Reader Comments
Investigation into alleged admissions bias expands
Published: Wednesday, June 11th, 2008
The Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights (OCR) has broadened its investigation into a federal complaint filed in August 2006 by an applicant to the University who was denied admission. Jian Li claimed in the complaint that back to the article)
To the poster who said, [Jian Li, please stop posting under your "Yale College Dad" pseudonym. If you're going to make that big a deal about getting denied from Princeton, at least be man enough to use your own name.] ======================================================= Yale College Dad is NOT Jian Li or is he related to Jian Li. YCD has never met Jian Li. Jian Li does not need to post on this site. His complaint against Princeton with the OCR and its broadening of the investigation of Princeton's admissions office is self-explanatory. Jian Li is at Harvard College and he is quite happy there. This complaint is NOT ABOUT Jian Li. It is about the alleged discrimination against Asian American applicants to Princeton based on RACE and ETHNICITY. Jian Li is just an "after thought" in this complaint, which will have far reaching consequences if the complaint is ruled in his favor. You must understand this simple point.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
From John Rosenberg's site, "Discriminations".......http://www.discriminations.us/2008/07/princeton_receives_weekly_chut.html ======================================================================= Princeton Receives Weekly Chutzpah Award “What weekly chutzpah award?” you may well ask. You’re right. At the moment DISCRIMINATIONS doesn’t bestow a weekly chutzpah award, but if it did this week’s would go to Princeton......... Regular readers will be aware of Jian Li’s complaint that Princeton discriminates against Asian applicants by holding them to a higher standard than others, a case I discussed here. Li’s complaint is being investigated by the Department of Education, and in fact has been broadened, causing nervous jitters across all Ivy Leaguedom........ Today’s Trenton Star Ledger has an article about Li’s case today that avoids most common pitfalls of mainstream media news coverage of racial preferences ... except this one: author Ana M. Alaya writes:////// For decades, critics of affirmative action have contended elite colleges, in their zeal to form racially diverse student bodies, have discriminated against top white applicants....... In a twist on that long-running feud, federal authorities are investigating an allegation that Princeton University discriminates against Asian-American applicants by accepting black and Hispanic students with lower entrance scores........ At the heart of both arguments lies the question of whether and how colleges should consider race when choosing a class....//////// But there is no new “twist” here; there is only one argument, not two: awarding benefits or burdens based on race is wrong, no matter who receives either burden or benefit. Ms. Alaya’s contrary assertion is rather like arguing that opposition to the state awarding preferential treatment to Jews and Catholics is really two arguments, rather than one argument based on the principle of separation of church and state........ But that slip pales into insignificance compared to the following remark that earned Princeton the much un-coveted DISCRIMINATIONS Chutzpah of the Week Award (or would if there were such an award): Princeton, for its part, denies using quotas. The university declined, however, to release admissions data broken down by race and test scores, spokeswoman Cass Cliatt said, “because we don’t want anyone to make the mistake that we make admissions decisions by category.” Translated from diversity-speak, what Ms. Cass Cliatt is saying on behalf of Princeton is that the release of admissions data revealing that Asian applicants had to jump over a much higher hurdle might cause the gullible public to make the “mistake” of concluding that ... Asian applicants had to jump over a much higher hurdle. Nevertheless, it’s still not clear exactly why Princeton is afraid to release this data, since it claims to believe that discriminating against Asians is not really discrimination....... A commitment to “acting affirmatively to ensure diversity,” Cliatt said, is not the same as discriminating....... The problem here, as most people not entwined in the “diversity” industry and rationale can see, is that at places like Princeton “acting affirmatively to ensure diversity” requires acting negatively when evaluating the applications of a whole host of people like Jian Li........ But wait! There’s more entertainment from Ms. Cass Cliatt of Princeton........ At Princeton, race is one factor, including socioeconomic background, extracurricular talents and academic record, considered during the admissions process, Cliatt said. Building a diverse class is like forming an “or chestra,” that may need different talents from year to year, she added......... Excuse me, but don’t most orchestras have, well, quotas for their string, wind, percussion, etc., sections (or are these only “goals”?)?...... In short, if words have meaning Princeton believes that choosing some applicants and rejecting others on the basis of their race or ethnicity is no different from filling a violin vacancy with a violinist....... Despite decades of tutelage to the contrary from Princeton et. al., liberals, Democrats, etc., most Americans continue to march to the tune of a different drummer, believing that everyone should be treated without regard to their race or ethnicity. Being black, white, Asian, Hispanic, or whatever, is simply not the same as playing an oboe or plucking a guitar. And that’s not just whistlin Dixie. ======================================================= Posted by John Rosenberg on July 13, 2008 5:26 PM | Permalink
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
Jian Li, please stop posting under your "Yale College Dad" pseudonym. If you're going to make that big a deal about getting denied from Princeton, at least be man enough to use your own name.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
The biggest tipping factor in admissions is the RACE FACTOR or racial preferences for preferred groups as shown in the Espenshade and Chung Study. =========================================== Please click on the commentary on the study by Espenshade at Princeton. http://www.princeton.edu/main/news/archive/S11/80/77I23/index.xml?section=topstories ===================================================================================== Removing consideration of race would have little effect on white students, the report concludes, as their acceptance rate would rise by merely 0.5 percentage points. Espenshade noted that when one group loses ground, another has to gain -- in this case it would be Asian applicants. Asian students would fill nearly four out of every five places in the admitted class not taken by African-American and Hispanic students, with an acceptance rate rising from nearly 18 percent to more than 23 percent. Typically, many more Asian students apply to elite schools than other underrepresented minorities. The study also found that although athletes and legacy applicants are predominantly white, their numbers are so small that their admissions do little to displace minority applicants. The authors based their work on models previously developed in a 2004 study where they looked at more than 124,000 elite university applicants' SAT scores, race, sex, citizenship, athletic ability and legacy in combination with their admission decision. This more recent study honed in on more than 45,000 applicants. Both studies are part of the multidimensional National Study of College Experience, which is funded by the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation...... 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,///// To Maketruth Planer who said, "legacies account for cutting edge in acceptability couple with annual giving." Read the Espenshade's findings which takes into account legacy admissions. They have little effect on the results and conclusions of the study........ 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.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
All you all. In reciting history, please recount that Princeton was built by African-American Slaves. Check out who was around in 1746 and what were the demographic salients for Old Nausea. Anecdotes don't really make legal points. Here's an applicant that "aces" the S.A.T. -- that in itself is a reason to accept. If Albert Einstein had applied to P.U. as an undergraduate, he would have been rejected because of the way he parted his hair! It's been clubby for generations - legacies account for cutting edge in acceptability couple with annual giving.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
