Nigerian Teen gets accepted into all IVY League Schools

[Outis]

You literally set up a sham argument to be easily knocked down by yourself with a scholarly 'LOL'. An argument, in which I never even hinted at supporting, by the way. And then, your reply is to make a wisecrack about "ignoring reality"? What reality am I ignoring? Are we talking quarks and neutrinos or history or what?

I don't see anywhere in this thread where I have said anything especially controversial. Perhaps, it was because I hinted at my suspicion of some 'fringe' elements of the social sciences - I see that your academic background is in psychology; perhaps that offended you, which would explain why you have resorted to logical fallacies and one liners.

[Exfactor]

You literally set up a sham argument to be easily knocked down by yourself with a scholarly 'LOL'. An argument, in which I never even hinted at supporting, by the way. And then, your reply is to make a wisecrack about "ignoring reality"? Please, tell me what reality I am ignoring? Are we talking quarks and neutrinos or history or what?

I don't see anywhere in this thread where I have said anything especially controversial. Perhaps, it was because I displayed my opinion of some of the 'fringe' elements of the social sciences - I see that your academic background is in psychology, so perhaps that is why you have quite literally resorted to logical fallacies and one liners.

Projecting a false reality are you? I responded to your subliminal statement, that anyone with an ounce of sense could observed. However, I didn't even go into detail, because if I really wanted to I could knock down every single anti-black argument projected in this thread, while using your very own "people" against you.

However, when TESC finally confers your degree, and you finally have a diploma with your name on it, only then project your toxic dynamics my way. Until then don't come for me unless I send for you. As its obvious college has only taught you how to notice logical fallacies, and not historical facts.

[Outis]

However, when TESC finally confers your degree, and you finally have a diploma with your name on it, only then project your toxic dynamics my way. Until then don't come for me unless I send for you.

I was hoping you wouldn't bring this line of thinking my way, but I expected it (from you). You are very clearly implying that my opinion doesn't matter because you have a degree and I don't. This is quite silly for several reasons. It is disturbing that you are essentially making a value judgement of me as a person, because of my lack of degree. This is horrible. I would never make a value judgement of someone because of their race, creed, gender, orientation, disability, or education (as long as they aren't giving medical advice ). With your pathetic line of thinking, when I start graduate school this fall from a university that is ranked within the top 20 in the world, I could simply say "talk to me when you're on my level bro", which is of course ridiculous.

As its obvious college has only taught you how to notice logical fallacies, and not historical facts.

Oh the horror, college taught me how to think and learn? Oh but it obviously didn't teach me "historical facts", of which I haven't said a word about in this thread or anywhere on the forum...talk about "projecting toxic dynamics"...you're good with the buzzwords.

Again, I have not made any seriously controversial statements nor even discussed any historical events. You refuse to add any substance to your arguments and are simply being unscholarly and really, acting childish.


I'm done with you and your simplemindedness (that's me being nice), let the previous posts be a demonstration of your idiocy.

[Exfactor]

I was hoping you wouldn't bring this line of thinking my way, but I expected it. You are very clearly implying that my opinion doesn't matter because you have a degree and I don't. This is quite silly for several reasons. But, it is disturbing that you are essentially making a value judgement of me as a person, because of my lack of degree.

You did the same exact thing, while trying to insult the fact I have a psychology degree.

This is horrible. I would never make a value judgement of someones opinion because of their race, creed, gender, orientation, disability, or education (as long as they aren't giving medical advice ). With your pathetic line of thinking, when I start graduate school this fall from a university that is ranked within the top 20 in the world, I could simply say "talk to me when you're on my level bro", which is of course ridiculous.

Lie. You already did. It's lame to insult someone, then hide your hands when they respond.

And then I'll respond and say how's that student loan debt working out for ya, while my masters is 100% paid for, while I'm on my way to applying to PHD programs.

Again, I have not made any seriously controversial statements nor even discussed any historical facts. You continue to refuse to add any substance to your arguments and are simply being unscholarly and really, acting childish.

