Do Elite Private Colleges Discriminate Against Asian Students?

[AngryAmish]

"A recent study of the applicants to seven elite colleges in 1997 found that Asian students were much more likely to be rejected than seemingly similar students of other races. Also, athletes and students from top high schools had admissions edges, as did low-income African-Americans and Hispanics.




Translating the advantages into SAT scores, study author Thomas Espenshade, a Princeton sociologist, calculated that African-Americans who achieved 1150 scores on the two original SAT tests had the same chances of getting accepted to top private colleges in 1997 as whites who scored 1460s and Asians who scored perfect 1600s."

[paulsby]

1. this was certainly the case in california before

laws against racial preferences were enacted.

asians were "overrepresented" in academia, and especially at the more elite (for example UC Berkeley vs. UC Davis).

research for the citizen initiative against racial preferences made many mentions of this. asians were the most discriminated against (needed the highest SAT scores), to get into UC Berkeley etc. ( i realize Berkeley is public , not private).

so, it doesn't surprise me at all that "elite private colleges" in seeking equality would discriminate against asians, since asians statistically are overperformers.

[frazzled]

2. Honestly, be careful of what you are saying here

Because it sounds a lot like the "reverse racism" arguments made by right-wing whites.

If you support the notion of diversity, and especially racial and socio-economic diversity achieved through affirmative action, you should not really be hailing this as a case of "discrimination." Schools who want to balance their socio-economic and racial demographics should be able to look at more than SAT scores.

Look, my son was rejected from a bunch of colleges/universities despite a 1580 SAT score (he had gotten perfect 1600 on the PSATs). It never even occurred to me that it was because, perhaps, white-Jewish math nerds were overrepresented. It also never occurred to me to to blame it on the fact that another demographic (black? Hispanic? female?) had gotten his spot. Perhaps it was just something that didn't stand out about him aside from his intelligence (though I, of course, think he is wonderful). He ended up at an excellent school that was probably better suited to him anyway.

[paulsby]

3. what i am saying is statistical fact

if you have evidence that disputes these facts, then present them.

here are the facts.

asians academically, when looking at test scores (an objective measure), outperform whites.

those are statistical facts.

if you dispute them, let me know.

you are arguing political rhetoric. i am merely stating statistical fact.

[frazzled]

4. I don't dispute the facts--I say it is not a "discrimination" case

Having high SAT scores alone does not mean that you will be accepted into a university. There are thousands upon thousands of kids with super high SAT scores who don't get into the schools of their choice--Asian, white, or otherwise.
Universities look for the well-rounded, enterprising students ... or even these days, those able to pay for the full ride. There are a whole host of legitimate factors on which to base admission decisions.

I find the article in the OP to be racist in its premise.

[paulsby]

5. if you don't dispute the facts

then there is no disagreement.

i simply said that if an institution is looking to equalize representation, and some groups outperform and others underperform, they necessarily will discriminate against the outperformers.

that was my point.

[frazzled]

6. There you go again, using the word "discriminate"

You call it discrimination for a university to admit a bright black student who may not have had the educational opportunities or cultural background over an Asian kid.

Asian students who are not admitted, despite high scores, are not being discriminated against. Plain and simple. And again, I speak as the parent of a student who outperformed in every area, and still received rejections.

We do not agree at all.

[paulsby]

7. by definition

if you set two standards for two different groups of people, based on their race, that's discrimination.

it's about as self evident as you can get.

[JerseygirlCT]

10. But what are the standards?

Are they merely test scores? Or are there less easily measured factors here - personality, talents, interests?

Choosing students based just on tests and grades seems to me a less than ideal way to go about it.

[AngryAmish]

11. Asian kids have lesser personality, talents, interests?

Is that your argument? Why?

[JerseygirlCT]

I'm sure some do

just as some kids from other backgrounds do, too.

What I'm saying is that using only test scores and grades to make the decision about admittance to a school is a poor way of going about it. I understand that larger schools, by necessity, must go that route. And in that case, looking at only the numbers, I wouldn't be surprised to find a large number of kids with Asian backgrounds.

OTOH, smaller schools can and usually do look at the entire student. That kid with the perfect SATs might have no extra-curriculars, no interests outside the purely academic, no involvement in the community - none of the extra things that makes for a well-rounded contribution to the college's community. In that case, you might indeed find kids with lower scores and /or grades being admitted, while the top scorers are not. It's a more balanced picture. And I most certainly wouldn't blame that on discrimination, but on standards that are broader than just test scores.

