Well, we will FIGHT BACK. Asians need to know that this has happened many times before. In the '80s with Ira Heyman, then UCB chancellor. Ever since the '70s to the present, at Ivy league colleges, with their legacy preference system and quotas against Asians–don't believe me? Read Daniel Golden's “The Price of Admission” in which he devoted a whole chapter to discrimination against Asian Americans. The book came out just 2 years ago and is up to date on the current measures and practices that help keep Asian admits down. He even cites Princeton University research that corroborates his own research that shows that colleges employ all kinds of measures to drastically limit the number of Asians that get in.
And, now, the University of California, supposedly the most transparent, democratic, meritocratic institution of higher learning on the planet is saying that Asians are a victim of their own success, essentially blaming Asians and thereby justifying systematic discrimination.
The saddest part doesn't even pertain to Asians: it's that, the fruit of a years-long drive to reform UC admissions doesn't do a THING to help Latino and African-American applicants, disproportionately poor or from non-English speaking homes. The only group slated to benefit is whites.
We need to start a letter-writing campaign. To protest anti-Asian discrimination and to protest the fact that nothing has been done to address the falling enrollment numbers of blacks and Latinos.

Well, we will FIGHT BACK. Asians need to know that this has happened many times before. In the '80s with Ira Heyman, then UCB chancellor. Ever since the '70s to the present, at Ivy league colleges, with their legacy preference system and quotas against Asians–don't believe me? Read Daniel Golden's “The Price of Admission” in which he devoted a whole chapter to discrimination against Asian Americans. The book came out just 2 years ago and is up to date on the current measures and practices that help keep Asian admits down. He even cites Princeton University research that corroborates his own research that shows that colleges employ all kinds of measures to drastically limit the number of Asians that get in.
And, now, the University of California, supposedly the most transparent, democratic, meritocratic institution of higher learning on the planet is saying that Asians are a victim of their own success, essentially blaming Asians and thereby justifying systematic discrimination.
The saddest part doesn't even pertain to Asians: it's that, the fruit of a years-long drive to reform UC admissions doesn't do a THING to help Latino and African-American applicants, disproportionately poor or from non-English speaking homes. The only group slated to benefit is whites.
We need to start a letter-writing campaign. To protest anti-Asian discrimination and to protest the fact that nothing has been done to address the falling enrollment numbers of blacks and Latinos.

if you want to educate yourself on what’s really going on with the policy change, please check out my 6 part blog series on the whole issue, starting with post 1 here: http://www.apaforprogress.org/uc-admissions-scandal-of-2009-yo-lets-not-freak-out-just-yet-part-1-of-5
At the end of each post is a link to the next post.
Post 1 talks about the current policy.
Post 2 talks about the new policy.
Post 3 talks about the impact on demographics of ELIGIBILITY to apply (not to be confused with admissions).
Post 4 talks about the need for disaggregation of data.
Post 5 talks about how the UC operates and the lack of an AAPI education organization.
Post 6 concludes the series with a letter (I was kinda angry when i wrote it) to neo-cons trying to pit asians against other people of color.

Hope you enjoy the read
P.S. I’m the new education issues blogger for APA’s for Progress.

if you want to educate yourself on what’s really going on with the policy change, please check out my 6 part blog series on the whole issue, starting with post 1 here: http://www.apaforprogress.org/uc-admissions-scandal-of-2009-yo-lets-not-freak-out-just-yet-part-1-of-5
At the end of each post is a link to the next post.
Post 1 talks about the current policy.
Post 2 talks about the new policy.
Post 3 talks about the impact on demographics of ELIGIBILITY to apply (not to be confused with admissions).
Post 4 talks about the need for disaggregation of data.
Post 5 talks about how the UC operates and the lack of an AAPI education organization.
Post 6 concludes the series with a letter (I was kinda angry when i wrote it) to neo-cons trying to pit asians against other people of color.

Hope you enjoy the read
P.S. I’m the new education issues blogger for APA’s for Progress.

The American system rewards achievement and talent while possibly only taxing that achievement such that the less fortunate can have a chance as well.

You can create some sort of diversification program such that less advantaged people can also attend this school.

I attended magnet schools where, in my youth, I wondered why some of classmates were admitted to an academically centered school. They were indeed less advantaged than I and I had to on occasion carry them through the learning process. Looking back on it now I see that was for the better of the whole.

But that was in K-12. Small time shit that goes away when you go to college.

Things really start to count when you get into college. You have to take a specific test to see if you can get into the college. College admission should be based largely, if not wholly on merit.

After 13 years of primary/secondary schooling most students have been given a decent chance to show that they can be high achievers. So the change to affect diversity should be implemented at the K-12 level, not at the college level.

How many second chances will people get while those of us that play the game and follow the rules get screwed?

YOU DO NOT PENALIZE PEOPLE FOR BEING HIGH ACHIEVERS.

Totally agree with you Efren. Thanks for bringing this up.

The American system rewards achievement and talent while possibly only taxing that achievement such that the less fortunate can have a chance as well.

You can create some sort of diversification program such that less advantaged people can also attend this school.

I attended magnet schools where, in my youth, I wondered why some of classmates were admitted to an academically centered school. They were indeed less advantaged than I and I had to on occasion carry them through the learning process. Looking back on it now I see that was for the better of the whole.

But that was in K-12. Small time shit that goes away when you go to college.

Things really start to count when you get into college. You have to take a specific test to see if you can get into the college. College admission should be based largely, if not wholly on merit.

After 13 years of primary/secondary schooling most students have been given a decent chance to show that they can be high achievers. So the change to affect diversity should be implemented at the K-12 level, not at the college level.

How many second chances will people get while those of us that play the game and follow the rules get screwed?

YOU DO NOT PENALIZE PEOPLE FOR BEING HIGH ACHIEVERS.

Totally agree with you Efren. Thanks for bringing this up.