Home
Asian-
American
Candidates
Asian-
American
Issues
Close
Contests
Presidential
Election
Voting
Records
Hot Topics
Write Your
Politician
News
Hate Crimes
Statistics
Reverse
Discrimination
Wen Ho Lee
Hall of Shame
Colleges
Medical
School
Law Schools
Law Firms
Veterans Free the
North Koreans
Links
Stop Being
a Sap Legal
Disclaimers
Who Is
This Guy? | |
7/27/11 The Chronicle of Higher Education: "Admissions Directors’ Power Grabs and Declining Meritocracy,"
by Richard Vedder
I spent three weeks this summer on a boat in the middle of nowhere in Russia, doing a good bit of reading about college life in America. I became convinced that admissions offices have successfully used the prevailing prejudices of the academy in a way that has greatly increased their power and reduced the objectivity and, from my perspective, fairness, in university admission policies.
After reading books like Andy Ferguson’s great Crazy U, and an as yet unpublished book by Bonnie Snyder (The New College Reality), I believe the following is approximately true of admissions policies at highly selective admissions schools:
1) Students who admissions directors know have little or no chance of being accepted are still encouraged to apply, despite the time, expense, and inevitable sense of rejection associated with the effort. This is done mainly to improve the perceived selectivity of the institution so as to enhance college rankings, even if it is costly and deceptive to those involved;
2) Some admissions offices are moving to end mandatory tests such as the SAT not for the stated reasons (i.e. claims that the tests are racially or culturally biased), but rather because reducing objective metrics on each student increases the power of admissions officers to select on the basis of personal subjective criteria;
3) Increasingly, academic merit and performance is downplayed, while considerations like race, geographic location, success in extracurricular activities, etc., are stressed;
4) Whereas in the past, subjective criteria were used to exclude Jews, blacks, and even those
attending public high schools from admission, the new rules will be used to exclude able and well qualified members of other groups (e.g. Asians and even whites). At the most prestigious schools, being a “nerd” (i.e. a highly studious individual and scholar) is increasingly a negative. Scholarly preference is becoming less important at the very top schools in terms of admission. Social skills, skin color, athletic aptitude, even sexual preference, are becoming more so, and I think that is a shame.
Standardize metrics probably cannot totally determine admissions, although they do so at universities in most of the rest of the world, without notably ill effects. Some evaluation of difficult to quantify personal characteristics in principle makes some sense. But in a world where prevailing fads sometimes lead to distorted decision making and detract from applying the same standards to all, a very strong case can be made to increase, not decrease, that standardization. Moreover, allowing admission directors more subjective control over admissions inevitably will lead to some use of corruption (e.g. I know of one case where an applicant was allegedly approached by an admissions officer for sexual favors, and another for an all-out monetary bribe), although I would hasten to add I think most admissions officers are honorable, decent people.
What is sad about this is America used to be about merit—the best get ahead, the less good fall behind. I think that is what made America great, and moving to a more subjective, less merit-based set of criteria for admissions is another sign of the weakening of America. We are replacing meritocracy with a politically correct version of aristocracy, and that is a shame. To be sure, you have to be bright and a good student to get into the best of schools, but the fact that tuition fees are lower than what would be necessary to equate demand and supply means that somehow we must allocate scarce slots. While the use of money to do this allocation, and thus make the top schools almost exclusively the playground of the rich, can be condemned on egalitarian grounds, so can the use of subjective allocation by admissions officers using whatever criteria the prejudice of the moment favors.
Richard Vedder is director of the Center for College Affordability and Productivity and professor of economics at Ohio University.
The Bigots for the Left who
perpetrate reverse discrimination against Asian Americans. Read the overwhelming evidence at Statistics on Reverse Discrimination
When universities in California, Texas and Washington were barred from considering race, admissions of Asian American applicants jumped.
Federal agencies and federal contractors keep records of how many applicants from each race apply, how many
offers are made to applicants of each race, and the racial composition of the
resulting workforce. This prevents discrimination against Asian Americans.
However, these colleges refuse to release statistics on how many Asian Americans
apply, their average test scores and GPAs, how many Asian Americans are accepted
and the same statistics for all applicants.
They are trying to hide their blatant
discrimination against Asian Americans.
All animals are equal, but some animals are
more equal than others.
According to
The Price of Admission: How America's Ruling Class Buys Its Way into Elite
Colleges - and Who Gets Left Outside the Gates, by Dan Golden, former Education
Editor of the Wall Street Journal, colleges
are making Asian applicants the new Jews and holding them to much
higher standards than other students.
National
Association of Independent Colleges and Universities (www.naicu.edu)
2/8/08 NAICU Washington Update
Likewise, after vigorous opposition from higher education, the Rules
Committee disallowed an amendment by Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) that would have
required tracking of students admitted under affirmative action policies sanctioned by
the Supreme Court.
