C:\DOC\WEB\98\04\GCRUZ.TXT From: GCruz29176 Date sent: Wed, 11 Mar 1998 06:04:56 EST To: EdReason@aol.com Copies to: arthurhu@halcyon.com, lcwang@uclink2.berkeley.edu, rtakaki@uclink4.berkeley.edu Subject: preferences As I had mentioned earlier, private medical schools make extensive use of preferences also. Let me cite 1 example, Albany Medical College reserves a certain number of seats in its entering class for premeds from Siena,Union and Rensaelaer Polytechnique (did I get this Dutch spelling right ?). These schools of course are in the same state as Albany Medical College, and I suspect that the use of reserved seats was done for a certain financial consideration. This kind of preferences in medical schools is rather common , they are called " early acceptance ", " bridge programs" , "B.S.- MD combined programs" , masquerading as some kind of preference. Of course this sort of thing also exists in other professional schools, including law schools where it is probably more prevalent and widespread. I am sure even Harvard Law reserves some seats for Harvard undergrads. I'll say again that in that math assessment test CSU Los Angeles ranked 6th among the 18 CSU campuses, and CSU Fresno ranked 12th (if i remember it correctly) and of course their positions reversed in the verbal assessment portion. Public medical schools also have their own version of preferences, for example they limit the number of out-state- premeds in their entering freshman medical classes. Some states don't even accept out-state applicants to its public medical schools. Florida is one of them, Louisiana and Mississippi are presumably 2 other examples. With regards to the limiting of out-of state premeds in a public medical school, a scenario might work out like this; If I am a premed student from California and I applied to the University of Wisconsin Medical School , the school can possibly demand that my MCAT scores be equal to that of the top 10 % of the in-state premeds of the freshman medical class. In other words, if the mean MCAT score of the entering class of U-Wisconsin Medical school was a 9.5 , then the California premed student has to have an MCAT score equal to 10.5 or more which is presumably the MCAT score of people in the 90th percentile of the entering class. This probably explains why only 3 out of 32 applicants from Berkeley were admitted,just like 1 out of 9 from the University of Chicago and 1 out of 10 from the University of Notre Dame in the 1995 entering medical school class at the University of Wisconsin. None of the applicants from NYU or Columbia were admitted. The reason why the 32 premeds from Berkeley probably applied to U-Wisconsin is that they probably felt they have a dim chance of being admitted to the UC medical schools (UC medical schools taken as a whole are the most competetive group of medical schools in the entire country) So they were applying to every available medical school in sight, of course their fellow premed peers at Berkeley who had better MCAT scores and grades did not feel a particular need to apply at U-Wisconsin. since they felt that they have a better chance of being admitted at one of the UC medical schools. In the competetive world of medical school admissions accepting an alumni legacy with an SAT score of 1200 might not mean that much because of all the other factors considered, you are competing with many students who are very hardworking (because the stakes are high )'and the undergraduate school where you came from matters little'--- so long as grades and MCAT scores are the only things considered and preferences are not given. Let me show you by example why that is the case, Only 18 of the 172 applicants from Stanford were accepted to the 1997 entering class of UC Irvine Medical school. UC Irvine does not give preferences supposedly to UC students , because the acceptance rate of the UC campuses were lower than that of the acceptance rate of Stanford to the 1997 entering class at UC-Irvine medical school. Of course in terms of absolute numbers there were more students from UCLA accepted than Stanford simply because there were more applicants from UCLA than Stanford to the Irvine medical school even though the acceptance rate of UCLA was lower than Stanford. Finally let me cite the example of the University of Pennsylvania Medical School . In the 1996 entering class to the medical school , there were 3 who enrolled from the Endowed Colleges of Cornell (private) and 3 who enrolled from the Statutory Colleges of Cornell(public) in the entering class. You know very well that you pay a much higher tuition if you go to the private part of Cornell rather than the public part of Cornell. This is not very convincing evidence to me to spend $30,000 a year to send my kid to the Endowed Colleges(private) of Cornell just so he/she could get inside the University of of Pennsylvania Medical School. I''ll talk again later to you, perhaps tomorrow. From: GCruz29176 Date sent: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 03:26:00 EST To: EdReason@aol.com Copies to: arthurhu@halcyon.com, rtakaki@uclink4.berkeley.edu, lcwang@uclink2.berkeley.edu Subject: preferences Sorry, for not writing you earlier , but I other things to