[paulsby]

16. nobody said

that i am aware of, that using only test scores and grades is the best, or even a particularly good policy.

what i said, is that GIVEN such policies, requiring a HIGHER test scores for certain groups (asians etc.) than others is discrimination.

fwiw, i got into the UC system based SOLELY on my test scores. if you got over a certain score on the SAT's, they would disregard your grades.

thank god! :)

[JerseygirlCT]

18. I don't disagree

and yes, as I've said elsewhere here, I understand that larger schools usually depend on the numbers. Smaller ones can take the time to review more about each student.

And yes, I do think that making judgements about a potential student based only on their ethnicity is nuts. Really, who cares? But I do think it's a good thing for schools to attempt to look at the bigger picture with their students - and in that case, the African American kid who went to cruddy schools in a poor town, and has the lower scores to show for it, but has been involved in the community and plays a mean flute... it's good to find a way to include those kids.

[AngryAmish]

19. Can we agree that Asian kids have, on average, the highest test scores?

Can we also agree that holding the test scores constant, other races are allowed into the colleges at a higher rate than asians? Is it your argument that asians are less well rounded, on average, than non-asian kids with the same test scores?

on edit: if I am misrepresenting your argument please correct me

[JerseygirlCT]

23. I'm not arguing about generalized characteristics of any

particular ethnicity. I don't think that ought to be part of the mix at all when selecting students for admission. I'm just saying that test scores, by themselves, are not enough to accurately judge the best students for admission.

My example was a "for instance" - and what I meant to say was that it's entirely possible that a student (let's say an Asian student) with top test scores might not always be the best choice for the particular school when compared to another student (let's say African American) who tested less well, but exhibited other desirable characteristics.

I completely agree that ethnic background really ought not be part of the criteria. But I don't believe test scores ought to be the entirety of the criteria either. And that there will always be, and I think always ought to be, a part of the selection process that's subjective. Which might mean it's harder to track or prove discrimination in any particular case.

[paulsby]

13. great, but that's not the point

the point is that asians had to get higher test scores to be admitted vs. other races. that's discrimination.

[JerseygirlCT]

17. If the reason they were not admitted is based on their

ethnic heritage only, then I agree - that's discrimination. And I don't think any school ought to be concerned with some vague idea of a balance of ethnicities. To what point? A balance of skills, talents, interests that may include more than test scores, yes.

[paulsby]

21. imo

consideration of ethnicities should not play a part. if they strive to accept the most qualified students, they will get a mix of ethnicities. it may not match the population at large, but that is at least a just metric.

i don't want ot be judged by the color of my skin, but by the content of my character

[JerseygirlCT]

22. Absolutely

I'm just saying that "most qualified" may not always mean "highest SAT scores".

[paulsby]

27. of course that is true

and of course the selection tests and criteria can never be perfect. there will always be flaws.

what is important is that the public institutions at least strive to be as objective as possible in judging merit.

and since one's race is not a form of merit, it should not be relevant in the process.

[frazzled]

20. The standards are wide and varied...

Sometimes it is a student who has excelled in other than purely academic pursuits--say, she has started a program to mentor unwed mothers in her school. Leadership qualities, tenacity shown in overcoming a disability, writing skill. The list could go on. And if you put two different admissions committees together they would come up with different lists.

Sometimes the decision is based on the various departments' needs: they need more sociology or Russian majors, say, and have filled their need for math or biology students. (Do not underestimate this particular factor in the discussion at hand).

What are the standards for anything? You think the Nobel Prize choices can be quantified? No, it's a decision process that takes input from a whole committee and takes into consideration various societal, political, and aesthetic/scientific considerations. There are thousands upon thousands of writers, scientists, economists, etc. who are worthy of the prize. Picking one doesn't discriminate against all the other deserving candidates.

SAT scores are becoming less and less relevant and less and less used.

[JerseygirlCT]

24. Yes, thank you

that's exactly what I've been trying to say!

[pampango]

32. To maintain a diverse campus, universities have to "discriminate" (seperate standards for

different groups based on race). The next question is whether it is a socially useful form of discrimination which it probably is.

