What exactly is the justification for Asiatic Exclusion at the Admissions Dept of Stanford Ivy USC Caltech?

Reverse affirmative action. Time for whitey to have a shot again.

at UC Berkeley engineering, asians are literally a majority

Esplain wrote:

Esplain.

1) Saw a study once that said that it doesn't actually happen at Caltech.

2) Most uni's justify based on soft skills. They argue that there is more to life than SAT scores.

Its racsim

There's been many commission studies on this phenomenon. The alumni are Anglo white racists and hate on minorities so the schools mentioned admit 'acceptable' half-whites from Turkey, Iran, Russia, israel, Syria, Croatia and roadblock East Asian Orientals.

4runner wrote:

Esplain wrote:

Esplain.

1) Saw a study once that said that it doesn't actually happen at Caltech.

In a very recent issue (Oct. 3, 2015) of The Economist, Asian-Americans were reported to constitute 44% of student enrollments at Caltech in 2014. (The figure was 41% at Berkeley, and a range of about 12-20% at the various Ivy League schools. I have no idea what the percentages are at Stanford and USC.)

Universities want well rounded students. A lot of the Asians spend all their time studying and are involved in no extraciriculars or they pad their resumes with activities they participate in half heartedly, often being involved in so many clubs they don't make half the meetings for any of them. In terms of foreign students, they do nothing but drill for the SAT, often being years behind their American peers in actual knowledge and critical thinking. The universities are not so much excluding students as they are selecting the best students through means other than highest sat and gpa and most activities and volunteering. To get into a top university, study hard, but have a life. Pick a sport a season max and a couple clubs you are passionate about. Volunteer or work in the summer for a few hours a week. This will get you where you want to go, regardless of race.

Avocado's Number wrote:

4runner wrote:

1) Saw a study once that said that it doesn't actually happen at Caltech.

In a very recent issue (Oct. 3, 2015) of The Economist, Asian-Americans were reported to constitute 44% of student enrollments at Caltech in 2014. (The figure was 41% at Berkeley, and a range of about 12-20% at the various Ivy League schools. I have no idea what the percentages are at Stanford and USC.)

Asians can be Iranians, Israelis, Turks. The figure you quote are not orientals, aka CJKs, aka East Asians which are ignored by the study. Caltech is guilty of Anglo-Wkite Racism.

exthrower wrote:

Liberals want equal outcomes...Not equal opportunity...Different outcomes mean that some people/cultures are better, or worse, a reality that liberals refuse to accept.

False

Exactly.

Asians put a premium on academic achievement. In some cases to the exclusion of other useful life activities and experiences. I don't think this is as prevalent in other groups. This hardly means all Asians are this way or that no whitey kids are, but it's a generalization with some validity IMO.

I do declar wrote:

Avocado's Number wrote:

In a very recent issue (Oct. 3, 2015) of The Economist, Asian-Americans were reported to constitute 44% of student enrollments at Caltech in 2014. (The figure was 41% at Berkeley, and a range of about 12-20% at the various Ivy League schools. I have no idea what the percentages are at Stanford and USC.)

Asians can be Iranians, Israelis, Turks. The figure you quote are not orientals, aka CJKs, aka East Asians which are ignored by the study. Caltech is guilty of Anglo-Wkite Racism.

Wrong. The figures reflect racial and ethnic classifications, not which side of the Bosphorus someone's great-grandparents came from.

Here are Caltech's own figures. Note that the categories of "Asian" (44% of undergraduate enrollment), "White" (28% of undergraduate enrollment), "International" (9% of undergraduate enrollment), and "Two or More Races" (3% of undergraduate enrollment) are treated as mutually exclusive:

The long answer is worth the read.

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/

Avocado's Number wrote:

I do declar wrote:

Asians can be Iranians, Israelis, Turks. The figure you quote are not orientals, aka CJKs, aka East Asians which are ignored by the study. Caltech is guilty of Anglo-Wkite Racism.

Wrong. The figures reflect racial and ethnic classifications, not which side of the Bosphorus someone's great-grandparents came from.

Here are Caltech's own figures. Note that the categories of "Asian" (44% of undergraduate enrollment), "White" (28% of undergraduate enrollment), "International" (9% of undergraduate enrollment), and "Two or More Races" (3% of undergraduate enrollment) are treated as mutually exclusive:

https://www.registrar.caltech.edu/academics/enrollment

It's pretty disgusting and shameful what has been going on.

What has to be done is to keep track of Asian admits by specific region:

1) East Asians (CJKs, Vietnam, Philipines, Singapore)

2) Central Asians (India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, etc.)

3) Near East Asians (Saudi, Syria, Iran, Turkey, Egypt, Israel, etc.)

4) Eastern European Asiatics (Russia, Poland, Hungary, Estonia)

Caltech prefers White-Asiatics by loading up with category 4) students. USC and Stanford do exactly the same to exclude 1), 2), and 3) whether they are American born or foreign. You would expect so since Stanford's original charter stated that minority Blacks, Mexicans, aAsians, etc. are banned from being students.

Caltech's category of "Asian" includes only American students who are racially identified as Asian. It excludes all students racially identified as White, all foreign students of any race, and all students from two or more races. If you have evidence that Caltech classifies, for example, White Poles or White Estonians as Asians rather than Whites, Internationals, or students of two or more races, I'd like to see that evidence.

asdfg wrote:

The long answer is worth the read.

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/

Although I was leery of an article in "The American Conservative," I agree that it's a good read. I wish it had gone further in discussing, for example, the reasons for and extent to which the percentage of students identified as Jewish has remained stable in elite Ivy League colleges despite their decreasing percentage of top academic candidates, I would also have liked to see more hard quantifiable evidence about the extent to which "legacy" admissions, donor status, personal and family connections, and admissions based substantially on athletic department recommendations affect figures for all racial and ethnic groups.

The movement of colleges away from SAT scores is strictly for the purpose of increasing diversity.

Stanford Caltech Ivies roadblocks Orientals limiting to 20%

. USC limits to 30%.

I don't know if you're the same poster under multiple names, but you continue to make similar unsubstantiated claims. At the very least, it seems that you leave Caltech out of your assertions, since the evidence presented so far suggests that you're completely off-base about the school.

Go away Randy.