Tell the world "UGLY facts of discrimination against AsAms."
FORWARD these ugly facts to your best friends,
regardless of race
Dear Fellow Asian Americans:
Public scrutiny is a very powerful weapon against injustice. 80-20's "Ugly facts on discrimination against Asian Am youth", shown below, has very powerful data. Let's put the two weapons together to obtain the explosive desired result -- a level playing field for AsAm children. Note: our data in "UGLY facts ..." have not been disputed by anyone, including the presidents of the Ivy League colleges.
Forward this shocking but true information to your best friends, regardless of race.
If you don't, don't ever come to 80-20 to complain about discrimination against your kids again.
80-20 EF President who volunteered for the last 19 years
The most complete documentation of UGLY discrimination against Asian American youth
Here is a complete account of the ugly discrimination against AsAm youngsters by elite colleges, including a number of NEW discoveries. These colleges are using the nobility of diversity as a cover to give an illegal advantage to white applicants over AsAms, thereby imposing an illegal quota on the number of AsAm students admitted. Read item 2) carefully.
1) DISCRIMINATION at the Graduate School Entrance Level:
The following table is published by the Am. Assoc. of Medical Colleges (AAMC). The info in the first 10 columns shows that the acceptance rate for AsAm applicants is always the lowest in 9 different combinations of comparable MCAT score & GPA, lower even than their white peers. The info. in the last 2 columns on the right show that the average AsAm MCATs score is the HIGHEST among all races, and yet they are accepted at the LOWEST rates among all races. Outrageous!
The bar chart below, based on the info shown in the above table, illustrates theglaring differences in admission rates.
The desire for diversity and the intent of the Affirmative Action Program causes the higher acceptance rate of Hispanic & Black applicants with comparable academic achievements, which most AsAms understand and embrace. However, why are AsAms given a lower acceptance rate than white peers? Isn't that the REVERSE of Affirmative Action?
2) DISCRIMINATION at the College Entrance Level:
In Table 3.5 on p 92 of Princeton Prof. Espenshade's famous book, "No Longer Separate, Not Yet Equal", the following shocking fact was revealed:
Table 3.5 (emphasis added) Race Admission Preferences at Public & Private Institutions
Measured in ACT & SAT Points, Fall 1997
---------------------------------------------------- Public Institutions Private Institutions ACT-Point Equivalents SAT-Point Equivalents Item (out of 36) (out of 1600) ------------------------------------------------------------------- Race
(White) -- -- Black 3.8 310 Hispanics 0.3 130 Asian -3.4 -140
For the sake of diversity, we do embrace the idea of granting extra points to the ACT & SAT scores of blacks and Hispanics -- we would add even more, if needed. However, why are 140 SAT pts.taken awayfrom AsAm applicants? To give the white applicants an advantage of 140 SAT pts. over the historically disadvantaged AsAms by using the nobility of diversity as a cover? This is the reverse of affirmative action. This is a gross abuse of affirmation action. This is outrageous discrimination.
We estimate that the AsAm admits into the Ivy Leagues colleges would be about 25%, not 18%, if AsAms were not deceitfully forced to yield 140 pts to whites.
3) DISCRIMINATION - a cabal to impose ILLEGAL quota on AsAms?
The black dotted line shows that the number of college aged AsAms in our population has approximately doubled over a recent 20 year period. The red solid line indicates the % of AsAm students at the California Institute of Technology where "race preference" admission is not permitted, tracks that increase.
In strong contrast, the Ivy League colleges converge to 16% +/- 3% AsAms students.. It smells of an Ivy League cabal against AsAm students.
4) Cowardly DISCRIMINATION against the weak & disorganized:
Some may say AsAms are only 6% of the national population, 16 +/- 3% is already too many. Really? Are they advocating a quota, which the Supreme Court ruled as illegal? America's ideal is meritocracy.
Jewish Americans comprise only 2% of the national population. Look at the % of their youngsters in the Ivies, as reported by The Jerusalem Post in 2015.
Yale: 27% (1,500 Jewish undergrads out of 5,477 total),
Harvard: 25% (1,675 out of 6,694 undergrads),
Cornell: 21% (3000 out of 14315), and
Columbia: 35% (3000 out of 8,613).
Further internet research reveals the following:
Penn: 25% Princeton, Dartmouth and Brown: 13% to 20%
It is a testament to America's decency that discrimination against the Jews has stopped. Nevertheless, the Ivies' discrimination against the weak and unorganized AsAms is cowardly.
5) Harvard's "Holistic Evaluation" is a Charade. The White House Commi-
ssion on Presidential Scholars tells annually that AsAms are not Nerdy:
Harvard has never defined its "holistic evaluation." It fought tooth and nail to
keep its admissions records secret. What is Harvard afraid of? How about
practicing the transparency, which Harvard preaches to its students and the
rest of the nation so frequently?
Fortunately, another group also performs a holistic evaluation of high school graduates annually. The esteemed "White House Commission on Presidential Scholars" evaluates all high school graduates "on academic
achievement, personal characteristics, leadership, service, and other
extracurricular activities, and an analysis of their essays."
The Presidential Scholars Award Program, where clearly defined holistic evaluation is used, has named AsAms to 28% of their finalists spots
averaged over the last 15 years. Over that same period, AsAms have made
up only 18% of Harvard's admissions.
Shame on you, Harvard. Your holistic evaluation is a charade in order to
place a quota on AsAm students, just as you did against Jewish students decades ago.
6) 3 Supreme Court Justices also saw DISCRIMINATION:
Supreme Court Justices J. Alito, John Roberts and Clarence Thomas stated in their dissent, issued on June 23, 2016 (pp 22 -27):
"... discriminates against Asian American students...including racial discrimination that undeniably harms Asian Ams ... the court's willingness to allow this discrimination against individuals of Asian descent is particularly troubling, in light of the long history of discrimination against Asian Americans, especially in education ... In particular, the Fifth Circuit's willful blindness to Asian-American students is absolutely shameless." (emphasis added)
7) How 80-20 EF Sees Things:
On Ivy League colleges: These institutions are superior in numerous ways. However, they have committed discrimination against AsAm students, and have practiced hypocrisy and deceitfulness with their decision to favor white students over their AsAm peers. It is a very shortsighted policy, possibly induced by racism and self-conceit. History will not be kind to the presidents of these colleges, who participated in this apparent cabal.
On AsAm community: Our community is definitely at fault as well. We have the average educational level and financial strength to understand the seriousness of this discrimination against our children. We have the generational responsibility to urgently put our assets together to fight against it. But we have not been able to get our act together yet.
History will not be kind to us, and will possibly be very harsh on those families who donated tens and hundreds of million dollars to get a Harvard building named after themselves. Those ignorant and vain acts will be seen as marks of shame on those families.
S. B. Woo
President and a volunteer for the past 18 years
80-20 Educational Foundation, Inc, a 501 C-3 organization,