As the parent of a 1/2 Asian, 1/2 white son who is now a junior in college, I remember well having to reconcile my progressive support for affirmative action with the realization that, to the extent that our son was considered Asian, the bar to get into the college of his choice was likely set higher.

[mamaleah]

8. How is it not discimination to not admit a student because he is Asian???

If the student were black, it wold certainly be discrimination. Same if they were Hispanic.

Are only certain groups allowed to be discriminated against but we cannot call it that?

[JerseygirlCT]

9. I think it's also important to remember that

in smaller schools, decisions are not made only on the numbers. A fair amount depends on the student him/herself - how was the interview? What other extra-curriculars are they involved in? What sort of impact are they likely to have on a small campus?

The bigger schools must go just by the numbers - grades, SATs, a list of extra-curriculars...

[paulsby]

14. and prior to legislation

even the bigger schools (e.g. berkeley) required a HIGHER SAT score for certain people (asians) in order to get admittance.

that has been changed in california at least.

[elleng]

28. Happened years ago to Jewish students, as highly qualified,

and resulted in Brandeis.

[BlooInBloo]

12. Heh. One of the awkward things about being the so-called "good minority".

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

15. This certainly looks to be a case where students with higher scores

were not accepted based on their race - assuming of course other admission criterion was similar.
Sure, there are occasional cases where a student with low SAT scores gets chosen over a student with higher scores... but when an entire demographic is claimed to be getting admitted with nearly 30% lower scores call me a skeptic to the notion that there's not something racially based decisions happening here. Students should be admitted based on performance, and race should have no bearing on the benchmarks of acceptance.

[Nikki Stone1]

25. I remember an admissions dean from UPenn on Oprah: "Asians would be 40% of admissions if..."

Asians would be 40% of admissions (going by SATS and grades) if the school didn't use other factors. It was a show from the 1990s, and the admissions officer, an African American woman, was making the case for affirmative action.

[pampango]

36. It does get to be sticky when you limit one minority to benefit other minorities (and perhaps some

in the majority as well).

Affirmative action should be used to promote the participation of disadvantaged minorities, which would exclude Asians at least in the context of higher education. (Of course, it might also exclude women who, I believe, are a majority of college students today.) A case can certainly be made that Asians should not benefit from affirmative action in higher education since they are not a disadvantaged, underrepresented minority in that context.

To argue that their numbers should somehow be limited because they are a "too successful" minority (as many colleges did with Jews early last century) seems to be a much more difficult case to make. Of course, if Asians aren't limited and are "overrepresented" then, by definition, some other groups (other minorities, women, whites) will have to be "underrepresented".

[Seeking Serenity]

26. "They're boring"

That was the thrust of comments made by one college official about Asian students in an article I read a few months ago on the same general topic. IIRC, the official was either a fundraiser/alumni official or a student-life administrator. His position was that universities, at least secretly, wanted a lower Asian population because (and I remember this quote distinctly) "all they do is study." The thrust was that their academic discipline meant Asians generally didn't go to ball games or otherwise get into "college life," and that that didn't look so good to alumni/potential donors, or something like that.

I was floored. I'll see if I can track down the article I read later when I have more time.

[anonymous171]

29. Standardized tests are biased in favor of Asians. nt

[girl gone mad]

33. I don't know if there is any truth to that.

I did some SAT tutoring in college. My Asian students committed a lot more time and energy to studying and prepping for the tests than their peers did.

Punishing a group for their success and hard work seems unfair and counterproductive.

[taught_me_patience]

30. Asians often have last names that are easy to identify

therefore, making it easier to discriminate against. My kids will be 3/4 asian and, thankfully, will have a "white" last name, so there will be less chance of discrimination.

[pampango]

31. Our son, a junior in college now, is 1/2 Asian with a "white" last name.

I remember that a few years ago, as we were immersed in the college application process, our first inclination was to be sure that his "minority" half was prominent in his applications. As our research progressed, we were convinced that he was better off being considered as "white" rather than "Asian". (Most of the applications at the time didn't have multi-racial categories.) As a white, I saw the irony in idea that my race benefited, at least relative to Asians, from a form of affirmative action., in the sense that campuses want a "well-rounded, diverse" student body. ;)

[Dorian Gray]

34. It's affirmative action in reverse

more qualified asian students are rejected because more apply. There are quotas that they meet, and they want students of other backgrounds to enter into the school.

It's an interesting phenomenon.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

35. These stats are from 1997? 12 years ago?