Who said you did? I stated you were being subliminal; in which I addressed such, so whats your problem? As if you actually added anything worth of substance in this thread, besides co-signing a known troll amongst various forums, who believes blacks can't succeed without assistance, while ignoring the fact that white women benefit from AA more so than anyone in the society, and that unqualified white students are more likely to be found at top ranked schools than blacks. But that's not the problem, the minority of black students at PWI's are the problem. LOL Really?

I'm done with you and your simplemindedness (that's me being nice), let the previous posts be a demonstration of your idiocy.

You sure? You just spent a large amount of time on my page, reading my post.

You have no foundation.

Only a foolish dog barks at a flying bird.

[Outis]

You did the same exact thing, while trying to insult the fact I have a psychology degree.

Reading comprehension.

My statement very clearly said the following:

I don't see anywhere in this thread where I have said anything especially controversial. Perhaps, it was because I hinted at my suspicion of some 'fringe' elements of the social sciences - I see that your academic background is in psychology; perhaps that offended you, which would explain why you have resorted to logical fallacies and one liners.

I'll break it down for ya, since you seem to need help:

Point 1: I am making the statement that I haven't said anything particularly controversial in this thread
Point 2: I am attempting to figure out why you seem to have an issue with me
Point 3: I noticed that you have a psychology degree and perhaps took offense to my comment about some elements of the social sciences
Point 4: I am claiming that your horrible logic and whacky one liners and insults are due to your anger with me


Nowhere did I disparage your psychology degree from Excelsior nor your current progress at Lynn University. Get real, girlfriend.

[Exfactor]

Reading comprehension.

My statement very clearly said the following I'll break it down for ya, since you seem to need help:

Point 1: I am making the statement that I haven't said anything particularly controversial in this thread
Point 2: I am attempting to figure out why you seem to have an issue with me
Point 3: I noticed that you have a psychology degree and perhaps took offense to my comment about some elements of the social sciences


Nowhere did I disparage your psychology degree from Excelsior nor your current progress at Lynn University. Get real, girlfriend.

I thought you were done, cupcake?

[Prloko]

Why did this have to turn into a race thread?

[KittenMittens]

You make several claims based on no provided evidence. To claim "An Asian or White applicant with those credential wouldn't have gotten into all of them, maybe one or two or three, but not all 8" is absurd. This type of statement is based on ideology and not logic. In order to prove such a statement, one would have to have access to far more data than is available to the general public. Your statements appear to claim that all 8 Ivy League universities favored this applicant over similarly qualified applicants based on his race. This claim is impossible to prove and is therefore conjecture.

How many of the students with SAT scores that exceeded 2270 + have 4.0 gpa + have equally impressive writing skills + have equally impressive extracurricular activities + applied to all 8 Ivy League Universities were accepted to all 8? When phrased completely, your question is a good one. Unfortunately, it would take a significant quantity of research to answer.

It's reasonable to assume that with a 99 percentile + SAT, that GPA is going to be very high, it's limited data, but it gives a good impression on how many people are qualified. At 99th percentile, writing skills are already very high considering they're at the 99th percentile on the writing section. With GPA being unweighted now that many schools give higher GPAs for taking harder work, it's harder to compare GPAs from schools that are weighted versus unweighted. SAT scores aren't perfect, but knowing that about 14,000 students beat him on the SAT, let's make an extreme assumption that only 1,000 of the 14,000 students had 4.0s and similar stats (it's probably more, but let's just say it's 1,000 for the sake of argument), it's likely that not even 1 percent of them got into all 8 ivy league schools. Again, the statistical odds of getting into all 8 ivy league schools is essentially 0 unless one's credentials are truly that remarkable. While the Nigerian's credentials are certainly good, and make him competitive for getting into an ivy league school, he gets a boost because of the color of his skin. Many if not most of the successful candidates in schools like Harvard are equally if not more qualified, it's just that they don't get into all 8 ivies.