From nj.com....http://www.nj.com/printer/printer.ssf?/base/news-11/1215923742298560.xml&coll=1&thispage=2 ======================================================= Russell Nieli is a lecturer in the Department of Politics at Princeton University ========================================================= June 30, 2008....... Is There An Asian Ceiling? ========================================================= By Russell Nieli....... Several years ago a Korean-American student in one of my politics classes at Princeton described the reaction of his Asian classmates in the California private school he attended when the college acceptance and rejection letters arrived in the mail the spring of their senior year. A female Black student, he explained, had applied to more than half a dozen of the most prestigious colleges and universities in the nation and got accepted to all of them, deciding eventually to enroll at Stanford. Many of his Asian friends, he said, along with many Whites, reacted bitterly to the Black student's success, some in open disbelief that this student could be so phenomenally successful in her college search. Why was there such bitterness among his classmates, I wanted to know. "Were there better qualified Asian and White students with higher SAT scores than the Black student?" I asked. "Better qualified?!" he said, "there were loads of Asian and White students who were much better qualified, with much higher SAT scores, much higher grade point averages, and who were much more active in student government and a host of other extra-curricular activities than this Black student." To add further fuel to his classmates' anger, he went on, this particular Black student had a cold, off-putting, self-centered personality which hardly endeared her to her classmates. "She didn't make it on charm" was the gist of his further remarks here........ This Korean student's story was in the back of my mind as I read the newspaper accounts about the racial discrimination complaint lodged not long ago with the Department of Education against Princeton University by Jian Li, the Chinese-American student at Yale who had a perfect 2400 (i.e. three 800s) on the newer version of the SAT. Li was a stellar student in high school, who in addition to his perfect SAT score achieved near-perfect scores on several of the College Board achievement tests (SAT IIs), took nine Advanced Placement courses, and had a near-perfect grade-point-average that placed him in the 99th percentile of his graduating class in a competitive suburban high school. In addition to his top-of-the line academic performance, Li was active in a number of extracurricular activities, and was a delegate to the prestigious Boys State. All of this would be an impressive achievement for anyone, but Li was the son of Chinese immigrants, his first language was Chinese, and English was not spoken in his home. Li's academic achievement was a truly remarkable and inspiring story of talent, persistence, and the immigrant work ethic in pursuit of the American Dream........ Li was happy at Yale and lodged his complaint not because of any animus against Princeton -- Princeton was only one of five elite universities that rejected his application (Harvard, MIT, Stanford, and Penn were the others) -- but because of a general sense that Asian applicants to elite colleges were being unjustly disfavored in comparison to the members of other minority groups, especially Blacks and Hispanics, and were not being evaluated fairly under the same set of academic standards as others. For anyone familiar with the admissions policies at the more selective colleges and universities over the past thirty years, Li's complaint not only rang true but has been well-documented again and again wherever the situation has been adequately studied. The simple fact is that a Black or Hispanic student with Li's credentials would almost certainly have gained admission to every elite institution he or she applied to. Indeed, an "underrepresented minority student" would have stood a decent chance of gaining admission to some of the schools Li was rejected at with test scores a hundred to two-hundred points below each of his scores on the three-part SAT exam........ While policies differ somewhat from college to college, generally speaking elite institutions strive to have a minimal representation of 5-7% Blacks and a similar percentage of Hispanics in their student body (i.e. roughly half the Black and Hispanic proportion of the general population), though they will almost always deny publicly that they have such numerical target goals in mind. What motivates them is a combination of "social justice" for previously disadvantaged groups, a fear of being charged with "institutional racism" by Black and Hispanic activists, a perceived social need for more Blacks and Hispanics in leadership positions in the U.S., and a peculiar form of post-60s white-guilt-expiation (the latter brilliantly analyzed by essayist Shelby Steele). All of these reasons and motivations, however, are concealed and fraudulently packaged under the beguiling rhetoric of "diversity" in order to make college admissions policies more palatable to the general public and more in tune with the requirements of the two major Supreme Court decisions in this area regarding the constitutionality and legality of racial preferences. (There is no other area of academic life, with the possible exception of the relaxation of standards for athletic recruits, where college administrators, admissions deans, and college presidents are more likely to lie -- and to engage routinely in deception and double-talk -- than on the question of racial preferences in their respective institutions.)....... A rough rule-of-thumb is that in checking off "Black" as one's racial category on an application to a highly selective college or university one gains the equivalent of about 75-150 points (out of a possible 800) as a "plus-factor" on each of the parts of the SAT exam and a boost of approximately .4-.5 (on a 4.0 scale) in one's high school grade-point-average. Hispanics enjoy a racial enhancement roughly two-thirds to three-quarters as great as that given to Blacks........ A 2004 study of the admissions policies at three of the most selective private research universities in the country by sociologist Thomas Espenshade and his colleagues has documented some of these racial advantages. At these three elite institutions, "being African American instead of white" was found "[to be] worth an average of 230 additional SAT points on a 1600-point scale [math + verbal]," while "Hispanic applicants gain[ed] the equivalent of 185 points." But "coming from an Asian background is comparable to the loss of 50 SAT points."....... The Espenshade team, however, goes on to explain that as sizeable as these preferences are "their magnitudes are biased down[ward] by relying on SAT scores as the sole indicator of academic merit. When such additional measures as high school GPA and class rank are included … the African-American and Hispanic advantage [in admissions] increases, as does the disadvantage if one has an Asian background." Again, one can well understand the consternation of people like Jian Li........ Although private colleges and universities will usually not disclose data regarding the past or present academic performance of their students categorized by race (they are aware that such disclosure would document the huge racial preferences they grant and the resulting racial stratification of subsequent college grades), we can get a fairly good indication of what is going on by a look at some of the more prestigious public institutions which have been forced to disclose such data either by court order or action upon Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) petitions. The University of Michigan is perhaps the best case to look at since it has operated recently under the watchful eye of the federal courts since the 2003 Grutter decision rejected as too mechanical and not sufficiently individualized its previous policies of racial preferences. Michigan now apparently scrutinizes each applicant's file more carefully but it is still up to its old tricks of counting "being Black" or "being Hispanic" as very huge "plus-factors" in making up its entering class. Indeed, the SAT gaps between recent Black and Hispanic admits, on the one hand, and Asian and Whites, on the other, has actually increased since Grutter. For those admitted to Michigan as undergraduates in 2004 the median SAT scores for the four major ethno-racial groups were as follows: Blacks 1160, Hispanics 1260, Whites 1350, Asians 1400........ These entering scores would closely parallel the cumulative GPAs earned by members of the four ethno-racial groups their first and second year in college (i.e. there was no tendency for the lower scoring groups to out-perform their entering SAT scores and do better in terms of classroom grades than their SAT numbers would predict). Broken down by race, the cumulative grade point averages (as of 2006) for the class entering in 2004 were as follows: Blacks 2.82, Hispanics 2.99, Whites 3.33, Asians 3.26. For those not familiar with the pattern of grade-inflation and grade-compaction at most elite colleges in America these differences may not seem large, but they are actually very large indeed, since many humanities and "soft" social science courses have effectively eliminated grades in the "C" range except for clearly substandard work that in pre-grade inflation days would have received a "D" or an "F". Blacks and Hispanics at Michigan were clearly not catching up to the better qualified White and Asian students, were receiving substantial numbers of mediocre-to-poor grades, and were no doubt viewed by many of their White and Asian classmates as intellectually inferior........ A similar pattern can be seen at the University of Virginia, which published, under FOIA prodding, odds-ratios of being accepted for admissions in various academic years. UVA's statistics show that in 2003 a Black student with an SAT score in the 950-1050 range had a substantially better chance of getting admitted to UVA than an Asian student with SAT scores in the 1250-1350 range. If a Black applicant had an SAT in the 1150-1250 range his chances of admission were about the same as an Asian student with a 1450-1550 SAT. The Black/White disparity in the odds-ratios of admission was even greater than the Black/Asian difference........ These are, by anyone's reckoning, very large differences and explain much of the ill-will that racial preference policies often create, especially in view of the fact that the typical Black or Hispanic student at an elite college or university comes most often from a middle class home and has almost always had the advantage of a decent, usually mixed-race public or private high school education. (Students from impoverished families attending a typical inner-city school system dominated by poor Blacks and Hispanics almost never achieve at the level considered the minimum for acceptance at the more highly competitive colleges)........ In an ongoing longitudinal study of students at 28 highly competitive colleges and universities, sociologist Douglas Massey and his colleagues found that White and Asian students expressed a great deal of "social distance" between themselves and the "beneficiaries of affirmative action" and that this had clearly negative consequences for the quality of race relations on campus. "Whites and Asians tended to perceive a great deal of distance between themselves and blacks who benefited from affirmative action," the Massey team writes. Students in general tended to rank each group in terms of their academic promise, "with Asians on top, followed by whites, Latinos, and blacks." The Blacks and Latinos, they found, were clearly perceived by their Asian and White classmates as "underqualified," the Asians as the most qualified........ The Massey group, which surely started out with no bias against current racial preference policies (its study was funded by the pro-affirmative action Andrew W. Mellon Foundation), warned against the harmful effects on college campuses of this general disdain for current affirmative action policies and their beneficiaries. "Such perceptions of distance from 'affirmative action beneficiaries,'" they write, "carry important implications for the general tone of race relations on campus because one stereotype that emerges... is that without affirmative action most black and Latino students would not be admitted. To the extent that such beliefs are widespread among white students at elite institutions, they will not only increase tensions between whites and minorities on campus; they will also increase the risk of stereotype threat by raising anxiety among minority students about confirming these negative suspicions." And we might add here, such beliefs may sour not only Black/White and Black/Latino relations, but relations between Asians and the lower-achieving minority groups as well........ Underlying the huge admissions preferences that Black and Hispanic students receive at the most competitive colleges is the simple fact that college bound students in these groups do not exist in sufficient numbers to satisfy the 5-7% representation goal that most elite institutions strive for. Were college administrators to enroll students primarily on the basis of academic performance without regard to race or ethnicity, projections show that Asian students would increase substantially at the most competitive colleges, while Black enrollment would sink to the 1-3% level, and Hispanic enrollment would similarly plunge, though somewhat less steeply. Instituting class-based preferences rather than race-based preferences, as many have suggested, would not significantly raise the proportion of currently underrepresented minorities for the simple reason that there are a lot of poor Asians and poor Whites with much superior academic credentials to poor Blacks and poor Hispanics........ The reason for these hugely disparate admissions outcomes is very simple: ethnic groups do not perform in the educational arena at anything like parity and over the last 15 years at least, their differential performance has remained remarkably constant. In 2004, for instance, when the average combined math and verbal score on the SAT test was 1026, the scores for the four major ethno-racial groupings distinguished by the College Board were as follows: Asians 1084, Whites 1059, Hispanics 916, Blacks 857. Two years earlier the College Board published data on SAT scores by religious groupings and revealed that Jews, the academically most successful group in the latter half of the 20th century, had an average SAT score of 1161, substantially higher than any other ethno-racial group......... There are very few Hispanic students, and even fewer Blacks scoring at the very high levels on the SAT from which the most selective colleges typically draw their students. In 2004, for instance, while constituting almost 10 percent of all SAT test takers, Blacks comprised only 1.4 percent of those who scored 700 or above on the verbal part of the SAT, and only 1.0 percent of those scoring 700 or above on the math. Since the nation's most selective colleges and universities choose most of their incoming student body from those who have scored at these levels, college administrators are faced with the choice of either forming an entering class that is well outside the 5-7% Black representation range they desire, or according to Blacks a huge racial preference........ Virtually all elite institutions choose the latter option (Cal Tech may be the one exception)........ At the 750 SAT level, where schools like Harvard, Princeton, Yale, and Stanford recruit many of their incoming students, the situation looks even more ethnically skewed. In 2004, for instance, 25,403 students nationwide scored 750 or higher on the verbal SAT, and 31,316 scored at this level on the SAT math. But more than ninety-five percent of these very high scoring students were either White or Asian. In the entire country that year only 303 Blacks scored 750 or higher on the verbal SAT (1.2 percent of the total), while only 203 Blacks scored that high on the SAT math (a mere 0.6 percent of the total). The situation with Hispanics was only moderately better. The message here is clear: if elite colleges seek to enroll the most academically talented and accomplished, they will be drawing from a pool that is overwhelmingly White and Asian (and among the Whites disproportionately Jewish). If they are unwilling to have an entering class that is only 1-3% Black or Hispanic, they will have to resort to huge racial preferences, even if they try to conceal this fact from the public -- or lie about it, as they almost invariably do........ Our current affirmative action regime is criticized for many things -- its tendency to foster a sense of racial grievance on the part of the disfavored groups, to reinforce negative stigmas and stereotypes about those racially favored, to generate a climate of lies and deceptions among academic administrators, to create a chilling effect on interracial relations on college campuses. But perhaps worst of all is its tendency to distort the incentive structure for members of the lower-achieving minority groups to improve their academic performance. "I can attest that in secondary school I quite deliberately refrained from working to my highest potential," writes the linguist and Manhattan Institute scholar John McWhorter, "because I knew that I would be accepted to even top universities without doing so." From an early age, McWhorter goes on to explain, "almost any black child knows … that there is something called affirmative action which means that black students are admitted to schools under lower standards than white; I was aware of this from at least the age of ten. And so I was quite satisfied to make B+'s and A-'s rather than the A's and A+'s I could have made with a little extra time and effort." ....... And it isn't only the students among the lower-achieving minority groups who know about "this something called affirmative action" but their parents and teachers as well, who have less to be concerned about in terms of college admissions when Blacks and Hispanics perform at very mediocre levels in school. Everyone knows that Black and Hispanic students can get into the same colleges and universities as their similarly talented -- or greater talented -- White and Asian classmates doing much less work in school, taking easier courses, and getting much lower grades. As McWhorter concludes, "in general one could think of few better ways to depress a race's propensity for pushing itself to do its best in school than a policy ensuring that less-than-best efforts will have a disproportionately high yield."....... If the past is any guide, nothing of any consequence will come from Jian Li's complaint to the Education Department's Office of Civil Rights. Princeton and other top universities will continue their mantra, "We don't discriminate against Asians or any other racial or ethnic group!," while continuing to plus-factor in "underrepresented minorities" at the expense of those like Li unlucky enough to be categorized among the "overrepresented." This, they will say (when forced to confront policies they would prefer to keep secret) is legitimate "diversity enhancement," not discrimination. Which is really a shame, since in the long run the benefits of abandoning "race sensitive admissions" and returning to the older color-blind ideal that inspired the original Civil Rights Movement would be enormous, and would redound to all parties concerned. It would not only improve race relations on college campuses and eliminate the sense of racial grievance among Asians and Whites, but would help to refocus the energies of the Black and Hispanic communities into avenues where they might really do some good -- like improving the educational outcomes of Black and Hispanic youngsters in the nation's k-12 school system. ======================================================== Russell Nieli is a lecturer in the Department of Politics at Princeton University
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