National Association for College
Admission Counseling Tom Parker
Dean of Admissions (current)
Amherst College
Richard E. Steele
Dean of Admissions (current)
Bowdoin College
James Miller (current)
Dean of Admission
Michael Goldberger
Director of College Admissions (1997? - 2005)
Brown University
Jessica Marinaccio (current)
Eric J. Furda
Director of Undergraduate Admissions
Columbia University
Doris Davis
Associate Provost for Admissions (current)
Cornell University
Maria Laskaris (current)
Karl Furstenberg
Dean of Admissions
Dartmouth College
Christoph Guttentag
Director of Undergraduate Admissions (current)
Jean Scott (1980 - 1986)
Duke University
Charles A. Deacon
Dean of Admissions (current)
Georgetown University
William R. Fitzsimmons
Dean of Admissions (current)
Marlyn McGrath Lewis
Director of Admissions (current)
Laura G. Fisher
Director of Admissions (1985)
Fred Glimp (1970s)
Harvard College
Joe
Polisi
President
Juilliard
6/15/05 60 Minutes: The Sound of Music,
"In 1991 70% of Juilliards students came from Asian descent."
Now it is down to 11% (see Colleges:
2005).
Stuart Schmill
Dean of Admissions (2008 present)
Marilee Jones
Dean of Admissions
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
From Dan Goldens book The Price of Admission: How
America's Ruling
Class Buys Its Way into Elite Colleges -- and Who Gets Left Outside the Gates
Similarly, MIT dean
of admissions Marilee Jones rationalized the institute's rejection of a Korean-American applicant by resorting to stereotypes.
Although she wasn't able to look up his application because records for his year had
been destroyed, "it's possible that Henry Park looked like a thousand other
Korean kids with the exact same profile of grades and activities and temperament,"
she emailed me in 2003. "My guess is that he just wasn't involved or
interesting enough to surface to the top." She added that she could understand why a
university would take a celebrity child, legacy, or development admit over "yet another
textureless math grind." College administrators who made such remarks about black or
Jewish students might soon find themselves higher education outcasts."
4/27/07 Wall Street
Journal: MIT Admissions Dean Lied On Rsum in 1979, Quits,
By Keith J. Winstein and Daniel Golden
Marilee Jones, the dean of admissions at the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology was forced to resign today after the school confirmed an anonymous tip that she
had lied about graduating from college herself.
She attended college for one year, as a part-time student at
the Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in 1974, but never received the bachelor's or master's
degrees that she claimed from RPI. Nor did she receive a degree she claimed from
Albany
Medical
College, the university found. Registrars at RPI and Albany confirmed
that Ms. Jones didn't receive degrees there.
Robert Clagett
Dean of Admissions (current)
John E. Hanson
Director of Admissions
Middlebury College
Bruce J. Poch
VP and Dean of Admissions (current)
Pomona College
Janet Rapelye
Dean of Admission (current)
Fred A. Hargadon (former)
Princeton University
Julie Browning
Dean of Undergraduate Enrollment (current)
Richard N. Stabell (former)
Rice University
Richard
Shaw
Dean of Admission and Financial Aid (2006 - present)
Bob Patterson
Director of Admission (2010 - present)
Shawn Abbott
Director of Admission (2008 - 2010)
4/2/08 Stanford Daily: Room to remain for transfers- Stanford to accept
transfer applicants
despite halting of process at
Harvard,
Princeton
,
Director of Admission Shawn Abbott said a racial breakdown of the admitted class
at
Stanford - a record-low 9.5 percent of the 25,298 applicants - could not be
provided to the
public. "We never release any
racial breakdowns of the admitted freshman class," he said.
"It has been the University's long-standing policy not to do this."
[Translation: "We are Bigots for the Left.
We are discriminating against Asian Americans
and we dont want to release statistics which would make our illegal actions
obvious.]
Anna Marie Porras
Director of Admissions
Robin G. Mamlet
Dean of Admission and Financial Aid (2000 - 2005)
Robert Kinnally
Dean of Admissions (____ - 2000)
Jean Fetter
Dean of Undergraduate Admissions (1985)
Stanford University
Jim Bock
Dean of Admissions (2001 - current)
Robin G. Mamlet
Dean of Admissions (1996 - 2000)
Swarthmore College
Lee Coffin
Dean of Undergraduate Admissions (current)
David Cuttino (2003)
Tufts University
Richard C. Atkinson
President
Susan Wilbur
Undergraduate Admissions Director (2007)
University of California
2001: Proposed abandoning the SAT in order to increase the racial and
ethnic "diversity" of UC's many campuses.
Mae Brown
Director of Undergraduate Admissions
University of California San Diego
Theodore O'Neill
Admissions Director
University of Chicago
9/28/07 Wall Street Journal: The College Try May Not Get You Into College,
by Naomi Schaefer Riley
A few months ago, black presidential hopeful Barack Obama, a former U of C
lecturer, told George Stephanopoulos that he didn't think his daughters should
be treated differently in the college admissions process from any other
"advantaged" kids. But Mr. O'Neill disagrees. He would give the Obama
girls "a break" anyway: "Those children, for all their
privileges, will have interesting things to say about American society based on
what I'm assuming their experiences are." [translation: I want to
discriminate against Asian Americans in favor of African Americans who dont
even want affirmative action. I'm
a Bigot for the Left. I know what is
good for you even if you don't want it.]
