|
One thing I've seen is that the Asian American percent at top SLACs is consistently lower than that in Ivies and other top 20 universities. For example:
Top Universities- Stanford: 29% Caltech- 37% Columbia- 30% MIT- 40% Yale- 27% Rice- 38% Duke- 32% Johns Hopkins- 27% Northwestern- 27% Top LACs- Amherst- 14% Swarthmore- 18% Wellesley- 23% Pomona- 18% Williams- 13% Harvey Mudd- 20% Davidson- 10% Carleton- 10% Why does this discrepancy exist? |
Top SLACs are as hard to get into as Harvard. Asian-Americans lack grades and money to get into them. |
| Asians don't like paying inflated prices for no-name products. |
| Asian Americans don't SLACK. |
|
|
Asian Americans don't have to/want to pay 90K/year for the privilege of pretending their kids attend some exotic no-name small LAC.
Besides, public universities are cheaper and offer better STEM majors. |
| SLACS are less popular in general. |
|
+1000 Asians have grit. We are strong and don't need the relentless coddling and hand-holding of Middlebury or Vassar. Besides, UMD has much better STEM. |
|
This is a little dated but probably still relevant:
"As one guidance counselor lamented to me, Asian-American parents just don't show up for information sessions featuring lesser known or liberal arts colleges, regardless of the quality of the school. Yet when it comes to the big name schools, you can't find a seat." "In many Asian countries, where you go to college determines the course of your professional life. It makes sense that Asian-American parents would think the same holds true in the U.S., and it used to, but not anymore." https://www.huffpost.com/entry/college-admissions-and-th_b_3255465 |
Is this a joke? |
This is a joke. |
| First generation may not know enough about top SLACs to apply. The next generation knows better and does. |
The top ones pull a similar amount of black and Hispanic students. It's the Asian demographic that is noticeably smaller. |
Many people consider all SLACs to be below the top 100 national universities |