• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

uc admissions info vs 2000 census

T

Tetsuo316

Golden Member
here's a little nugget to discuss while i'm off at work.

census 2000 california info from the census bureau:

number of black youths aged 15-19: ~164,000
number of asian-american youths aged 15-19: ~267,000
number of white youths aged 15-19: ~1,458,000

this means that the ratio of white to black youths in that age bracket is roughly 9 to 1.
this also means that the ratio of white to asian-american youths in that age bracket is roughly 5.5 to 1.
the ratio of asian-american to black youths in that age bracket is roughly 1.5 to 1.

now, the uc admissions this year are as follows:

asian-americans: 16,000
white: 14,000
black: 1,000

so that puts the ratios at:

white to black: 14:1
asian-american to white: 8:7
asian-american to black 16:1



now, these numbers are not precise, and i'm not sure where the uc admissions info can be found online; my friend read it to me from here newspaper. what is important here are not the exact numbers, but that the ratio of students admitted is grossly out of proportion.

there is also the issue of out-of-state students. i did not factor these in at all, but i do know that the vast majority of students in the uc sstem are in-state.

again, these numbers are not precise, but are close. the message i want to get out there is that the uc admissions system is out-of-whack.
 


<< asian students on the whole are smarter then whites and blacks, its not their fault. >>



I wouldn't go that far, but I would say that Asians tend to fit the admission criteria better.

-geoff
 
i was being a little facetious (I saw your pic and thought you were AaronP, lol sorry)


On the whole you do seem to see that kids from asian families have a better work ethic which helps them in school
 
There's nothing "out of whack" with16 Asians for every 1 Black at a school, if for every qualified black applicant there were 16 qualified Asian students. The general population statistics are irrelevant. Maybe less blacks applied to UC.

Hell, I'd bet that for every qualified black that applied to UC schools, there were 30 or more qualified Asians. The ratio is 1:16 because of affirmitive action!
 
Asian kids usually have more pressure to do well in school to goto college. The UCs do have their unofficial "affirmative action" though. We had an interesting discussion in my Gov't & Politics class on an article about how their system for rewarding students for life challenges is targeted for certain groups.
 


<< << Maybe less blacks applied to UC. >>




yeah, maybe they all applied to Howard. >>



Or maybe they were too busy humping your Mom.
 
The UC's admissions process can hardly be blamed for admitting people based on MERIT rather than RACE.

Or do you think we should descriminate against more-qualified applicants just because they're of a certain ethnic background?
 
You can't look at half the picture. You have no basis to make any claims whatsoever until you get facts regarding the number of white/black/asian students that actually applied to the UC schools.

Example: 90 men, 10 women apply. 9 men and 1 woman excepted, you take these results and then proclaim the admissions are sexist. Don't you see a problem with this logic?
 


<<

<< << Maybe less blacks applied to UC. >>




yeah, maybe they all applied to Howard. >>



Or maybe they were too busy humping your Mom. >>




hahaha christ, its a joke people, i swear somedays everyone laughs at my jokes and others everyone is looking at me cock-eyed.
 


<< You can't look at half the picture. You have no basis to make any claims whatsoever until you get facts regarding the number of white/black/asian students that actually applied to the UC schools.

Example: 90 men, 10 women apply. 9 men and 1 woman excepted, you take these results and then proclaim the admissions are sexist. Don't you see a problem with this logic? >>



i think hes complaing becaue if there were 90 stupid men and 10 smart women, all the women get admitted, thats sexist.
 
"asians are smarter, get over it. "

Sure, and this is based on what exactly? Anecdotal evidence in the U.S.? Hey here's a hint, most asian people don't live in California. In general the stupid people in a country aren't going to uproot and go off looking for a better life either.
 
<<Hey here's a hint, most asian people don't live in California. >>

really??? where are they from then? i think many asians live in california. can't seem to imagine a bunch of asians living in utah. i myself am asian and i attend ucla... and i think the proportions are about what tetsuo316 says.
 
asian parents lash their kids for getting anything below an A- . I'm sure if that method were applied to any other race, they'd do equally well.
 
i however do think that asians are smarter...
like how does such small countries make such technological advances: japan (everything electronic), korea (damn good computer stuff), taiwan (good a** motherboards), etc...
 
Asians just tend to do better in school.
No biggie, just like Blacks tend to excel in athletics, and whites tend to excel in oppressing all races (joke)

How come no one ever looks at the ratio of athletic scholarships and asks where the equality is. PLEASE..........

We need quality education throughtout the state not remarks on how racist the UC system is or how the SAT is bad or how AA is good.
 


<< asian parents lash their kids for getting anything below an A- . I'm sure if that method were applied to any other race, they'd do equally well. >>



This is too much of a sterotype. I ended up doing ok, and my sister even better, but I never got whooped for grades. Pressure, yes, but nothing where I thought it hurt me.

I don't know of any Asians whose parents fit that supremely strict grade pumping image.
 
I don't see how that is racist at all.
First tier has always been people who get in purely on grades/scores. 2nd tier people is for everyone else. At the 2nd Tier, things like extra curric and essay are what differentiates candidates.

The Life Challenges things helps identify people by economic class and not race (If it were race, this would be called Affirmative Action).
Because educational minorities tend to come from poorer families, this system works decently.

I went to an average public HS in San Jose, and I can honestly say no minorities got robbed from attendng UCB from my class. Everyone I knew pretty much got what they deserved, minority or not.

I still think people refuse to look at the issue: improve K-12 schools, not the selection process. People, instead, like to ignore the issue and think the UC is at fault.

If someone gets something over me, I want to know that they deserved it, not that they were the last Eskimo/Native American in the state and therefore someone should make the balances even.

Otherwise, I should be demonstrating for Affirmative Action in sports. AA is in the workforce after all. I don't see many professional Asian athletes. I know, it MUST be racism, not the fact that most Asians aren't that good yet.

ed.
Without focusing on improving schools and life conditions, no selection process will every be "fair"
If you look at the scores there's a huge difference between Asian/White score and African American/Chicano/Latino scores

If I had got a 1100 on my SAT's and a 3.7 GPA I'd probably expect to go to UCSB or UCSC instead of UCLA.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top