Harvard Generously Imposes A Quota On Blacks

Harvard, as many of you know, has recently adopted a new financial aid scheme that “substantially discount[s] costs for all but the very wealthiest students.” This move immediately generated fears, as expressed in this article from the Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, that Harvard’s largesse “will lure affluent and brightest blacks away from state universities.” (HatTip to reader Ed Chin)

An important question is the effect of the new plan on college-bound African Americans. It is certain that the new plan will draw more affluent blacks to Harvard. Consider, as an example, a high achieving black student from a Detroit suburb whose family income is $150,000 or more. In the past, this student would have shied away from applying to Harvard because of its high cost — now approaching $50,000 a year — and the unavailability of financial aid for a student from a family with this relatively high level of income. In most cases, Harvard would have lost this highly accomplished student to the University of Michigan, where in-state tuition costs are a fraction of Harvard’s comprehensive fees. Now the same student may apply to Harvard knowing that if accepted he or she will not have to pay any more than it would cost to attend the University of Michigan.

Not to worry, says Harvard, generously imposing a quota on the number of blacks it will buy.

In an effort to persuade the academic community that Harvard’s financial muscle should not be feared, Harvard will make the point that at best it will enroll 200 black freshmen each year. Thus, it will be argued that its new financial aid plan will have a negligible effect on enrollments of blacks at America’s leading state universities.

It’s nice (for its competitors) for Harvard to impose on itself a quota on the number of blacks it will buy, but I’m not sure 200 is a very reassuring number, given the data reported in another article in the Journal of Blacks in Higher Education:

In 2005, 153,132 African Americans took the SAT test. They made up 10.4 percent of all SAT test takers. But only 1,132 African-American college-bound students scored 700 or above on the math SAT and only 1,205 scored at least 700 on the verbal SAT.

….

If we raise the top-scoring threshold to students scoring 750 or above on both the math and verbal SAT — a level equal to the mean score of students entering the nation’s most selective colleges such as Harvard, Princeton, and CalTech — we find that in the entire country 244 blacks scored 750 or above on the math SAT and 363 black students scored 750 or above on the verbal portion of the test.

Assuming that Harvard’s 200 will come from this high-scoring pool, that leaves a considerably smaller number over which all the other “diversity”-seeking selective institutions will have to compete.

Say What? (18)

  1. E February 15, 2008 at 12:14 pm | | Reply

    [If we raise the top-scoring threshold to students scoring 750 or above on both the math and verbal SAT — a level equal to the mean score of students entering the nation's most selective colleges such as Harvard, Princeton, and CalTech — we find that in the entire country 244 blacks scored 750 or above on the math SAT and 363 black students scored 750 or above on the verbal portion of the test. ]

    Harvard and Yale Colleges’ entering freshman now have a SAT I composite (Math and Verbal combined) score of almost 1500 or even more for the upcoming year, since this score has been increasing every year. CalTech’s average SAT I Math and Verbal COMBINED score is about 1530! Princeton’s average SAT I composite score is about 1480.

    Citing the data above, the number of blacks achieving a COMBINED score of 1500 or above on the SAT I Math and Verbal is statistically MUCH SMALLER (less than one half smaller) than the number of blacks we find in the entire country – 244 blacks scored 750 or above on the math SAT and 363 black students scored 750 or above on the verbal portion of the test.

    In other words, there are MUCH, MUCH LESS THAN 200 blacks who achieve a combined score of SAT I Math and Verbal of 1500 in the whole country. This is an incredibly small number, leaving no black high scorers for the rest of country, if Harvard matriculates them all. However, Harvard does not enroll all black high scorers above 1500, therefore the average SAT I Math and Verbal scores combined for Harvard’s blacks are over 200 points below the average of the entering class, about 1300, two standard deviations below the mean, which is statistically significant. At the other “lesser” Ivies and elite public and privates, the Black-White test score is even wider, on the average of 300 points (on the SAT I 1600 max composite score) lower than the average for the entire entering class. There are several studies which have shown this to be the case. This Black-White SAT I Test gap does take into account of the Black-Asian SAT I test score gap, which is even WIDER, because Asian Americans are admitted with a SAT I composite score (1600 max) average of 50 to a 100 points higher than the entering classes average of Harvard, and Yale.