do. I just want to repeat again the fact that any numerical data that i show is open public data gleaned from various sources or computations and estimates based on public data. The last point that you made was that it is the " percentage " that counts, meaning that the percentage of fresh- -men/women who score above 700 in the Math Sat at Harvard is higher than that of public universities , say Berkeley. Harvard probably has 69 % of its freshmen who score above in the Math Sat (1996 data or 1997 data, it does not really matter), and Berkeley has 44 % of its freshmen scoring above 700 in the Math SAT ( 1996 data ). First of all , only 15 % at Harvard come from Massachusetts, maybe 18 % from New York or 16 % from California. At Berkeley less than 15 % of the freshmen are from out of state. Obviously , in terms of absolute numbers Berkeley has more fresh- men who score above 700 in the Math Sat (3600 frosh at Berkeley versus 1600 at Harvard). In other words Berkeley does not have to scour every state for students scoring above 700 to achieve a a percentage of 44, unlike Harvard. That must be a lot of hard work for Harvard, scouring every state....ain't that a bummer ? And note this fact also,the midrange of the Sat scores of the entering class at Harvard ( scores falling between the 25th-75th percentile ) is 1380-1580. Whew , that is a 200 point spread. Consider the data from U-Texas Austin : the midrange ( scores falling between the 25-75th percentile_of the entering class at U- Texas is 1130-1320. Be reminded that the entering class at U-Texas Austin is 4x as large as the Harvard entering class (there are about 6500 Texas- -Austin frosh) . Now why would Harvard have the same 200 point or close to 200 point spread as the U of Texas-Austin at its midrange(as far as Sat scores are concerned) ? Taking account of the sizes of both freshmen classes , the spread at the midrange of Harvard should be be considerably smaller. The answer is obvious as to why this is the case. There is massive use of preferences at Harvard (alumni specifically). If grades and Sat scores were the sole basis of admissions at harvard, the spread at the midrange would be much smaller ,say 1520- 1580. In other words,70% of the entire freshman class at Harvard will disappear if grades and Sat scores were the sole basis of of admission. at Harvard. Also think of this, if all the qoutas against out - of - state applicants to Berkeley were dropped , don't you think the percentage of of freshman with scores above 700 in the Math Sat will rise from 44 % to something higher equal to or above the 69 % of Harvard. If all Southeastern and Southwestern states adopted this idea, there will be an increase in the numbers of people in th freshman classes with scores above 700 in the Math Sat. Sun and surf obviously has something to do with this. Hi Ron, this is arthur, I saw your name up on the staircase wall at the new SF library, congratulations. What do you and Ling Chi think of the new reading report that says that those who don't speak english first should be taught either in their native language first, or not be taught reading at all until they can speak english first? I think it's pretty crazy, but I'd like to find anyone who thinks it's a good idea. Anyways, this gcruz guy is still upset about legacy preferences, all you can do is point them out and scream about them, they are NOT illegal. From: GCruz29176 Date sent: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 03:51:22 EST To: EdReason@aol.com Copies to: arthurhu@halcyon.com, rtakaki@uclink4.berkeley.edu, lcwang@uclink2.berkeley.edu Subject: preferences Virginia, I am getting tired of this preferences stuff, so I'll probably send you 2 or 3 more e-mail and then i'll quit sending people e- mail about preferences . Now let us get back on track as to what we were talking about. I was using the example of medical schools as a way of pointing out that preferences in our society ares widespread, even medical school preferences are mild compared to some of the preferences that exist in our society. Human nature being what it is, this has been going on for so long in its many vile and evil manifestations . I would like to make a correction on what I said about my e-mail concerning Jan Hoffman's article, if you still remember it. In that e-mail I said that the mean LSAT score for the University of New Mexico Law School was 160 ,well actually it is more like 155 ( I was probably thinking of Arizona State ). At any rate, they sure could raise their mean LSAT score (New Mexico) by banning quotas against out- of - state applicants. Anyway that e-mail as you probably suspected is nothing but a satirical spoof at the behavior of law school deans quaking with craven fear everytime the US News & World Report ranking of law schools rolls off the press (Incidentally, the dean of yale law signed the mass mailing of the "caveat " letter, Harvard's law dean did not....Hmmn....interesting eh? ). When I said that the midrange of the entering class of Harvard as between 1380-1580, I understood full well that there are a number of alumni legacies whose scores fall into that range. But the point that I was making was that those legacies still got in at the