http://www.nj.com/printer/printer.ssf?/base/news-11/1215923742298560.xml&coll=1&thispage=2 ........Princeton is accused of anti-Asian biases....... Sunday, July 13, 2008...... BY ANA M. ALAYA....... Star-Ledger Staff........ For decades, critics of affirma tive action have contended elite colleges, in their zeal to form racially diverse student bodies, have discriminated against top white ap plicants........ In a twist on that long-running feud, federal authorities are investigating an allegation that Princeton University discriminates against Asian-American applicants by ac cepting black and Hispanic stu dents with lower entrance scores....... At the heart of both argu ments lies the question of whether and how colleges should consider race when choosing a class. The Supreme Court has ruled race can be a factor in the process, though racial quotas have long been declared unconstitutional...... Critics say admission quotas remain a dirty little secret in academia. "There is almost no other area that colleges consistently lie about," said Russell Nieli, a professor in Princeton's department of politics, who recently published an essay titled "Is there an Asian Ceiling?"...... Princeton, for its part, denies using quotas. The university declined, however, to release admis sions data broken down by race and test scores, spokeswoman Cass Cliatt said, "because we don't want anyone to make the mistake that we make admissions decisions by category."...... The federal review at Princeton -- which adamantly denies it discriminates against Asians -- was sparked by a complaint filed in 2006 by Livingston High School graduate and Asian immigrant Jian Li. He claims he was rejected by Princeton and other elite universities despite graduating in the top 1 percent of his high school class, earning various honors outside the classroom and nailing perfect SAT scores....... Nieli said Li's complaint, be cause it was made by an Asian- American, may carry more weight with proponents of racial preferences....... "The people making these decisions are post-'60s guilty white limousine liberals," Nieli said. "They don't take a protest by a white person as seriously as one by a Chinese or Japanese or Korean student."...... Others argue Asian students are wrongfully being used as racial mascots in the battle against affirmative action. Advocates claim affirmative action policies can help Asian students, because diverse classes help dispel lingering biases against minority groups....... "I have a hard time buying the argument that this particular stu dent suffered serious harm," said Vincent Pan, a Millburn native who now heads Chinese for Affir mative Action in San Francisco. "There is a need to balance the private interest and the public interest, and in this case I think af firmative action does that well."........ Li, who could not be reached for comment, went to Yale and transferred to Harvard, according to other published reports........ In January, the U.S. Education Department's Office for Civil Rights expanded its review be yond Li's case to include all ad missions policies for Asian-American students for the Class of 2010 at Princeton....... In his complaint, Li accused the Ivy League institutions of a "historical and ongoing" use of racial preferences for admissions, including bias against Jews at Princeton in the early 1900s....... He also cited a 2005 study by two Princeton researchers who found eliminating racial considerations at three unnamed elite universities would increase the admission rate for Asian Americans, while that of African-Americans and Hispanics would plum met....... At Princeton, race is one factor, including socioeconomic background, extracurricular talents and academic record, considered during the admissions process, Cliatt said. Building a diverse class is like forming an "or chestra," that may need different talents from year to year, she added. About half the applicants with perfect SAT scores were ad mitted to the class Li applied to; 14 percent of that class is Asian. Almost half of Princeton's incom ing class this year are students of color........ A commitment to "acting affirmatively to ensure diversity," Cliatt said, is not the same as discriminating....... Li's complaint has been closely watched by the Ivy League schools, in part, because he asked for a suspension of federal funding to the university until it eliminates not only racial preferences, but also athletic preferences and legacy preferences, which universities historically give to children of alumni........ Ward Connerly, a former member of the University of California Board of Regents, and the architect of anti-affirmative action initiatives in California, Washington and Michigan, said the federal investigation is going to force "a very exacting examination of what Princeton is doing." He said it will get the attention of universities nationwide, contending discrimination against Asian-Americans is widespread....... Still, proving discrimination at Princeton or any college may be difficult, because colleges don't use a specific formula for admis sions, according to David Hawkins, director of public policy and research at the National Association for College Admission Counseling....... Roughly 30 to 40 percent of colleges consider race in admis sions, according to the association, and some 70 percent of institutions have a stated commit ment to diversity....... ======================================================== © 2008 The Star Ledger © 2008 NJ.com All Rights Reserved.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
http://www.openmarket.org/2008/07/11/no-excuse-for-discrimination/ ==================================================== No Excuse for Discrimination Posted by Hans Bader Are people with good grades and test scores really nerds who have no life? That’s the impression left by some affirmative-action defenders — even though it happens to be false....... A typical (and misleading) defense of college affirmative-action policies — recently made by USA TODAY — is to claim that they are not really as discriminatory they seem. When students of disfavored races express dismay that they have been rejected, despite having excellent grades and test scores (even as students of other races with poorer grades and scores are admitted), they are told that this is because grades and test scores are not the only thing colleges are looking for, but rather things that contribute to a well-rounded class, like extracurricular activies....... Factually, this is misleading, since extracurricular activities don’t usually count for much in admissions, compared to grades and test scores. (Nor do other characteristics, like leadership activities or economically-disadvantaged status. Those factors pale in importance compared to grades, test scores, and your race in determining whether you get into a selective college)....... But it also rests on a stale, baseless stereotype: that people with good grades and scores are actually nerdy dweebs who spent all their time studying, to the exclusion of extracurricular activities (the way the bright kid in a sitcom is often caricatured as being wimpy, bespectacled, and unpopular)....... Asian students are particularly subject to this stereotype. Every time an Asian student complains about Asians being rejected at higher grades and test scores than most admitted applicants, defenders of affirmative action respond by claiming that grades and test scores aren’t everything (even though no one ever said it was)....... The reality in statistics is that good things usually go together. For example, people who are smarter tend to be physically in better condition than people who are dumb....... Similarly, people with good grades and test scores tend to have more extracurricular activities and leadership experience than people with bad grades and scores. So when an admission system systematically turns away people with high grades and scores to make room for people with low grades and scores, it’s usually because of discrimination, not because the college is looking at the “whole person” or seeking a class with diverse interests. I know this because I’ve read countless college applications in my lifetime...... But USA TODAY recently defended affirmative action by claiming the fact that ”High-scoring Asian students face higher admissions hurdles . . . does not necessarily prove discrimination. Test scores and grades have never been the sole basis for admission to college.”..... As I noted in a letter in response (”All-Around Applicants Disprove Asian Stereotypes,” USA TODAY, July 11, Pg. 8A), “That statement is misleading because it implies that Asian Americans only have good test scores and grades, and not other characteristics sought by colleges. From having read thousands of applications, I can tell you that Asian students participate in just as many extracurricular and leadership activities as the average student. The fact that they are being rejected despite high grades and test scores can’t be justified by saying those aren’t the only factors.”........ There is absolutely no evidence that Asian or white applicants participate less in extracurricular or leadership activities than applicants of other races.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
Hey P'10, you said, "This is true, because one author says in his book? Clearly you're just embracing the sources that support your argument, while completely ignoring others..." ====================================================== Read Dan Golden's book, The Price of Admission: How America's Ruling Class Buys Its Way into Elite Colleges -- and Who Gets Left Outside the Gates, and also read The Chosen: The Hidden History of Admission and Exclusion at Harvard, Yale, and Princeton by Jerome Karabel. You haven't presented any credible arguments to my posts. ========================================== Read the article, Jews in Second Place When Asian-Americans become the "new Jews," what happens to the Jews? By Nicholas Lemann, June 25, 1996....... http://www.slate.com/id/2378/.....The writer Nicholas Lemann, is the Dean of the Graduate School of Journalism at Columbia University. ======================================================= Read the Jerusalem Post, Jun 14, 2008, Metro Views: Asian-Americans, the new Jews By M. Henry....http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1212659731742&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull.../// ["They" are taking over - overrunning American college campuses. "They" are concentrated in selective universities. "They" are a homogenous group, uniform in educational and financial achievement and culture. Once upon a time in the not-so-distant past, these were the stereotypes, the myths, the canards about Jews, who were subjected to unofficial quotas that limited their access to some of the finest American universities and employment prospects. These days, the "they" against whom such charges are leveled are Asian Americans. They are smart, determined, committed to education and advancement. This hardly sounds like a bad thing. They sound like Jews.]