It's also common knowledge that colleges discriminate against Asians (and even white men) in general and there's enough information out there to gain the impression that there is strong and explicit discrimination against Asians. It's like the OJ Simpson Trial or Bill Cosby where you can't exactly prove that the former killed his wife since the clear evidence is lacking, nor can you for the latter since its been decades and no ability to do genetic screenings, but there's enough people to have vividly and in-depthly described their accounts with Cosby to get the general idea that he would drug and rape girls. Or the Armenian genocide where about 1.5 million people were killed, but Turkey disputes that it was a genocide partly based on a lack (rather censorship) of data.

To claim "An Asian or White applicant with those credential wouldn't have gotten into all of them, maybe one or two or three, but not all 8" is absurd.

It's the very opposite of absurd. In the case of affirmative action and Asians, there's enough info out there to know that this is indeed the case there's enough data out there to support it see: The Myth of American Meritocracy How corrupt are Ivy League admissions?. It's so bad that the Supreme Court in California ruled that California state schools like UC Berkeley could not discriminate on the basis of race and afterwards Asian admissions went up to the point that UC campuses are basically half Asian. You don't have much data on this from ivy league schools because they deliberately hide this information. There are ample studies and stories, and anecdotes that show this to be the case:

[URL="http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/12/19/fears-of-an-asian-quota-in-the-ivy-league/statistics-indicate-an-ivy-league-asian-quota"]Statistics Indicate an Ivy League Asian Quota
[/URL]Mindy Kaling's brother: I faked being black - CNN.com
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/25/opinio....html?_r=0
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/09/us/led....html?_r=1

Also, I did provide an example of an Asian who self reported their credentials similar to the Nigerian ( https://www.reddit.com/r/UpliftingNews/c...ue/cq2hs1y ), and though it is a singular data point, it shows that he was rejected by all but the least difficult to get into ivy Cornell. This is all too common a story as I described above. I mentioned a friend of my son who got into 2 ivy league schools that was half hispanic/half Afghani despite having worse credentials overall (lower rank, GPA, SAT scores, less involved extracurriculars, etc.) and came from a richer background than us. My son also reported how a colleague of his, from a rich family from Haiti, with a 2.6 GPA, and a 23 MCAT score (he apparently studied the day before the MCAT whereas most people will spend 3 months to a year dedicating a substantial amount of time), and got into 5 medical schools. My son with phi beta kappa, 36 MCAT, and 3.8+ GPA from the same school? Only 1. And perhaps most recently, Mindy Kaling's brother who got rejected from medical school with a 3.1 and 31 MCAT in 1998, but shaved his head, trimmed his eyebrows, and changed him name to JoJo and got into several medical schools with many exclaiming how incredible he was when he reported himself black (but not when Indian).

Overall, I don't think it's an issue about disputing whether or not he was a qualified candidate, he most certainly is. But that in two years, two black kids getting into all 8 ivy league schools screams affirmative action since the statistical odds are essentially 0. And even if some random white or Asian did, how come you never hear about it in the news? I think it's great that he got in, and he's a testament that being black (and rich) can mean you can do just as well as white/Asian counterparts - it dispels the notion that being blacks can't do well on the basis of merit - this Nigerian certainly did. But it's important to recognize that skeptics will think that getting into all 8 ivies is indeed incorrectly applied affirmative action. Stories like these just make me roll my eyes since it's highly unlikely that an Asian/white counterpart would get into all 8, not to mention two black kids in a row in two years getting into all 8 ivy leagues (and the one from the year before scoring lower & not even being in the top 10 of the class).

A rich Nigerian, or a rich white woman are not the type of people who deserve or need affirmative action especially since the issue is primarily concerned with poor African-Americans and their ancestors who were treated poorly in the context of civil discrimination and slavery (but more the former since slavery was over 150 years ago). Like I've said before, affirmative action should be based on socioeconomic background not color of skin i.e. whether a person is a poor blacks, poor woman, poor Asian, or poor white, etc. Only then can we say that all have an equal footing.