expense of of others. As I had said earlier , if you got in at Harvard with a Sat of 1400 there were at least 3000 other applicants who got higher Sats than you did, who were denied admission. And if you got in at Harvard with a SAT score of 1200 , there were at least 7000 applicants who got higher SAT scores than you did who were denied admissions. Consider also the fact that many Ivies and private schools have small enrollments .This ties in the fact that they want to keep a high mean or median SAT score to make them attractive to applicants, which in turn causes them to engage in widespread tuition discounting . Adding a few more students in the freshman class might not increase fixed costs, but adding more than a few will increase variable and fixed costs for the school. Having higher costs does not mean greater revenue from tuition. And that is why because of this uncertainty ,the Ivies might not want to increase the size of their student body . Right now private higher education is feeling the squeeze, it has become 1 gigantic bazaar (souk) where the common denominator is haggling as far as tuition discounts are concerned. The marketing people have taken over the financial aids office turning it into something not unworthy of a Nike marketing campaign. Preferences are simply evil. Why should preferences be given to the daughters of Prez Clinton, Henry Cisneros (Cabinet secretary in Clinton' s tenure) Arizona's Bruce Babbitt when they applied to Stanford? I would say the same thing about the Bush children when they Applied to Yale, or the Kennedy clan when they applied to sundry Ivy League schools ( they probably are the worst offenders ) when it comes to preferences. I should say the same thing about Jane Fonda's and Tom Hayden's son Zachary when he applied to Brown and to Bill Buckley's son Chris (Yale '75). Bill Buckley's apologia and encomnia for alumni preferences in the pages of NR (National Review) has the distinct whiff or aroma of selfishness and self-interest. At the other extreme, Chris Edley's( Prez Clinton's point man on racial preferences) ascents into hyperbole about anti-preferences people borders into the bizarre. For example he has accused the anti-preferences crowd of committing "crimes against humanity " and naming Abigail Thernstrom as the "high priestess " of the anti-preferences forces. Well this is my hyperbolic riposte to him, the real "crimes against humanity" were perpetrated by people who commit and practice preferences (alumni,racial and everything else that has nothing to do with a need or a disability), they are no different from Hitler and Pol Pot. The kind of " talent and ability cleansing" by the preferences squad is no different from the "Yugoslavian ethnic- cleansing". At her age, I doubt very much if Abigail has the limb dex- terity or muscle contractility From: GCruz29176 Date sent: Tue, 24 Mar 1998 04:47:19 EST To: arthurhu@mail1.halcyon.com Subject: preferences I read your reply, and it is frankly irritating to me, what is legal? What is illegal?, i know the feds have not closed down the Ivies for enga- -ging in alumni preferences yet, I wish it would soon. It is vile and evil. You are engaging in double standards ART !!!!!!!, Alumni preferences appeal to what is vile,evil and base and selfish in human beings . The alumni want their children to have what they do not deserve. They want their children to be labeled as intelligent even though they are not. Obviously they are deluding themselves, misleading their children and trying to fool other people. Art, the reason why the Ivy league exists and even your precious alma mater perhaps is to perpetuate the ruling classes in this country. Never fool yourself for one moment as to why they exist. Why do you think private schools were created in the first place ? The kings of old felt that Nature could not guaran- tee that their children would be born smart and hence could not com- -pete with the children of the common people, therefore they felt they should hire with all the money at their disposal the finest teachers in the land to teach their mediocre children. What is "legal " does not mean it is moral and ethical and fair or just,. Every day in our lives , we encounter that kind of situation I am sure. Art , I am no innocent in this kind of game, even before 1 sent my first e-mail to you ( and that was a long time ago ), I had already suspected that you would defend alumni preferences and that was the reason why I sent my first e-mail to you. Do you honestly think I believe that Chang-lin Tien ( a trustee of Princeton ), Li-Ching Wang ( graduate of Princeton theological seminary ), Henry Der (Stanford ), Bill Lann Lee (yale and Columbia ) , Don Nakanishi (yale......don't worry he'll get my e-mail too) would condemn alumni preferences......their silence is resounding and defeaning. I see that you are soliciting the opinion of Ron Takaki , the guy who is sponsoring \ a statewide initiative reinstating racial preferences ( or at least some measure of it), a position that you definitely abhor (racial preferences that is ). Don't worry, I love Ron Takaki (Sucheng Chan may not....I've read 2 of his books .... " Strangers and Iron Cages " ....I just don't agree with