    In other words, on SAT I composite score(on max 1600 scale), for Harvard and Yale, the Asian American average would be AT LEAST over 1550. This added 50 points on the 1500 level of scoring for the SAT I is statistically much more difficult to achieve than an additional 50 points over 1400, 1300, or 1200, regardless of how much test preparation the test taker gets.

    IN 2003, ONLY 72 BLACKS SCORED OVER 1500 on the SAT I Math and Verbal (combined) test.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3475092/%5Benter%20URL%5D

    FEROCIOUS COMPETITION

    ‘Most of these students don’t realize that they are being fought over.’

    — JOY ST. JOHN

    The competition is particularly ferocious for blacks and Hispanics with SAT scores that put them on par with the most talented white students. According to the College Board, only 1,877 black students (about 1.5 percent of blacks who take the tests) scored higher than 1300 out of a possible 1600 on the SAT in 2003. Only 72 scored higher than 1500.

    Among the overall student population, 148,024 (about 10 percent of test takers) scored higher than 1300, and 13,897 earned scores higher than 1500.

    “Most of these students don’t realize that they are being fought over,” said Joy St. John, an Amherst admissions officer who specializes in minority outreach, gazing over a room of 70 or so black, Hispanic, Asian and American Indian students whose SAT scores ranged from the low 1100s to above 1500. “They are modest, and they don’t know the options that are out there.”

    1. Steven Lucas September 7, 2011 at 6:46 am | | Reply

      You state:

      Citing the data above, the number of blacks achieving a COMBINED score of 1500 or above on the SAT I Math and Verbal is statistically MUCH SMALLER (less than one half smaller) than the number of blacks we find in the entire country – 244 blacks scored 750 or above on the math SAT and 363 black students scored 750 or above on the verbal portion of the test.
      In other words, there are MUCH, MUCH LESS THAN 200 blacks who achieve a combined score of SAT I Math and Verbal of 1500 in the whole country.

      ———————————-

      The data imply that the upper bound on the number of blacks earning a composite SAT I Verbal/Math score greater than or equal to 1500 is 363 + 244. One would expect SAT I Math scores to be highly correlated with SAT I Verbal scores, in which case there would not be “MUCH, MUCH LESS THAN 200 blacks who achieve a combined score of SAT I Math and Verbal of 1500 in the whole country.” For example, I am a black Yale College graduate who earned a composite SAT I Verbal/Math score of 1520 (so you are correct in your assertion that “Harvard does not enroll all black high scorers above 1500″), though it is not necessarily true that “therefore the average SAT I Math and Verbal scores combined for Harvard’s blacks are over 200 points below the average of the entering class” (especially in light of the fact that Harvard does not publish SAT score by race statistics). It would be presumptuous of me to think you are a nonblack who may not have gained admission to the colleges you mentioned because a nonqualified black has unjustly taken your place. If it makes you feel better, you can demonstrate your superior qualifications via email.

      1. Gary December 30, 2012 at 12:52 pm | | Reply

        Mr. Lucas,
        Your assertion that the upper bound of black students with a composite score greater than 1500 is 363 + 244 is not correct. The upper bound is less than 244. In order to score 1500 on the SAT, a student needs to score about 750 in each of the two sections. Assuming that the data is correct and that 244 African American students scored 750 or more on the math section, then the number of black students scoring 1500 or more can’t be much higher than 244 because you first have to score around 750 in the math section in order to have a chance at scoring 1500 or more on the test.

  2. E February 15, 2008 at 2:21 pm | | Reply

    Correction of post above with correction in capital letters:

    This Black-White SAT I Test SCORE GAP DOES NOT take into account of the Black-Asian SAT I test score gap, which is even WIDER, because Asian Americans are admitted with a SAT I composite score (1600 max) average of 50 to a 100 points higher than the entering classes average of Harvard, and Yale.

  3. Cobra February 18, 2008 at 4:31 pm | | Reply

    And the SAT test is indeed omnipotent, right? No other criteria need be considered save the almighty SAT score, huh?

    So how would the SAT test criteria apply in the case of Jennifer Gratz?

    –Cobra

  4. John Rosenberg February 18, 2008 at 6:19 pm | | Reply

    No one claims the SAT is perfect, or suggests using it and nothing else. For example, one of its problems is that on average black freshmen get lower grades than their SAT scores would predict.

  5. Cobra February 18, 2008 at 8:40 pm | | Reply

    John writes:

    >>>”No one claims the SAT is perfect, or suggests using it and nothing else.”