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
"...Asian Americans have taken the place of the old JEWS of the past, because as Dan Golden said in his new book..." This is true, because one author says in his book? Clearly you're just embracing the sources that support your argument, while completely ignoring others...
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
4:10 p.m. on June 29th, 2008 Posted by Yale College Student Posted by Yale College Dad "To Yale College Student, who said, "Well, if Asians are the new Jews, as you've repeatedly said, then aren't you now by extension advocating that Asians too be rejected at higher rates? Hooray logic!" Hey Yalie, I think you a little tiny bit confused. I think you lack critical thinking skills. Please read the book by Dan Golden, THE PRICE OF ADMISSIONS, CHAPTER 7, titled, Asians Americans are the new Jews: They need not apply....Also read" My critical thinking skills are just fine, thanks. Some recommended reading for you: the definition of 'sarcasm' in any dictionary. Happy witch-hunting! ======================================================== I have the utmost empathy and sympathy for the Jews of the past because of the discrimination against them based on ethnicity and religion, especially in ADMISSIONS TO AMERICA'S ELITE COLLEGES AND PROFESSIONAL SCHOOLS, but Asian Americans have taken the place of the old JEWS of the past, because as Dan Golden said in his new book, THE PRICE OF ADMISSIONS, Chap. 7, Asian Americans are the "new Jews" and they need not apply. Now, with all due respect for Jews, Asian Americans (East, South East, and South Asian) are not Jews, nor do they want to be Jews, OLD OR NEW. Asian Americans should also not be discriminated against in admissions based on race and ethnicity. I think that's simple enough, isn't it?
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
@ wren Please keep in mind that Michele Obama was a student at Princeton in the early 1980s. Princeton is a great place, but it doesn't exactly have the most impressive track record when it comes to progressiveness. Women weren't allowed to join certain bicker clubs until the 1990s. There was all-black housing as late as the 1980s and some students even requested room changes to avoid having to live with black students.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
Of course he was rejected -- they need to make room for people like Michelle Obama so that she can write a thesis about how racist Princeton is.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
IT SEEMS ASIAN AMERICANS ALONE BEAR THE BURDEN OF RACE BASED AA, NOT WHITES. I repeat, NOT WHITES. Race preferences in admissions screws Asian Americans, advantages blacks and Latinos, with very little effect, if any, on whites. How about reducing the numbers of whites to give spaces to blacks and latinos?
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
Suck it up. Asian Americans are discriminated against in the admissions process. Just face it. Look at what you know critically and objectively, and come to the obvious answer. Sure it could be that _______ or maybe _______ or maybe it's just that it's what's in front of your eyes: Asian Americans are discriminated against. Jews were before, and I'm sure in the history of the world many others were too. Don't get your feathers ruffled now. No one's calling you a racist bastard, no one's telling you that you're worse than someone else. Let's just look at the situation critically and rectify the problem.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
You're not actually '12, are you? Shouldn't freshmen still retain that sense of blind optimism toward their university?
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
How sad that Princeton has gone this low. Not that I wouldn't expect it from such a university,
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
Posted by Yale College Dad "To Yale College Student, who said, "Well, if Asians are the new Jews, as you've repeatedly said, then aren't you now by extension advocating that Asians too be rejected at higher rates? Hooray logic!" Hey Yalie, I think you a little tiny bit confused. I think you lack critical thinking skills. Please read the book by Dan Golden, THE PRICE OF ADMISSIONS, CHAPTER 7, titled, Asians Americans are the new Jews: They need not apply....Also read" My critical thinking skills are just fine, thanks. Some recommended reading for you: the definition of 'sarcasm' in any dictionary. Happy witch-hunting!
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
Are you people still talking about this case? Get a fucking life.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
I personally support what Jian Li is doing but I've met him too and I wish that he were much more charismatic and better looking. He's not that great of a spokesperson for the case and I think that's going to ultimately doom it.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
To the Pimple Popping Princeton brats......Quote from Chris Shea, Boston Globe.... But Li's complaint draws attention to other aspects of the study: Asian-American students faced by far the lowest admissions rates of any ethnic group (17.6 percent, compared with 23.8 percent for whites, 33.7 percent for blacks, and 26.8 percent for Hispanics). What's more, contrary to the Office of Civil Rights report from 1990, legacy and athletic preferences trimmed Asian-American enrollment by only a few percentage points. But if preferences based on race, legacy status, and athletic talent were all done away with, Asian-American enrollment would jump 40 percent (while white enrollment would drop by 1 percent). To Li, it seems Asian-Americans alone bear the burden of affirmative action.......////IT SEEMS ASIAN AMERICANS ALONE BEAR THE BURDEN OF RACE BASED AA, NOT WHITES. I repeat, NOT WHITES. Race preferences in admissions screws Asian Americans, advantages blacks and Latinos, with very little effect, if any, on whites. How about reducing the numbers of whites to give spaces to blacks and latinos?