[soliloquy]

I posted the article because I thought it was a pretty awesome achievement, but I should have known this would spawn a debate. I have no clue to what extent AA played a part in each of these school's decision but it certainly is sad that his admission into these schools will be marred by his skin color. After reading this thread, doing a quick search for his name and affirmative action shows a lot of people up in arms over this and they are totally willing to throw his achievements thus far out the window to discount his accomplishment. Many children of the "elite" get into these schools because someone has the right connections or because of legacy admissions. That's not much different than affirmative action in my opinion.

In Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 265 (1978), Allan Bakke’s application to the Medical School of the University of California at Davis (hereinafter “Davis” was denied twice even though he had a GPA and MCAT scores that were “significantly higher” than minorities admitted under an alternate admissions program at the same institution. As a result of his twice-denied application, Bakke filed suit against Davis, alleging that Davis’ admissions policy was in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The suit skipped over the intermediate appellate court and, after the trial court, was next heard by The California Supreme Court. The California Supreme Court agreed with Bakke’s position that this practice was discriminatory. The Court found that "no applicant may be rejected because of his race, in favor of another who is less qualified, as measured by standards applied without regard to race." The Court, in its decision, ordered Davis to abolish its quota system. In response, Davis appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The U.S. Supreme Court agreed that it was unconstitutional for Davis to use “rigid” racial quotas to hold 16 of their 100 positions exclusively for minorities. The Supreme Court further held that it was constitutional for the school to utilize affirmative action policies in order to admit more minority students. Justice Powell penned the 5-4 split decision that it was appropriate for a university to strive for diversity in its admissions programs but adding that the university also has to consider other important factors on a case-by-case basis. Powell’s opinion set forth that Davis’ admissions policy violated the Constitution's Equal Protection Clause because it prevented whites from gaining entry to the school through use of 16 of the 100 seats solely because of their race. The Court held that it was not relevant that the discrimination was against a white person rather than a black person because racial quotas are always "odious to a free people whose institutions are founded upon the doctrine of equality."

Although Davis’ admissions policy was well-intentioned, it had the unfortunate side-effect of systematically discriminating against white applicants solely on the basis of their race. I agree with the Court’s conclusion that diversity within the student population is a "constitutionally permissible goal," and that "race or ethnic background may be deemed a 'plus' in a particular applicant's file." I also agree that rigid racial quotas are absolutely unconstitutional and should never be used to discriminate against anyone. If affirmative action is to be used, race should be only one of many factors for the sake of promoting diversity. No qualified applicant – white, black, or other - should be excluded from admission based upon race.

What would the consequences be for minorities (women, immigrants, etc.) if AA disappeared entirely? I don't know the answer to that but I could guess.

[KittenMittens]

I posted the article because I thought it was a pretty awesome achievement, but I should have known this would spawn a debate. I have no clue to what extent AA played a part in each of these school's decision but it certainly is sad that his admission into these schools will be marred by his skin color. After reading this thread, doing a quick search for his name and affirmative action shows a lot of people up in arms over this and they are totally willing to throw his achievements thus far out the window to discount his accomplishment. Many children of the "elite" get into these schools because someone has the right connections or because of legacy admissions. That's not much different than affirmative action in my opinion.

In Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 265 (1978), Allan Bakke’s application to the Medical School of the University of California at Davis (hereinafter “Davis” was denied twice even though he had a GPA and MCAT scores that were “significantly higher” than minorities admitted under an alternate admissions program at the same institution. As a result of his twice-denied application, Bakke filed suit against Davis, alleging that Davis’ admissions policy was in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The suit skipped over the intermediate appellate court and, after the trial court, was next heard by The California Supreme Court. The California Supreme Court agreed with Bakke’s position that this practice was discriminatory. The Court found that "no applicant may be rejected because of his race, in favor of another who is less qualified, as measured by standards applied without regard to race." The Court, in its decision, ordered Davis to abolish its quota system. In response, Davis appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The U.S. Supreme Court agreed that it was unconstitutional for Davis to use “rigid” racial quotas to hold 16 of their 100 positions exclusively for minorities. The Supreme Court further held that it was constitutional for the school to utilize affirmative action policies in order to admit more minority students. Justice Powell penned the 5-4 split decision that it was appropriate for a university to strive for diversity in its admissions programs but adding that the university also has to consider other important factors on a case-by-case basis. Powell’s opinion set forth that Davis’ admissions policy violated the Constitution's Equal Protection Clause because it prevented whites from gaining entry to the school through use of 16 of the 100 seats solely because of their race. The Court held that it was not relevant that the discrimination was against a white person rather than a black person because racial quotas are always "odious to a free people whose institutions are founded upon the doctrine of equality."