    Well, it’s not a difficult assumption when incessantly, the ONLY “evidence” provided for the anti-affirmative action argument here is SAT scores.

    John writes:

    >>>”For example, one of its problems is that on average black freshmen get lower grades than their SAT scores would predict.”

    That’s an entirely different topic. If you wish to have a discussion on college preparation levels for students across the spectrum of socio-economic and ethnic conditions, that’s one thing, and it can be a productive discourse.

    If this is just another “let’s show how blacks don’t deserve to be in college next to whites and Asians because of aggregate standardized test scores” thread, I don’t know what new ground you’re going to be breaking, other than getting a cheap pop from the eugenics choir.

    –Cobra

  6. E February 18, 2008 at 10:30 pm | | Reply

    Hey Cobra,

    Read this thread:

    http://www.discriminations.us/2008/02/more_handwringing_orthodoxy_fr.html#comments

    More Handwringing Orthodoxy From The College Board

    ============================

    Also read:

    http://www.jbhe.com/features/49_college_admissions-test.html

    Almost No Blacks Among the Top Scorers

    on the Scholastic Assessment Test

    It is important to explain how the SAT racial scoring gap challenges affirmative action policies at the nation’s highest-ranked colleges and universities. Under the SAT scoring system, most non-minority students hoping to qualify for admission to any of the nation’s 25 highest-ranked universities and 25 highest-ranked liberal arts colleges need to score at least 700 on each portion of the SAT.

    For admission to the very highest ranked, brand-name schools such as Princeton or MIT, applicants need scores of 750 to be considered for admission. Yet, as we shall see, only a minute percentage of black test takers score at these levels. Thus, if high-ranking colleges and universities were to abandon their policies of race-sensitive admissions, they will be choosing their first-year students from an applicant pool in which there will be practically no blacks.

    Let’s be more specific about the SAT racial gap among high-scoring applicants. In 2005, 153,132 African Americans took the SAT test. They made up 10.4 percent of all SAT test takers. But only 1,132 African-American college-bound students scored 700 or above on the math SAT and only 1,205 scored at least 700 on the verbal SAT. Nationally, more than 100,000 students of all races scored 700 or above on the math SAT and 78,025 students scored 700 or above on the verbal SAT. Thus, in this top-scoring category of all SAT test takers, blacks made up only 1.1 percent of the students scoring 700 or higher on the math test and only 1.5 percent of the students scoring 700 or higher on the verbal SAT.

    If we eliminate Asians and other minorities from the statistics and compare just white and black students, we find that 5.8 percent of all white SAT test takers scored 700 or above on the verbal portion of the test. But only 0.79 percent of all black SAT test takers scored at this level. Therefore, whites were more than seven times as likely as blacks to score 700 or above on the verbal SAT. Overall, there are more than 39 times as many whites as blacks who scored at least 700 on the verbal SAT.

    On the math SAT, only 0.7 percent of all black test takers scored at least 700 compared to 6.3 percent of all white test takers. Thus, whites were nine times as likely as blacks to score 700 or above on the math SAT. Overall, there were 45 times as many whites as blacks who scored 700 or above on the math SAT.

    If we raise the top-scoring threshold to students scoring 750 or above on both the math and verbal SAT — a level equal to the mean score of students entering the nation’s most selective colleges such as Harvard, Princeton, and CalTech — we find that in the entire country 244 blacks scored 750 or above on the math SAT and 363 black students scored 750 or above on the verbal portion of the test. Nationwide, 33,841 students scored at least 750 on the math test and 30,479 scored at least 750 on the verbal SAT. Therefore, black students made up 0.7 percent of the test takers who scored 750 or above on the math test and 1.2 percent of all test takers who scored 750 or above on the verbal section.

    Once again, if we eliminate Asians and other minorities from the calculations and compare only blacks and whites, we find that 0.2 percent of all black test takers scored 750 or above on the verbal SAT compared to 2.2 percent of all white test takers. Thus, whites were 11 times as likely as blacks to score 750 or above on the verbal portion of the test. Overall, there were 49 times as many whites as blacks who scored at or above the 750 level.

    On the math SAT, only 0.16 percent of all black test takers scored 750 or above compared to 1.8 percent of white test takers. Thus, whites were more than 11 times as likely as blacks to score 750 or above on the math SAT. Overall, there were more than 61 times as many whites as blacks who scored 750 or above on the math section of the SAT.