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
This case is not only about Jian Li. Jian Li has become a minor player in the INVESTIGATION of Princeton for alleged bias against ALL Asian American applicants to Princeton, and the OCR has taken this approach by EXPANDING the probe. The sooner you are able to understand this, the sooner you be able to comprehend what exactly the OCR is doing. Again, I ask the pimple popping Princeton brats who post here to stop using ad homenims against Jian Li, and this includes you. You have absolutely no understanding of what the OCR is looking for in order to determine bias. Jews were and are still 2% of the American population, yet Yale DISCRIMINATED against Jews by imposing a limiting quota/cap on Jews as a policy specified by the admission at 10%. At 10% of Yale's enrollment before WW II, Jews were OVERREPRESENTED AT 4 1/2 times their % of the American population, YET THEY WERE STILL DISCRIMINATED AGAINST WITH A QUOTA/CAP, simply because they were over represented. Today Jews are as much as 30% of Yale without the quota, because it has been abolished. Over representation does not mean there is no discrimination. The OCR will look at the % of applicants for each racial and ethnic group in the total applicant pool, and then it will determine the acceptance rate for each group in the matriculated pool. PRINCETON REFUSED TO RELEASE THESE SIMPLE NUMBERS, EVEN WHEN ASKED REPEATEDLY TO DO SO. These numbers ARE DAMNING TO PRINCETON, because the admit rates are different for each group. Previous studies done at Brown, Stanford and U Penn show that blacks are admitted at a much higher rate than whites. Whites are admitted at a greater rate than Asians. Asians are admitted at 2/3s the rate of the white admit rate. Other studies will be much more complex, but is easy to determine Asian Americans are admitted at the LOWEST RATE, lower than the white rate, and the black rate. In previous studies of Stanford, Brown and U Penn, Asians were admitted at 2/3s of the white rate, blacks were admitted at double the white rate and even more than double than the Asian rate. Asian Americans must meet a higher bar for admissions. There will be comparative studies done to determine the weight of each preference given to each applicant, if any.....The OCR will determine whether or not there is bias against a particular racial or ethnic group in admissions. They will have access to the stats of all the applicants for each standard used in admissions, including holistic criteria, social and economic status, family income, parental education, legacy status, and athletic prowess, which will be disaggregated according to race and ethnicity in a math model with regression analysis, to determine the odds of admissions for each group at each level of each standard used (SAT scores/GPAs, etc.) for each group according to family income and parental education, disaggregated by race and ethnicity.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
Jian Li is actually one of the ugliest people I have ever seen. I'm not even kidding. I know colleges aren't supposed to admit people based on looks, but he's so ugly, I'm pretty sure the admissions officers couldn't stomach letting him into their school. Then they would have to see him walking around on their campus. Yuck.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
I don't blame her. I've met Jian Li before. The best way to describe him is short, stocky, and slightly overweight. Also, from his personality, he has a proverbial stick in the ass.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
hahaha, that sounds like a great movie
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
I know a few Princeton '10s, and I believe one of these Princeton '10s was a love interest of Jian Li before college, but his love was unrequited. She got into Princeton, and he did not. Effectively, the Princeton Admissions Office, in his eyes, emasculated him of his manhood in front of her. Thus, perhaps Li's quest against Princeton in the name of Asian-Americans is a cover, and this whole ordeal is actually an attempt to show to this girl that Princeton is biased against Asians and didn't emasculate him of his manhood! Perfect love story.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
Posted by Enjoying The Quiet Looks like YCD finally passed out after pulling a vodka-infused allnighter writing the same posts over an over. ========================================================= To another Pimple Popping Princeton brat...Not really.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
Looks like YCD finally passed out after pulling a vodka-infused allnighter writing the same posts over an over.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
9:09 p.m. on June 26th, 2008 Posted by Asian '10 jian li suddenly transferring at harvard without explanation is pretty damn sketchy to me. and whatever princeton may be doing, how can anyone claim that all the other ivies/stanford/mit don't do the same thing? ========================================================= Jian Li transferring to Harvard is not relevant to the case, if anything this bolsters his case. Asian '10, the other Ivies, Stanford/MIT do also practice race preferences and they do the same thing.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
To the poster, "Ignorance=Bliss Defender"....Quote from Ivygate....But what isn’t so common is his ( Yale College Dad's) encyclopedic knowledge of the case! From my super-scientific estimation, YCD has quoted extensively from at least a handful of articles and legal texts regarding this case, all in his valiant efforts to defend an innocent student from the Princeton’s discrimination and its students’ ridicule.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
Please pay particular attention to the last line written by Chris Shea at the Boston Globe.....THIS IS REALLY NOT ABOUT JIAN LI, but the subtext of this case is what this case is really about, and that is the alleged bias against ALL Asian American applicants to Princeton. This "subtext" will hit the fan!! Yet Li isn't alone in his concerns, the derision heaped on him by his contemporaries notwithstanding. Daniel Golden, author of the Journal story this month, helped bring the issue of discrimination against Asian-Americans back to life this year in his book "The Price of Admission," in which he dubs Asian-Americans "the new Jews." From the 1920s through the 1950s, Jewish applicants with straight A's vexed elite-college admissions officers, who wanted to maintain a strong WASP tone on their campuses. The result was quotas.... Golden basically concludes that some Asian-American students who would be admitted if they were of any other ethnicity get rejected -- often for reasons based on stereotype -- to make room for "more desirable" students. But he can't make an airtight case. The question now is: Will the Office of Civil Rights, with its investigative powers, prove Li and Golden right? . . . In the late 1980s, in response to complaints, the Office of Civil Rights investigated whether Harvard had been discriminating against Asian-Americans. It found that while Asian-Americans faced longer odds than whites at admissions time (a 13.2 percent acceptance rate, compared with 17.4 percent for white students, from 1979 to 1988), the difference could largely be explained by the fact that few were legacy kids or recruited cornerbacks. The investigation did, however, turn up some embarrassingly stereotypical descriptions of rejected Asian students in Harvard records ("he's quiet and, of course, wants to be a doctor").... To bolster his case, Li has cited work by two Princeton researchers, Thomas Espenshade and Chang Chung, that was originally framed as strengthening the case for affirmative action. In articles published in 2004 and 2005 in Social Science Quarterly, Espenshade and Chung analyzed the admissions fates and qualifications of 45,500 students who applied to three very elite, unnamed universities in 1997.... The chief finding, according to the authors, was that ending all admissions preferences -- for athletes, legacy kids, and minorities -- would cut the number of black students at elite colleges by two-thirds, and Hispanic enrollment by one-half. Ending just legacy and athletic preferences, meanwhile -- something often proposed by egalitarians -- would, on its own, not help black and Hispanic students much.... But Li's complaint draws attention to other aspects of the study: Asian-American students faced by far the lowest admissions rates of any ethnic group (17.6 percent, compared with 23.8 percent for whites, 33.7 percent for blacks, and 26.8 percent for Hispanics). What's more, contrary to the Office of Civil Rights report from 1990, legacy and athletic preferences trimmed Asian-American enrollment by only a few percentage points. But if preferences based on race, legacy status, and athletic talent were all done away with, Asian-American enrollment would jump 40 percent (while white enrollment would drop by 1 percent). To Li, it seems Asian-Americans alone bear the burden of affirmative action.... Espenshade declined to answer questions about the study, saying via e-mail that he only wished to state "the obvious: academic merit is not the only kind of merit that elite college admission officers consider in making admission decisions."... Li no doubt faces a difficult road in proving discrimination, given that elite colleges turn down many stellar applicants, but his complaint has touched a nerve. "[T]here can be good reasons for the disproportionately low acceptance rates for many Asians," one self-identified Yale student wrote on the online news site Inside Higher Ed, discussing Li's case. "Top-tier schools...look not only for good grades but for an interesting student who will bring something of value to the community."... That sounds a lot like what admissions officers say, but there's a whiff of something else, too. The less-pleasant subtext is what Li's complaint is all about.... Christopher Shea's column appears biweekly in Ideas. E-mail critical.faculties@verizon.net. © Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company Current Rating: 0 (0 Ups and 0 Downs)
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
You retype the same post for the god-knows-how-many-th time and then try to defend your intelligence? You see no irony there? How bad is your ability to think critically? Do you at least see the irony of calling others "infantile" while you write in ways that most people slough off by middle school? "Ha! ha! ha!ha!..." and so many other expressions my 11 year old brother already recognizes as childish
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
To the poster, "Ignorance=Bliss?"....Quote from Ivygate....But what isn’t so common is his ( Yale College Dad's) encyclopedic knowledge of the case! From my super-scientific estimation, YCD has quoted extensively from at least a handful of articles and legal texts regarding this case, all in his valiant efforts to defend an innocent student from the Princeton’s discrimination and its students’ ridicule.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
Before y'all forget...A reminder---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, 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. If your teenager received a reject letter, file complaints with the Department of Education and the Department of Labor. You have 180 days. Office for Civil Rights U.S. Department of Education 400 Maryland Avenue, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20202-1100 1-800-421-3481 FAX: (202) 245-6840; TODD: (877) 521-2172 Online complaint form: http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/complaintintro.html E-mail: OCR@ed.gov How to file a complaint: http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/howto.html?src=rt Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs U.S. Department of Labor Frances Perkins Building 200 Constitution Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20210 1-866-4-USA-DOL How to file a complaint: http://www.dol.gov/esa/regs/compliance/ofccp/pdf/pdfstart.htm
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
Hey, Ignorance= Bliss.....1:24 a.m. on June 23rd, 2008 Posted by Swifter. I agree with with '09. He's detailed almost to, if not past, the point of insanity. Such fervor is a bit frightening.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
Yale College Dad is too stupid to realize how much of a fool he's made of himself. Here's a challenge to you: show your posts to someone who respects you, and watch their respect quickly vanish.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
Again, "You are a great troll though. So you got that going for you." What a compliment! A GREAT troll and I've got this going for me, according to "Crusty Alum".
