Originally Posted by Pennglock
I dont have much sympathy for the young lady in the Op.
I do feel back for young asian americans applying for the ivy league, however. All evidence points to a quota capping them at appx 20% of the student body. E.g.
· - Princeton sociologist TJ Epenshade’s work has shown Asian Americans must score 140 points higher on the SAT than their white counterparts to stand an equal chance of admission to selective universities.
· - The population of college-age Asian Americans has roughly doubled in the last 20 years while at the same time the Asian American makeup of Ivy League student bodies has either remained flat or slightly declined over the same period. Interestingly in the two highly selective universities with more or less 'race-blind' policies, Cal Tech and the UC system, Asian admissions have basically trended with their increase in population.
The stock reply I’ve heard in response to these statistics is that Ivy Admissions takes a holistic approach to evaluating applicants, and that qualities such as leadership and extracurricular accomplishment are given a weight almost equal to academics. Fair enough. But the implication of that stock reply is that these valued non-academic qualities are much rarer in Asian Americans as compared to Whites. I am skeptical of that argument.
Whats really maddening is that these schools could rebut the quota accusation with a fairly simple experimental design—have the current admissions team process a sample of applications that have been stripped of any racial markers. If the Asian American demographics admitted from this blind sample are in line with Ivys' overall Asian American admittance rate, it would be a relief. Barring that experiment, at least release the data on racial makeup of applicants in the same way they release the data on admitted students.
It's a crazy situation when whites are getting preferential treatment over asians-- I guess there is a lot of traction for the idea of not letting these campuses get too yellow. I have an asian buddy who is a big donor to our alma mater and I never get tired of calling him a race-traitor.
Here's another question: is it really a problem that those schools cap their Asian student body at 20%?
And again, a student is more than a series of test scores, it does not make a lot of sense to suggest that because one group is scoring higher on the SAT than another they should automatically make up more (or really most) of any given student body.
Also, would Harvard, Yale, ect really be what they try to represent themselves as if they were heavily populated by Asian grinders/strivers? So much of the "prestige" of those schools has little to nothing to do with the actual
raw talent of their undergrads. And test scores are not an amazing measure of "raw talent" anyway.
I read a study a while back that basically said that really talented/motivated people turned out to do equally well no matter where they went, be it Harvard or State school x.
I tend to believe it.
Harvard would not really be Harvard without the well connected (rich) student body and the legacy admissions that feed into that. These schools are the self appointed incubator of, and gatekeeper to, future power, allowing the unwashed and over tutored mob in would destroy the myth.
If those Asian Americans really want to get ahead and prove they're better than whitey who beat them out to Harvard, they should get a free ride where ever they can and go kill it by creating the next wave of tech/industry/business. Then they can donate 50k to the "right" cause and get their kids whichever degree they want.
TLDR: Cunts are still ruling the world.