasing but the percentage of Asian American students at Harvard staying constant. Two non-quota explanations come quickly
to mind. One is that Harvard was taking a critical mass approach rather than proportionate representation. The other is that Harvard's concept of diversity has become less racialized and serving other constituencies -- e.g. international students, first generation college students, lower-income students -- has become a higher priority than it was 20 years ago.

Has anyone seen data on the racial demographics of Harvard College's international students?

That's because an Asian would be embarrassed to go there, let alone 'fight' to get in.

Anonymous wrote:Just noticed that the plaintiff in the UNC case is white -- not Asian.

Re the Asian-American population increasing but the percentage of Asian American students at Harvard staying constant. Two non-quota explanations come quickly
to mind. One is that Harvard was taking a critical mass approach rather than proportionate representation. The other is that Harvard's concept of diversity has become less racialized and serving other constituencies -- e.g. international students, first generation college students, lower-income students -- has become a higher priority than it was 20 years ago.

Has anyone seen data on the racial demographics of Harvard College's international students?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oops, I was going off of what you said. If we go over the corrected data it's even more uniform:

Black - 3,731 applied - 241 accepted - 6.4% accepted
Hispanic - 4,663 applied - 265 accepted - 5.7% accepted
Asian - 7,871 applied - 418 accepted - 5.3% accepted
Overall - 37,305 applied - 1,990 accepted - 5.3% accepted

You are obsessing over between a .4% and a 1.1% difference in acceptance rates.

Actually, these stats seem to support complaints Asian-Americans.

1.1% out of 5.3% is 20%.

Can someone seriously claim that, from the overall pool of applicants, AAs are at least 20% better qualified than Asians?

If anything, it is probably the opposite.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just noticed that the plaintiff in the UNC case is white -- not Asian.

Re the Asian-American population increasing but the percentage of Asian American students at Harvard staying constant. Two non-quota explanations come quickly
to mind. One is that Harvard was taking a critical mass approach rather than proportionate representation. The other is that Harvard's concept of diversity has become less racialized and serving other constituencies -- e.g. international students, first generation college students, lower-income students -- has become a higher priority than it was 20 years ago.

Has anyone seen data on the racial demographics of Harvard College's international students?

If this is true, AA admissions would be getting lower and lower.

Are they?