    In a race-neutral competition for the approximately 50,000 places for first-year students at the nation’s 25 top-ranked universities, high-scoring blacks would be buried by a huge mountain of high-scoring non-black students. Today, under prevailing affirmative action admissions policies, there are about 3,000 black first-year students matriculating at these 25 high-ranking universities, about 6 percent of all first-year students at these institutions. But if these schools operated under a strict race-neutral admissions policy where SAT scores were the most important qualifying yardstick, these universities could fill their freshman classes almost exclusively with students who score at the very top of the SAT scoring scale. As shown previously, black students make up at best between 1 and 2 percent of these high-scoring groups.

    Looking to the Future

    In the Grutter case upholding affirmative action in college admissions, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor’s decision expressed the goal of eliminating affirmative action over the next 25 years. At the moment there is no evidence that substantial progress toward closing the test scoring gap will occur. Thus, the huge and growing gap in SAT scores, and particularly the scores at the highest levels, becomes one of the nation’s most urgent problems.

    =========================

    Bottom Line from the Journal of Blacks in Higher Education:

    Thus, the huge and growing gap in SAT scores, and particularly the scores at the highest levels, becomes one of the nation’s most urgent problems.

  7. E February 18, 2008 at 10:41 pm | | Reply

    Cobra said,

    “That’s an entirely different topic. If you wish to have a discussion on college preparation levels for students across the spectrum of socio-economic and ethnic conditions, that’s one thing, and it can be a productive discourse.”

    =========================

    http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/testing.htm

    The Usual Suspects

    Writing about test scores in the November 1993 issue of The Atlantic Monthly, Duke University professor, Stanley Fish, renowned for scholarship in both law and literature, asserted: “Statistical studies have suggested that test scores reflect income and socioeconomic status. It has been demonstrated again and again that scores vary in relation to cultural background; the test’s questions assume a certain uniformity in educational experience and lifestyle and penalize those who, for whatever reason, have had a different experience and lived different kinds of lives. In short, what is being measured by the SAT is not absolutes like native ability and merit but accidents like birth, social position, access to libraries, and the opportunity to take vacations or to take SAT prep courses.”

    Lani Guinier, Professor of Law at Harvard University, writing in the New York Times of June 24, 1997, argues, “But within every racial and ethnic group, test scores go up with family income. One explanation for this may be that students who come from better-off families can afford coaching for the test. Students from wealthier families also have other advantages. They are more likely to have been exposed to books and travel.”

    We know that test scores go up with family income. They also improve with socioeconomic status. Both trends are observed within all ethnic and racial groups. But before you blame income and socioeconomic status for the test score gaps, consider this:

    Black children from the wealthiest families have mean SAT scores lower than white children from families below the poverty line.

    Figure 3 shows how math SAT scores increase with family income for both whites and blacks, confirming Professor Guinier. However, black students from families earning more than $70,000 (1995 dollars) score lower than white students whose families earned less than $10,000. Figure 4 shows more of the same for the verbal SAT. Here too, the wealthiest blacks score below the poorest whites. (Complete data can be found in Appendix B.)

    As for “social position, access to libraries, and the opportunity to take vacations or to take SAT prep courses,” consider this:

    Black children of parents with graduate degrees have lower SAT scores than white children of parents with a high-school diploma or less.

    Figures 5 and 6 show, respectively, how math and verbal SAT scores for blacks and whites vary with parental levels of education. In both cases, black children of parents with graduate degrees score lower than white children whose parents have a high-school diploma or less.

    When Professor Fish asserts that test scores reflect income and socioeconomic status, he is, of course, correct. We cannot conclude, however, as he does, that either is to blame for the black-white SAT gap. Figures 5 and 6, show that at every level of income and social advantage the gap exists. In fact, it remains remarkably constant when economic and cultural levels are controlled.

    Professor Guinier observes that within every racial and ethnic group, test scores go up with family income. Guinier leaves no doubt she is aware in detail of the SAT data. Her syllogism begins, “. . . students who come from better-off families can afford coaching for the test . . . They are more likely to have been exposed to books and travel.” We are to complete it with: Minorities have less income and cultural exposure; therefore, minorities have lower scores.