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
From the beginning..... 2:48 p.m. on June 12th, 2008 Posted by 090909.... "How the heck did this guy get into Harvard?".....Another Pimple Popping Princeton answers...Duh?. 090909, of course had no clue.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
The "ha!ha!"s really drove it home. Please YCD, add more "ha!"s to every post, it shows how much more mature your argument is. And please, I beg you, continue to finish your sentences with multiple exclamation points!! They let all the rotten PPP's know they are dealing with a scholar of a extraordinary caliber.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
To the Pimple Popping Princeton brats....Please this post,.....Posted by Crusty Alum..... And I thought I was a troll. Wow. Can the Prince ban this turkey before he reposts the same quotes for the fifth time? His white noise is preventing any interesting discussion, such as the grad student comment. Oh, and I'll go with an ad hominem attack since they seem to be what this thread is about. For a "5th generation" American, your grammar is the bad. I assumed English was your second language until I got to the post where you peacocked your heritage. You are a great troll though. So you got that going for you. Which is nice.....//////////////////============== Again, "You are a great troll though. So you got that going for you." What a compliment! A GREAT troll and I've got this going for me, according to "Crusty Alum.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
You have illegally quoted the education staff of half the nation's newspapers, you might as well start using my words as well!
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
The Opportunity Cost of Admission... Preferences at Elite Universitiesn... Thomas J. Espenshade, Princeton University... Chang Y. Chung, Princeton University....... Conclusions...... Critics of affirmative action in American higher education often overlook the fact that elite universities give added weight in the admissions process to many different types of student characteristics. In this article, we use microsimulation analysis to investigate the effect on the profile of admitted students of eliminating preferences for one or more categories of students. Data for the 1997 entering class indicate that eliminating affirmative action would reduce acceptance rates for African-American and Hispanic applicants by as much as one-half to two-thirds and have an equivalent impact on the proportion of underrepresented minority students in the admitted class. White applicants would benefit very little by removing racial and ethnic preferences; the white acceptance rate would increase by roughly 0.5 percentage points. Asian applicants would gain the most. They would occupy four out of every five seats created by accepting fewer African-American and Hispanic students. The acceptance rate for Asian applicants would rise by one-third from nearly 18 percent to more than 23 percent. We also show that, even though athlete and legacy applicants are disproportionately white and despite the fact that athlete and alumni children admission bonuses are substantial, preferences for athletes and legacies do little to displace minority applicants, largely because athletes and legacies make up a small share of all applicants to highly selective universities.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
To 090909... I like bashing Pimple Popping Princeton brats, that's why. Hey, this is tiring me and it has been endurance test, me against all the PPP brats. Using your own words, 090909, "I am just messing with you."
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
To Cynic who said, "Jian Li is righteous for his holy jihad against the princetonian infidels, and then quoting some obscure document." Hey, Cynic, Jian is a Chinese American, not a Muslim American. =================== 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.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
Whatcha drinking tonight, Yale College Dad? You are clearly on the sauce. By the way, why haven't you posted on IvyGate? I'm sure you'd get a great reception there.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
To Cynic, who said, "And you win at proving yourself to be a complete douchebag and undermining the credibility of the Jian Li case.".....Undermining the credibility of Li's case?? Undermine my azzzz. Are you really stupid? This is a typical response from an ignorant Pimple Popping Princeton brat. This case is not about Jian Li anymore. The OPENED FILES of the Pronceton admissions office for every applicant will determine the outcome. Even if the OCR rules against Li, which it may do, simply because it consists of politically correct appointees, The FILES will be opened for an impartial, and independent observer to view.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
To the Pimple Popping Princeton brats......From Chris Shea, Boston Globe.... But Li's complaint draws attention to other aspects of the study: Asian-American students faced by far the lowest admissions rates of any ethnic group (17.6 percent, compared with 23.8 percent for whites, 33.7 percent for blacks, and 26.8 percent for Hispanics). What's more, contrary to the Office of Civil Rights report from 1990, legacy and athletic preferences trimmed Asian-American enrollment by only a few percentage points. But if preferences based on race, legacy status, and athletic talent were all done away with, Asian-American enrollment would jump 40 percent (while white enrollment would drop by 1 percent). To Li, it seems Asian-Americans alone bear the burden of affirmative action.......////IT SEEMS ASIAN AMERICANS ALONE BEAR THE BURDEN OF RACE BASED AA, NOT WHITES. I repeat, NOT WHITES. Race preferences in admissions screws Asian Americans, advantages blacks and Latinos, with very little effect, if any, on whites. How about reducing the numbers of whites to give spaces to blacks and latinos?
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
Hey PPP brats, including Cynic, Listen up!....read this post...Posted by Rather Not Say... Sadly, I do not think that Yale College Dad is Jian Li. As a graduate of Livingston High School, I know for a fact that at least two people from the school were admitted to Harvard's class of 2009..../// This poster is trying to tell yo something... Can't you read?
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
Pimple popping Princeton brat asked...How the heck did this guy get into Harvard?....Another PPP brat answers...duh???
