|
|
|
|
|
GOLDSEA |
ASIAMS.NET |
ASIAN AMERICAN ISSUES
ARE IVY DEGREES WORTH THE SACRIFICES
ending their kids to ivy league universities is the dream of every Asian American parent. Or so it seems. And there is no shortage of young AA willing to oblige. As of 2000, Asian Americans made up 12-19% of the undergrad enrollments of the top-20 ivy league universities.
No one questions the prestige associated with ivy degrees. In fact, sneer critics, that's the only thing bought with the extra money. And even that, they add, is wearing thin in a nation in which he cultural center of gravity has shifted to California.
It's true that investments in high ivy tuitions often don't show up in career earnings when compared with graduates of public universities of comparable student body profiles. But the criticisms run deeper than return on investment. Some Asian Americans who have attended ivy league colleges have come away regretting their decisions for other reasons.
Foremost is the sense that the ivies are structured for the benefit of legatees, the progeny of blueblooded alumni. Comprising upwards of 40% of some ivies, the legatees are often exempted from stringent admissions standards. The result is that AA students with excellent credentials are the workhorses preserving the institutions' high academic reputations, thereby giving a free ride to undeserving legatees.
Another common complaint is that the deck is stacked socially against Asian males in a system designed to preserve the princely status quo of the scions of WASP families. A disproportionate number of attractive AA females are admitted by the ivies, some have observed, while far fewer attractive AA males are admitted. This subtle bias, suspect critics, is implemented in the screening interviews used by most ivies.
Then there's the Eurocentric worldview imposed by the courses. Not to mention the lousy weather, bland food and having to put up with locals hostile toward Asians. Contrast all this against the majority-ease lifestyles enjoyed by the AA in, say, the UC campuses.
The bragging rights an ivy education affords parents, conclude critics, are far outweighed by the psychic and emotional sacrifices exacted from their kids.
Does an ivy education provide rewards commensurate with the sacrifices? Or is it a trap for AA with overzealous parents with old-world views?
This interactive article is closed to new input.
Discussions posted during the past year remain available for browsing.
CONTACT US
|
ADVERTISING INFO
© 1996-2013 Asian Media Group Inc
No part of the contents of this site may be reproduced without prior written permission.
|
|
|
|
WHAT YOU SAY
[This page is closed to new input. --Ed.]
(Updated
Tuesday, Apr 1, 2008, 06:01:15 PM)
In the fall 2001 freshman class
at Berkeley,there were between 1700 -1800 freshman who scored above 700 in the Math portion of the SAT, There were only slightly above 1200 freshman in the fall 2001 entering class at Harvard who managed the same feat. There are more Asian freshman in the fall 2001 entering class in the entire UC System campuses than whites .
Here is the supreme insult at Harvard, there are more Asian freshman in the fall 2001 entering class at Berkeley who scored above 700 in the Math portion of the SAT than white freshman who demonstrated the same achievement in the fall 2001 entering class at Harvard.
Sure there are 1600 freshman in the Harvard 2001 entering class and 3700 at Berkeley. Remember however that 85 % of Berkeley freshman come from California,Arizona and Nevada.
The combined population of these 3 states equal the populations of New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Delaware, Maine, Vermont, Rhode Island and New Hampshire. 40 % of the Harvard entering class approximately comes from these aforementioned northeastern states.
On that basis alone, your can see the magnitude of Berkeley's achievement. The end result of the massive use of legacy preferences in the Ivy League is loss of racial diversity and intellectual vitality. For the past 10 years the number of freshman who scored above 700 in the Math portion of the SAT at Harvard had not risen above 1300, and usually fluctuated at around 1200.
The number of freshman at Berkeley who scored above 700 in the Math portion of the SAT has been increasing for the past 20 years continiously. Harvard could not increase the number of freshman who scored above 700 in the Math portion of the SAT, for doing so meant decreasing the number of white freshman who are alumni legacies.
Also, because of the massive system of preferences at Harvard, the percentage of Asian freshman at Harvard had fluctuated at around 17 - 19 % for the past 10 years , while at Berkeley it has increased continiously for the past 20 years ( despite the qoutas of the mid and late 80's). Of course Prop. 209 boosted Asian freshman increases to its current fall 2001 percentage at 48 % of the freshman class.
This is in dire contrast to the situation at the Ivy League, Stanford and at other private universities.The heavy emphasis of public universities on grades and standardized test scores as a basis of admission in contrast to private universities , with their vast system of preferences, has enabled the massive rise in the number of Asisns with regards to both numbers and percentage in the UC system and otherflagship public universities.
Again because of the heavy emphasis of
public universities on grades and standardized test scores , Asians were able to replace blacks as the largest non - white racial group in many leading state flagship public universities.This is in contrast to the Ivy League and other private universities where whites managed to retain their numbers and percentages due to the vast system of alumni, athletic and " development preferences".
In fact, the number and percentages of whites have declined in the key public flagship universities because of the heavy emphasis of public schools on grades and standardized test scores. This is also the reason as to why Asians have replaced blacks as the largest non -white racial group in the key state public flagship universities.
The list of key flagship universities where both situations occured is long and varied. These key public flaghsip universities are : the UC system , the Universities of Washington, Arizona, Colorado, Utah, Texas, Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, Iowa, Kansas, Oklahoma, Wisconsin, Oregon, Florida,
Georgia, Nevada ,Connecticut, Massachusetss, Rutgers, SUNY
University Centers ( Binghamton,Stony Brook,Albany, Buffalo,Geneseo ) Cuny Baruch, Cuny Queens, NJIT,Georgia Tech, University of Houston etc.
This is very damning evidence that whites managed to keep their numbers and percentage in the Ivies and private schools only because of the vast orefereces system, whereas their numbers and percentage declined in the key flagship public universities.
This is finally the reason as to why
public levy tax money should not be used to fund medical or scientific
research at Harvard, Yale, Johns Hopkins, Stanford and other privates
because of their rotten alumni legacy preference system. Tell Congress to do just that
leo cruz, let my tag be "biaknabato"
bahaghari2001@yahoo.com
Sunday, January 20, 2002 at 04:54:21 (PST)
An asian parent in Asia would expect their children to get the best education possible and try to send them to the best universities in Aisa (Tokyo U., Beijing U., Taiwan U., etc.).
Once they arrive in the USA as immigrant they will expect the same for their children here as they did Asia.
Unless there is no economic possibility of attending elite privite institutions or as an out of state resident at the elite public institution. One should strive to attend these competitive environments.
Note I do not stress the importance of name brand degrees. But instead the competitive student body they attract. Grades may not reflect one's success in life, but one's achievements and failures in a competitive environment will.
AC dropout
Tuesday, January 08, 2002 at 10:46:51 (PST)
NEWEST COMMENTS |
EARLIER COMMENTS
|