    More SAT data may be found in Appendix B. There, you will discover that Asians mostly sit on top of the heap; that whites, Mexican Americans and blacks follow in that order. Some details prove interesting. For example, whites enjoy a verbal advantage over Asians that disappears at high levels of income and social advantage. Regrettably, the College Board no longer discloses these data. In 1996, they stopped publishing performance by income and parental education disaggregated by race and ethnicity.

    ==========================

    Hey Cobra, how do you explain this one?

    Bottom Line:

    1. Black children from the wealthiest families have mean SAT scores lower than white and Asian children from families below the poverty line.

    2. Black children of parents with graduate degrees have lower SAT scores than white and Asian children of parents with a high-school diploma or less.

  8. E February 19, 2008 at 12:13 am | | Reply

    Cobra said,

    “If this is just another “let’s show how blacks don’t deserve to be in college next to whites and Asians because of aggregate standardized test scores” thread, I don’t know what new ground you’re going to be breaking, other than getting a cheap pop from the eugenics choir.”

    ==========================

    There you go again!

    Apparently you did not even bother to read this thread:

    http://www.discriminations.us/2008/01/new_report_asians_not_whites_g.html#comments

    New Report: Asians, Not Whites, Gain When AA Ends

  9. E February 19, 2008 at 12:21 am | | Reply

    THESE FACTS ARE SAD AND PITIFUL FOR THOSE WHO REFUSE THE TRUTH. THIS IS ONE OF OUR COUNTRY’S MOST URGENT PROBLEMS, YET COBRA IS IN DENIAL!

    IN 2003, ONLY 72 BLACKS SCORED OVER 1500 on the SAT I Math and Verbal (combined) test.

    Among the overall student population, 13,897 earned scores higher than 1500.

    Source: The College Board

    Bottom Line from the Journal of Blacks in Higher Education:

    Thus, the huge and growing gap in SAT scores, and particularly the scores at the highest levels, becomes one of the nation’s most urgent problems.

  10. Andrew February 19, 2008 at 10:12 am | | Reply

    >> Cobra wrote: “And the SAT test is indeed omnipotent, right? No other criteria need be considered save the almighty SAT score, huh?”

    No, SAT is neither omnipotent nor the only criteria that should be used in granting college admissions. There are and there should be other criterias that nobody (except affirmative action bigots) oppose: extracurricular activites, work experience, internships, school grades, essays and engagement in social activities. The thing about racist admission policies is, that the people who benifit from them and the people who are discriminated against can not influence the score.

    I will tell you how EVERY black aplicant can increase his or her test scores: by learning harder. Just a few dozen hours more prectise can increase the score of any given test dramatically.

    Now, can you tell me how can a white person increase the score on the race bonus? By going to the admissions interview in blackface?

    >> Cobra wrote: “So how would the SAT test criteria apply in the case of Jennifer Gratz?”

    That is very simple: she might have been granted admission and she might have been rejected – on the grounds of achievement and merit. She would simply not have been discriminated against.

    You see, even if the absence of racist discrimination does not pose individual, immediate or any gain – the absence of racist discrimination is a cause for itself. There was a time when black people were forced to sit in the back of the bus. Sitting in the front of the bus does not make you travel faster or on a different route than sitting in the back of the bus. Just as there may not have been an immediate gain for any specific person, there was no immediate gain or loss forcing black people to sit at the back of the bus.

    The absence of an immediate individual gain when ceasing to discriminate does not justify continuing a racist practise.

    To think that black people should not be discriminated against when choosing a seat on a bus but that it is ok to discriminate against white people and asians when applying for college is nothing but racism!

    – Andrew

  11. E February 20, 2008 at 11:05 am | | Reply

    The absence of an immediate individual gain when ceasing to discriminate does not justify continuing a racist practise.

    To think that black people should not be discriminated against when choosing a seat on a bus but that it is ok to discriminate against white people and asians when applying for college is nothing but racism!

    – Andrew

    ========================

    I agree with Andrew.

    COBRA CANNOT OR REFUSED TO ANSWER THE FOLLOWING QUESTION:

    If someone kicks your butt, and then stops kicking your butt, is that person “helping” or “benefitting” you because your butt doesn’t hurt anymore?

    I would argue that Asian Americans experience no benefit from the absence of discrimination. They are merely not being harmed. Conversely, no one who actually or could “benefit” from racial preference is actually or could be harmed by the absence of discrimination. They are merely not being preferred and/or given an unfair advantage based on immutable physical characteristics like race and gender.