Although Davis’ admissions policy was well-intentioned, it had the unfortunate side-effect of systematically discriminating against white applicants solely on the basis of their race. I agree with the Court’s conclusion that diversity within the student population is a "constitutionally permissible goal," and that "race or ethnic background may be deemed a 'plus' in a particular applicant's file." I also agree that rigid racial quotas are absolutely unconstitutional and should never be used to discriminate against anyone. If affirmative action is to be used, race should be only one of many factors for the sake of promoting diversity. No qualified applicant – white, black, or other - should be excluded from admission based upon race.

What would the consequences be for minorities (women, immigrants, etc.) if AA disappeared entirely? I don't know the answer to that but I could guess.

I want to be clear that I happy for this Nigerian individual. He worked hard, got excellent grades, and excellent SAT scores and he proves that there is no inherent academic or intellectual disadvantage for being black. No one is disputing his academic and intellectual capabilities and I would certainly be comfortable trusting him as a future brain or cancer doctor should he ever become one. He's certainly qualified for ivy league schools - but the question is he that exceptional enough that he can get into 8 ivy league schools? Those of us who who have personal experience, who read up on the issue, etc. are skeptical and bitter about this aspect because it tends to reflect how affirmative action gives boosts even when they shouldn't. I think given that he did well on his SAT, in school, and came from a rich background, he should have been put in the same pool as the others and not given an extra advantage based on the color of his skin. Ok, even if we wanted to give it to him, at least be from an African-American background/lineage.

I have no clue to what extent AA played a part in each of these school's decision but it certainly is sad that his admission into these schools will be marred by his skin color. After reading this thread, doing a quick search for his name and affirmative action shows a lot of people up in arms over this and they are totally willing to throw his achievements thus far out the window to discount his accomplishment. Many children of the "elite" get into these schools because someone has the right connections or because of legacy admissions. That's not much different than affirmative action in my opinion.

When a policy favors one group more than others on reasons more or less not based on academic and intellectual output (for unfair/right or wrong reasons), it is only natural and inevitable for other groups that are "disenfranchised" to feel bitter about an issue. After all, they're being told that they're not "good enough" despite doing everything they possibly can, being perfect at everything, and perhaps coming from even worse/poorer upbringings - which is quite often the case for many white male and Asian kids. But to basically be told you're not good enough because of the color of your skin, despite proving through merit you deserve a spot, only for a less qualified person to get in who worked less than you? It's reverse discrimination and racism in general.

It's good to know that a lot of people believe affirmative action gave him a big boost. I'd say it's pretty obvious that AA had a big role into getting into 8 ivies due to the statistical low odds of getting into one school, so I can confidently say that affirmative action did play a definite role in it. What the issue then becomes at least for me is how far we want to go with AA and to whom it should be given to.

From what I've seen, most people tend to come to an agreement that affirmative action shouldn't be exclusive based on a notion of skin color/ethnicity but also incorporating socioeconomic upbringing as well. I think it's certainly fine that poor people, if they are black or white or brown, get a chance to have an equal footing at a top college if they grew up poor, but not if they're an upper middle class/upper class kid who comes from wealth i.e. if you're black or hispanic and grew up rich, you don't deserve to get an extra pass, but it happens all the time & you'd be shocked how many people abuse the system like this all the time.