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
Hey, Cynic...HOW ABOUT REDUCING THE NUMBER OF WHITES/JEWS AT PRINCETON TO MAKE SPACES AVAILABLE FOR BLACKS AND LATINOS????...Do you understand this question?....Please read Christopher Shea's article I just posted below. This case is NOT REALLY ABOUT JIAN LI, per se. He is just a minor player in this. Your questions regarding Li were TOTALLY irrelevant to the OCR case and it does not really care about what you question about Li and /or his circumstances or even his motives for the complaint. IT DOES NOT MATTER. Whether or not I am Jian's dad is also totally irrelevant. You can't seem to accept these simple facts. You can check mate my azz.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
Cynic: Watch out, he's now going to shout at you about how IT'S NOT OBSCURE!!!! IT HAS BEEN WRITTEN ABOUT IN THE WALL STREET JOURNAL!!!!! HA!HA!HA!HA! ad infinitum.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
Hey, Cynic... Read the post Ivygate rated as one of the "BEST"....Ha!Ha!Ha!Ha!Ha!Ha!Ha!Ha!Ha!Ha!...As poster 0909009 said, "I am just messing with you"
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
"Well, you ignorant fool, what have you established? What you "tried to establish" IS TOTALLY IRRELEVANT FOR THE CASE AND THIS PRINCE ARTICLE" Yes, I know it's irrelevant for the case and the prince article, I never tried to argue against the case. I questioned your motivations and sanity... But, you know what Yale College Dad/Jian Li, you win. You win at shouting others who try to have an intelligent debate into submission. You win at proving beyond the shadow of a doubt that you/Jian Li are correct and everyone else is wrong. You win at proving that all Princetonians have acne and require topical ointments. And you win at proving yourself to be a complete douchebag and undermining the credibility of the Jian Li case. Although Jian Li did not have many supporters at Princeton before your senseless tirade, you've only succeeded in driving those with a bit of sympathy for Jian to the other side. Bravo, Yale College Dad, bravo, you've served your purpose. I expect another long tirade from you, which will consist of the following: calling me ignorant, expressing your resentment against "pimple popping princetonians," speaking about how Jian Li is righteous for his holy jihad against the princetonian infidels, and then quoting some obscure document.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
Ivygate rated this post as one of the BEST posts by YCD=====================================//// One of his better posts: To the pimple popping Princeton brats…Jian Li has more than a strong argument. At the Ivies, especially at HYP, the evidence is overwhelming and compelling, and it is clear and convincing that for decades, there has been a racial basis, conscience or non-conscience, directed against Asian American applicants. Regardless of the outcome of the decision on Jian Li’s complaint from the OCR, since it also consists of biased politically correct appointees, who will undoubtedly rule against Jian anyway, Princeton’s admissions files will be OPENED, and this could bolster Jian’s claims when viewd by an impartial party. This case has put Princeton and the Ivies on notice for more future complaints and federal law suits based racial discrimination by Asian Americans. They won’t be ignored, mocked and ridiculed and be treated as frivolous anymore, especially by the Daily Princetonian….090909 has yet to post a credible reponse. Laugh it up, Princetonians, because the joke will be on YOU!!! BTW, some of my relatives and best friends are graduates of Princeton. Ha!Ha!Ha!Ha!Ha!Ha!Ha!Ha!Ha!Ha!Ha!Ha!Ha!Ha!Ha!Ha!Ha!Ha!
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
To the poster who said, "My acne has pretty much cleared up..."///// Really? Look again! Those medicines and ointments ain't working.! Keep popping those pimples.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
Cynic said, "I am having fun with you, since you are just another pimple popping Princeton brat who posts here, with very little understanding of this case." Yale College Dad, you're right, I have a very little understanding of this case. That is why I never tried to argue against you on the merits or details of the case. You don't seem to recognize that my intention WAS NOT to establish that Jian Li's argument does not have reason, but to establish that you, Yale College Dad, a fanatical whacko who has nothing better to do but to argue with "pimple popping princeton brats" on the comment boards of the Daily Princetonian, may be Jian Li."...Well, you ignorant fool, what have you established? What you "tried to establish" IS TOTALLY IRRELEVANT FOR THE CASE AND THIS PRINCE ARTICLE. Before you show your ignorance, you must read and understand the case, you idiot. Can't you read? I posted the law and the section of this law, that Princeton allegedly violated, in the complaint of alleged bias against ALL Asian American applicants to Princeton. If Princeton is found in violation, this will have FAR REACHING CONSEQUENCES and Princeton will be labeled as being RACIST against Asians. If Sir Gordon Wu is in his right mind, he should take his name off that building at Princeton and ask for a refund of all the millions he has donated to the school, since he is Princeton's largest single individual donor.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
Ivygate said, "Please, Yale College Dad, send a statement to Ivygate, advance your crusade to the next level. We'll all be rooting for you!"...Thanks again, Ivygate. Thanks for your support of my "crusade" against these Pimple Popping Princeton brats or the PPP brats...signed YCD
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
jian li suddenly transferring at harvard without explanation is pretty damn sketchy to me. and whatever princeton may be doing, how can anyone claim that all the other ivies/stanford/mit don't do the same thing?
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
My acne has pretty much cleared up...
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
"I am having fun with you, since you are just another pimple popping Princeton brat who posts here, with very little understanding of this case." Yale College Dad, you're right, I have a very little understanding of this case. That is why I never tried to argue against you on the merits or details of the case. You don't seem to recognize that my intention WAS NOT to establish that Jian Li's argument does not have reason, but to establish that you, Yale College Dad, a fanatical whacko who has nothing better to do but to argue with "pimple popping princeton brats" on the comment boards of the Daily Princetonian, may be Jian Li. When you quoted Ivygate, you seemed to have missed out on the best part of the article: "Or is he defending himself? Several of the commenters have begun to call into question just how YCD could possibly know about the admissions decisions of other people at Jian Li’s high school: the one area where his comments do not aggressively cite articles. So is this Jian Li himself? Not content with waging his war in the courts, he brings it to the comment board of the Daily Princetonian? In what I am only bold enough to assume is an interesting coincidence, the tipster who tattled to us about YCD’s possible secret identity was identified only by the initials “J L.” Could Jian Li be looking to get caught? Now I will take the only logical step and invite Yale College Dad to explain or defend himself here on IvyGate. Yale College Dad, if you will email us with a statement of some sort I will promote you from your comment board stomping grounds and print it on the front page for all to see! Afterwards, you’ll want to continue defending Jian Li/yourself in the comments, I’m sure. I have a feeling that most of our readers aren’t on your side here. Yale College Dad we want to hear from you! Obviously, if you know Jian Li himself and can offer any insight here we’d love to hear from you as well. Alternatively, if you have any good guesses as to who YCD might be if it’s not Jian Li, sound off in the comments please!" Please, Yale College Dad, send a statement to Ivygate, advance your crusade to the next level. We'll all be rooting for you!
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
"I ask the pimple popping Princeton brats who post here to stop using ad homenims against Jian Li." Do you really not see how ironic you're being, YCD? Should we be addressing you with "TO THE INSECURE PREMATURE-EJACULATOR"?
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
TO THE PIMPLE POPPING PRINCETON BRATS WHO POSTS HERE....THIS IS WHAT THE LI COMPLAINT IS REALLY ABOUT...From Chris Shea, Boston Globe.... But Li's complaint draws attention to other aspects of the study: Asian-American students faced by far the lowest admissions rates of any ethnic group (17.6 percent, compared with 23.8 percent for whites, 33.7 percent for blacks, and 26.8 percent for Hispanics). What's more, contrary to the Office of Civil Rights report from 1990, legacy and athletic preferences trimmed Asian-American enrollment by only a few percentage points. But if preferences based on race, legacy status, and athletic talent were all done away with, Asian-American enrollment would jump 40 percent (while white enrollment would drop by 1 percent). To Li, it seems Asian-Americans alone bear the burden of affirmative action.......////IT SEEMS ASIAN AMERICANS ALONE BEAR THE BURDEN OF RACE BASED AA, NOT WHITES. I repeat, NOT WHITES. Race preferences in admissions screws Asian Americans, advantages blacks and Latinos, with very little effect, if any, on whites.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
To the poster, "Cynic", who said, "Yale College Dad, No, I don't know how the OCR ha