    Exactly. Standing up for one’s right not to be classified by race/gender cannot infringe other persons’ right to so classify one, because they have no such right. And, the protection is very narrow. As universities and institutions are free to use just about any other criteria they like (other than race and gender), they have little cause for complaint.

  12. Cobra February 28, 2008 at 3:15 pm | | Reply

    Andrew writes:

    >>>”I will tell you how EVERY black aplicant can increase his or her test scores: by learning harder. Just a few dozen hours more prectise can increase the score of any given test dramatically.”

    ….

    “learning harder”

    ????

    OK. I’m not going to walk through that gate you left open for me, tempting as it may be. I will ask you this, however…

    What was the problem America had with black kids attending school with white kids BEFORE standardized test scores, and why do you think there will cease to be problems IF standardized test scores among black kids were equal to those of the groups favored on this blog?

    E writes:

    >>>”COBRA CANNOT OR REFUSED TO ANSWER THE FOLLOWING QUESTION:

    If someone kicks your butt, and then stops kicking your butt, is that person “helping” or “benefitting” you because your butt doesn’t hurt anymore?”

    I didn’t respond to it because it’s a silly question and a terrible analogy to this situation.

    “Kicking somebody’s butt” cannot be compared to race and gender discrimination because absent of self defense, which must be determined in a court, it’s almost always illegal for any civilian to do so.

    Race and gender discrimination happens all the time. It’s a PERSONAL CHOICE. Many times it’s illegal, especially in regards to hiring, public accommodation and commerce. Due to freedom of association, most personal acts of racial and gender discrimination are NOT, and even when it often gets blurred with the former, anybody trying to prove it better have a big bankroll to finance the neccessary class action lawsuit.

    My point is that most HONEST people looking at this discussion knows that racism and sexism still exist in America, and eliminating Affirmative Action laws will not end it.

    E writes:

    >>>”I would argue that Asian Americans experience no benefit from the absence of discrimination. They are merely not being harmed. ”

    Waitaminute, tough guy…weren’t you the one who recently filled this screen with court case upon court case, example after example of how Asian-Americans were being harmed due to the actions of a predominantly white American government? Didn’t it seem obvious to you that no matter what the outcome of those cases, discriminators still found a way to CONTINUE discriminating against Asian-Americans?

    What the heck makes you think that eliminating “racial/gender preferences” will cause people who discriminate AGAINST women and minorities to cease and desist?

    I think that many anti-affirmative action types have a complex. I think deep down, many of them think that eliminating affirmative action will somehow transform or transmogrofy the minds of racist and sexist people who neccessitated the NEED for it in the first place into color-blind, enlightened troubadors of fairness.

    Perhaps you belong to the other flank of the movement that really doesn’t give a fig about gender equity and underrepresented minority enfranchisement in the first place, so it would be a win/win.

    In other words, IMHO, it’s all a load of horse-pudding, and that’s WHY this anti-affirmative action movement has a welcome home amongst angry RIGHT-WING conservatives, because their agenda is already hostile to the advancement of women and underrepresented minorities.

    Now you can go ahead and cut and paste some anti-black diatribe from whatever reactionary fish-wrapper of a periodical you can find on the web. You’re nothing if not predictable, E.

    –Cobra

  13. E February 28, 2008 at 5:08 pm | | Reply

    Hey Cobra, how do you explain this one?

    Bottom Line:

    1. Black children from the wealthiest families have mean SAT scores lower than white and Asian children from families below the poverty line.

    2. Black children of parents with graduate degrees have lower SAT scores than white and Asian children of parents with a high-school diploma or less.

    THESE FACTS ARE SAD AND PITIFUL FOR THOSE WHO REFUSE THE TRUTH. THIS IS ONE OF OUR COUNTRY’S MOST URGENT PROBLEMS, YET COBRA IS IN DENIAL!

    IN 2003, ONLY 72 BLACKS SCORED OVER 1500 on the SAT I Math and Verbal (combined) test.

    Among the overall student population, 13,897 earned scores higher than 1500.

    Source: The College Board

    http://www.jbhe.com/features/49_college_admissions-test.html

    Almost No Blacks Among the Top Scorers

    on the Scholastic Assessment Test

    Bottom Line from the Journal of Blacks in Higher Education:

    Thus, the huge and growing gap in SAT scores, and particularly the scores at the highest levels, becomes one of the nation’s most urgent problems.