his proposed initiative. The left and the right both love alumni preferences. Strange bedfellows indeed...just like Bill Buckley and Chris Edley. At least I am not the only one condemning alumni preferences, Michael Lind , ex-editor of the New Republic and former Reagan cult member denounces it. Jim Sleeper (his piece appears in the latest issue of Commentary ) speaks in the same vein ( he does not like alumni preferences ). Until tomorrow. From: GCruz29176 To: EdReason@aol.com Copies to: arthurhu@mail1.h, lcwang@uclink2.berkeley.edu, rtakaki@uclink4.berkeley.edu Subject: preferences Date sent: Mon, 23 Mar 1998 02:36:49 EST Organization: AOL (http://www.aol.com) Perhaps 1 way to convince anybody why household income does not guarantee high academic performance is to cite the case of Beverly Hills high school. In 1996 Beverly Hills high graduated about 440 seniors and sent 18.6 % of these seniors to the UC system (University of California ). Consider this fact however, Arcadia High school in the San Gabriel Valley of LA which graduated more than 700 seniors for that year sent 27.9 % of these seniors to the UC system. Obviously the average household income of students at Arcadia are lower than the average household income of Beverly Hills high school. I will mention the names of LA high schools and the corresponding percentage of their 1996 seniors that went to the the UC system : Cerritos High School (22.2 %).,Gertrude Whitney (53.6 %), Granada HIlls (23.4 % ), Van Nuys (19 %), Diamond Bar High (27.4 ), Walnut High (19.4 ). All the aforementioned high schools have lower average household incomes as far as its students are concerned than the students of Beverly Hills High. Gertrude Whitney though has a lower # of 1996 seniors than Beverly Hills High, even so West High in Torrance with a percentage of 18.4 % of 1996 seniors enrolled at UC actually graduated more 1996 seniors than Beverly Hills High. What is the common thread with these high schools being compared above with Beverly Hills high? These high schools are heavily Asian or have a high percentage of Asians. From: GCruz29176 Date sent: Thu, 26 Mar 1998 03:03:37 EST To: arthurhu@halcyon.com Subject: Re: preferences I have never said that middle class blacks performed better than their poor, middle class or rich white counterparts. Obviously there are a lot of exceptions. Let me tell you a story Art, Springfield Gardens high school has a lower percentage of students who are eligible for a free lunch than either Frederick Douglas Academy or Manhattan Center for Science and Mathematics , it is 20 % versus 46 % and 57.6 % for Frederick Douglas and Manhattan Center respectively. It is a school that is 90 % black and Hispanic., just like Manhattan Center and Frederick Douglas. It also means that Springfield Gardens high in Queens has a more middle class student body than either Manhattan center or Frederick Douglas yet it had a significantly lower passing rate for its students who took the Regents math exam sequence 3 compared to Frederick Douglas and Manhattan Center. It is also obvious that among majority black and Hispanic high schools in New York City, Douglas and Manhattan Center had the highest passing rate in the Regents Math exam Sequence 3, several of these majority black and Hispanic high schools as you might suspect have a more middle class or affluent student body than Douglas or Manhattan Center. So that answers your counterexample. From what I had shown in my previous e- mail and the explanation above , the truth is clear ; poverty and isolation is not necessarily a barrier preventing blacks and hispanics from doing well in standardized exams like the Regents math exams. Determination, hard work support from teachers ,parents , the public can make some of the difference. Art, I agree that veterans preference can be unfair and hurt Asians. Even so ,veterans have a better moral and ethical claim for relief or preference than the children of alumni. There are situations where veterans risked their life and spilled blood . The people who need the least preference are the alumni legacies. Let me cite further data as to why all preferences that has nothing to do with a preference are. I'll continue later. From: GCruz29176 Date sent: Fri, 27 Mar 1998 02:18:12 EST To: arthurhu@mail1.halcyon.com Subject: preferences The e-mail data that i showed you about Manhattan Center and Frederick Douglas has been known to me for about a year. It came from the website of the New York State Dept. of Edu- -cation under the EMSC section. When I looked at the website data again tonight it has been changed already, instead of the 39 % passing rate at Manhattan Center for the Regents math sequence 3 it has now been changed to 71 % for Douglas it has been changed to 88 %, making them even more impressive compared to Long Island high schools like Syosset, Jericho , plainview-old bethpage JFK high school in the context of poverty . Sorry to disappoint you, but there it is . Looking at the data thru an Acrobat Reader is a strain in the eye, but if you want ,you can feast at the new data given by the Nys board of education....Enjoy....by the way take a look also at Fiorello La Guardia High school.in Manhattan...whatever.