Eric Kaplan
Interim
Dean of Undergraduate Admissions (2008- ____)
Lee Stetson
Dean of Undergraduate Admissions (1978-2008)
University of Pennsylvania
John A. Berg
Associate Vice Chancellor for Undergraduate Admissions (1994-current)
Nanette Tarbouni
Director of Undergraduate Admissions (current)
Washington
Univ.
(St. Louis
)
Dick Nesbitt
Director of Admission (current)
Williams College
Jeffrey Brenzel (current)
Richard H. Shaw
Dean of Undergraduate Admissions (_____ - 2005)
Yale University
August 2005 Journal
of Blacks in Higher Education (JBHE), p. 12:
At 13 of the 18 [high-ranking] universities that supplied
data to JBHE, the black student
acceptance rate was higher than the acceptance rate for white students. In some
cases the
difference was substantial. For instance, at MIT the black student acceptance
rate was nearly
twice as high as the 15.9% acceptance rate for all applicants. At the University
of Notre Dame
55.6% of black students were accepted compared to 30.4% of all applicants. At
the
University
of
Virginia
62.2% of blacks were accepted whereas 38.2% of all applicants received notices
of acceptance.
Six of the high-ranking universities we surveyed had black
acceptance rates that were lower
than the overall acceptance rate. At the
University
of
California
at
Berkeley
and the
University
of
California
at
Los Angeles
, which were prohibited from taking race into account during the 2004 admission
process, the black acceptance rate was significantly below the rate for whites.
The
black acceptance rate was also lower than the white rate at
Washington
University
,
Emory
University
, and
Wake
Forest
University
.
Info from chart on page 7:
|
College (listed according to selectivity)
|
All applicants
|
Total accepted
|
Overall acceptance rate
|
Black applicants
|
Blacks accepted
|
Black acceptance rate
|
Difference between overall acceptance rate and black acceptance
rate
|
% difference between overall acceptance rate and black acceptance
rate
|
|
Harvard
|
19,752
|
2,110
|
10.7%
|
1,263
|
211
|
16.7%
|
6
|
56.1%
|
|
MIT
|
10,466
|
1,655
|
15.9%
|
383
|
121
|
31.6%
|
15.7
|
98.7%
|
|
Brown
|
15,286
|
2,534
|
16.6%
|
923
|
243
|
26.3%
|
9.7
|
58.4%
|
|
University
of
Pennsylvania
|
18,282
|
3,878
|
21.2%
|
1,199
|
361
|
30.1%
|
8.9
|
42.0%
|
|
Georgetown
|
14,841
|
3,261
|
22.0%
|
1,009
|
310
|
30.7%
|
8.7
|
39.5%
|
|
Washington
University
|
19,822
|
4,400
|
22.2%
|
1,654
|
298
|
18.0%
|
-4.2
|
-18.9%
|
|
Rice
|
8,110
|
1,806
|
22.3%
|
487
|
140
|
28.7%
|
6.4
|
28.7%
|
|
UCLA
|
43,197
|
9,981
|
23.1%
|
1,944
|
235
|
12.1%
|
-11
|
-47.6%
|
|
UC-Berkeley
|
36,785
|
9,029
|
24.5%
|
1,553
|
236
|
15.2%
|
-9.3
|
-38.0%
|
|
Cornell
University
|
20,882
|
6,130
|
29.4%
|
1,031
|
316
|
30.6%
|
1.2
|
4.1%
|
|
Johns
Hopkins
|
11,103
|
3,323
|
29.9%
|
922
|
338
|
36.7%
|
6.8
|
22.7%
|
|
Notre Dame
|
11,491
|
3,488
|
30.4%
|
331
|
184
|
55.6%
|
25.2
|
82.9%
|
|
Vanderbilt
|
11,147
|
4,256
|
38.18%
|
705
|
295
|
41.8%
|
3.62
|
9.4%
|
|
University
of
Virginia
|
15,149
|
5,786
|
38.19%
|
1,034
|
643
|
62.2%
|
24.01
|
62.9%
|
|
Emory
|
11,218
|
4,330
|
38.6%
|
1,594
|
476
|
29.9%
|
-8.7
|
-22.5%
|
|
UNC -
Chapel Hill
|
19,053
|
6,736
|
35.4%
|
2,209
|
812
|
36.8%
|
1.4
|
4.0%
|
|
Carnegie Mellon
|
14,113
|
5,868
|
41.6%
|
715
|
324
|
45.3%
|
3.7
|
8.9%
|
|
Wake
Forest
University
|
6,289
|
2,945
|
46.8%
|
408
|
147
|
36.0%
|
-10.8
|
23.1%
|
Caltech,
Columbia
,
Dartmouth
, Duke, Northwestern, Princeton, Stanford,
University
of
Michigan
, and Yale did not submit complete data.
|