  14. E February 28, 2008 at 5:45 pm | | Reply

    Cobra said,

    “What the heck makes you think that eliminating “racial/gender preferences” will cause people who discriminate AGAINST women and minorities to cease and desist?”

    ASIAN AMERICANS ARE NOT ASKING FOR PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT OR RACE PREFERENCES.

    YOU ARE IN DENIAL OF THE FACTS. YOU ARE THE ONE DISCRIMINATING WITH RACE PREFERENCES!! COMPRENDE???

    ===========================

    Hey Cobra,

    A reminder for you.

    THE ONLY THING YOU ARE “SETTING STRAIGHT” IS THAT YOU ARE A RACIST AND A LIAR!

    You are the racist, since you, Cobra, are asking for race preferences and preferential treatment for blacks by playing the race card, which will be the cause of your quick demise. Jews and Asian Americans are NOT ASKING for preferential treatment based on race, religion and ethnicity, even though they faced prejudice and hatred from you and your ilk. That’s the difference.

    Cobra, you have COMPLETE DISREGARD for the truth.

    http://www.discriminations.us/2006/11/preferences_as_a_zerosum_game.html

    Preferences As A Zero-Sum Game

    It really shouldn’t surprise anyone (though it still does) that giving preferences to some applicants based on their race places a burden on other applicants because of their race. Nor at this late date should it surprise anyone (though it still does) that the primary beneficiaries of eliminating preferences to minorities are not whites but another minority group, Asian-Americans.

    Asian-American enrollment at Berkeley has increased since California voters banned affirmative action in college admissions. Berkeley accepted 4,122 Asian-American applicants for this fall’s freshman class — nearly 42% of the total admitted. That is up from 2,925 in 1997, or 34.6%, the last year before the ban took effect. Similarly, Asian-American undergraduate enrollment at the University of Washington rose to 25.4% in 2004 from 22.1% in 1998, when voters in that state prohibited affirmative action in college admissions.

    The University of Michigan may be poised for a similar leap in Asian-American enrollment, now that voters in that state have banned affirmative action. The Center for Equal Opportunity study found that, among applicants with a 1240 SAT score and 3.2 grade point average in 2005, the university admitted 10% of Asian-Americans, 14% of whites, 88% of Hispanics and 92% of blacks. Asian applicants to the university’s medical school also faced a higher admissions bar than any other group.

    Here is the link to the Princeton study. This is the complete paper from Princeton U., “The Opportunities Cost of Admission Preferences at Elite Universities”, by Espenshade (Chair of Sociology at Princeton) and Chung,

    http://opr.princeton.edu/faculty/tje/espenshadessqptii.pdf

    Asian American applicants are the ones who lose with the use of race preferences in admissions. Whites don’t forfeit spaces for race based AA favoring blacks and Latinos. Asian Americans are being punished and discriminated against in this process. This is independent of the use of the legacy and athletic preference for whites because this study corrected for this. Asian Americans have much lower admit rates based on their race because they are the only non-preferred group in admissions and are discriminated against based on their race alone.

    Now, as Dan Golden reports in front-page article in the Wall Street Journal, discrimination against Asians is coming under increased scrutiny. A Chinese-American student has filed a complaint against Princeton, and the Office for Civil Rights of the Department of Education has agreed to investigate.

    Click on the following link to listen to Golden’s interview on his book, The Price of Admission.

    http://podcast.mktw.net/wsj/audio/20060906/pod-wsjgolden/pod-wsjgolden.mp3

    He talks about legacy, sports, and rich and famous VIP preferences in admissions to the Ivies.

    Dan Golden has a chapter about the discrimination against Asian Americans, who have to meet a higher standard of admissions (SAT scores as much as 125 points higher) and a higher holistic criteria (motivations, creativity, ECs). He states that Asian American faced the same discrimination Jews did. Asians faced a higher bar. He talks about the stereotypes of Asians , which he states “that if they are not held to a quota, there is certainly an effort to keep their numbers down” by the Ivies and elites. He calls the issue a “scandal” and a “shame”.

    Sports help rich affluent whites, not URMs, and not poor whites in elite college admissions in sports such as crew, squash, fencing, etc., in preps such as Groton and Andover.

    From Daniel Golden’s The Price of Admission, Chapter 7, “The New Jews, Asian

    Americans Need Not Apply”:

    ………

    “In 1990, federal investigators concluded that UCLA’s graduate department in mathematics

    had discriminated against Asian applicants.”

    ………

    “ most elite universities have maintained a triple standard in college admissions,

    setting the bar highest for Asians, next for whites, and lowest for blacks and Hispanics.

    According to a 2004 study by three Princeton researchers, an Asian American applicant

    needs to score 50 points higher on the SAT than other applicants just to have the same chance

    of admission to an elite university. (Being an alumni child, by contrast, confers a 160-point

    advantage.) Yale records show that entering Asian American freshmen averaged a 1493

    SAT score in 1999-2000, 1496 in 2000-2001, and 1482 in 2001-2. For the same three years,

    the average for white freshmen was about 40 points lower. Black and Hispanic freshmen

    lagged another 100-125 points below whites. A Yale spokesman attributed the Asian-white

    gap to more whites being recruited athletes, and said Asians and whites are held to the same

    academic standards.”

    . . . . . . . . . .

    “Federal investigators also turned up stereotyping by Harvard admissions evaluators. Possibly

    reflecting a lack of cultural understanding, Harvard evaluators ranked Asian American candidates

    on average below whites in “personal qualities.” In comments written in applicants’ files, Harvard

    admissions staff repeatedly described Asian Americans as “being quiet/shy, science/math oriented,

    and hard workers,” the report found. One reader summed up an Asian applicant this way: “He’s

    quiet and, of course, wants to be a doctor.”

    . . . . . . . . . .

    “He [ Princeton economist Uwe Reinhardt] added that the stereotype of the quiet Asian student

    is “really a strange notion. My Asian American students are very lively. They take leadership

    positions. They’re not at all shy or reticent.”

    . . . . . . . . . .

    “Now as then, a lack of preferences can be a convenient guise for racism. Much as college

    administrators justified anti-Jewish policies with ethnic stereotypes — one Yale dean in 1918 termed

    the typical Jewish student a “greasy grind” — so Asians are typecast in college admissions offices

    as quasi-robots programmed by their parents to ace math and science tests. Asked why Vanderbilt

    poured resources into recruiting Jews instead of Asians, a former administrator told me, “Asians are very good students, but they don’t provide the kind of intellectual environment that Jewish students provide.”

    . . . . . . . . . .

    From chapter 10, “Ending the Preferences of Privilege”:

    “Provide equal access for Asian American students and for international students who need

    financial aid. If elite colleges were truly committed to socioeconomic diversity, they would regard

    the proliferation of outstanding Asian American applicants as an opportunity, not a problem. They would rush to propel into the higher ranks of American society a group of students who not only

    boast outstanding test scores and grades but also are immigrants or immigrants’ children from low or middle-income families that sacrificed in hope of a better life for the next generation. Asian

    American students also bring a variety of cultures, languages, and religions to stir the campus melting pot. Colleges should counter anti-Asian bias through sensitivity training sessions and hiring more Asian American admissions deans, directors, and staff.”

    . . . . . . . . . .

    Golden states “that if Asian Americans, are not held to a quota, there is certainly an effort to keep their numbers down” by the Ivies and elites. He calls the issue a “scandal” and a “shame”.

    Posted by: E | February 3, 2008 6:11 PM

  15. E February 28, 2008 at 5:50 pm | | Reply

    Hey Cobra,

    The TRUTH.

    YOU CAN’T HANDLE THE TRUTH!!

    READ THE THREAD!

    http://www.discriminations.us/2008/01/new_report_asians_not_whites_g.html#comments

    New Report: Asians, Not Whites, Gain When AA Ends

    THE TRUTH

    Asian Americans are admitted at the lowest rate of any racial or ethnic group, including whites, because of racial preferences.

    Blacks are admitted at the highest rates. The black admit rate is 2 times higher, and the white admit rate is also higher than the Asian American admit rate, because of racial preferences, and a de facto anti-Asian quota.

    By lowering the admissions standards for URMs (underrepresented minorities, blacks, Latinos, etc.), these schools raise the admissions standards for Asians. Whites are also admitted with lower standards than Asians, on the average, but higher than that of URMs.

    Asians, with their overall higher standards for admissions, as an applicant group, on the average relative to the other groups, including whites, are used to compensate for the lowered standards for the admission of the other groups.

Say What?