student_3

ERR_Alpha, I think your pre-application idea is interesting and worth further investigation. As for the rest of your process, I ASSUME to "an extent" (Please no one take this out of context) is similar to current adcom procedure barring the early notifications and some of the finer details. Overall, well done.
 
My approach would be a little different. Applicants would participate in an obstacle course/puzzle challenge held in various locations across the country. Each puzzle trial would require critical thinking skills while the obstacles would require teamwork and collaboration. If too many applicants remained at the end of the race (minus those disqualified for unsportsmanlike behavior), then winners would duke it out in knockerballs till the end<--- hilarious looking things. I think this process really brings out the perseverance and importantly qualities in a grad student.   Agreed?

Definitely missing the point. The whole point is that SOPs will help anyone who had a tougher time. Also, just because you got a ticket once or that you're white and you had struggles doesn't mean the overall trend doesn't still exist. There are plenty of exceptions, but that doesn't make the rule any less true. Forming your opinions based on your own personal experience is flawed- you're only considering you. Maybe ask your roommate or coworkers what issues shes had to deal with because of her race. Appreciate that not everyone has the same experience.
Edit: I just wanted to add that I'm happy we can all talk about this issue. It's a tough one.

...I think it's a bit offensive, assuming that the minority groups are expecting a preferential treatment. No one is expecting that. And your accomplishments will be looked at equal level. They won't expect more from you just because you are white, nor expect less from someone who isn't. 
 
I think you are taking this factor as something against you because you are white. But that's not true. The reason the ad comm look at race and gender is to maintain diversity in the fields. But I cannot imagine they would have quota as you describe. And different fields tend to have differently skewed demographics, so what they consider will differ. One example we can think about is Asian male applicants in STEM fields. They are minority in many other fields but not necessarily in STEM. Admissions committees in these fields may look at applicants who are white women, which will include you, and consider it as a factor. But again, I want to emphasize that if you are in STEM, you won't get accepted just because you are a white woman. You need to have strong application to compete the rest of the applicant pool in the first place, then they may or may not consider the fact that you are white woman.

I love how people have no qualms about using stats to generalize facts about white people, but when we do the same we are labeled as racists. You're taking statistics about a given race and using them to assume that all of us fall into those categories. Blanket statements are problematic because it pigeonholes people into certain stereotypes. So according to you I have an easier time getting a job? That's kind of ironic considering I live in a city where white people are the minority and about 75% of my coworkers are people of color. I have an easier time getting an apartment?My credit is less than stellar so I live with my friend who's Mexican (I'm not being racist, she really is Mexican) and had no problem getting a lease in her name. I'm less likely to be pulled over and given a ticket? Again, not true. I was pulled over in January of this year and given a ticket. I realize the possibility that I could be considered an anomaly, but I'm basing my opinions on my experiences. 
 
With all of that being said, I'm not naive. I'm not blind to the social injustices of the world. I know racism is alive and well. The point I'm trying to get across is that based on my experiences, I think that my accomplishments and merits should be looked at on an equal level with other applicants. I would not want to get a job based solely on the fact that I'm a woman when there are men with higher stats so I don't believe other groups should expect preferential treatment either. Schools and businesses that accept and hire people based on a predetermined quota are missing out on a large chunk of highly qualified applicants. Let's take race out of the equation for a second. Would you want to be rejected from a school because they need to include 5 Atheists even though you are more qualified than these people? People that don't fall under these categories will automatically be excluded and I'm sorry, but that's not right. You don't have to agree with me, but these are my own personal beliefs and opinions. 

You may not have, but others have since joined the conversation, and they certainly did. Ain't all about you.

I feel like I'm talking to a wall. Has anyone bothered to read my subsequent comments or are we all more interested in arguing until the cows come home about something I didn't even mean?

To summarize: I don't think society is equal or that minorities get undue favoritism in the admissions process, I am more concerned about Ivy League incest and nepotism than so-called "reverse racism", and I don't presume that universities "owe" me anything.

If I could go back and edit my original post to clarify my meaning, I would, but can't because the post is too old.

You seem to be under some misapprehensions about what is meant by privilege, how it operates, and how the use of criteria such as race in admissions attempts to counteract the disparity created by privilege. Here is a good read to get you started on understanding what is actually at stake: http://qz.com/257474/what-riding-my-bike-has-taught-me-about-white-privilege/
 
You should read that now, and then finish this post.
 
Done? OK.
 
Because of the color of your skin, you may or may not have had access to more resources and opportunities. However, because of the color of your skin, you are much less likely to be stopped by police. When you are stopped by police, you are much less likely to be arrested or ticketed, all because of the color of your skin. Because of the color of your skin, it is easier for you to find an apartment. Because of the color of your skin, it is easier for you to find a job. Because of the color of your skin, you were less likely to be singled out as a "troublemaker" in school. Despite the challenges you have almost certainly faced and overcome in your life through your own intelligence and force of will, you were more likely to succeed because of the color of your skin. That is our reality, and an admissions program should take reality into account when making its decisions.
 
Further readings:
http://gawker.com/my-vassar-college-faculty-id-makes-everything-ok-1664133077
http://documents.latimes.com/investigation-ferguson-police-department/
http://www.redstate.com/2015/03/15/many-conservatives-blowing-it-ferguson-doj-report/

It sounds like some of the posts on race/gender factor are somewhat exaggerated. Yes, it is certainly a factor, but this is not as deterministic as some comments here imply. This is a bit ridiculous hypothetical example, but just because an applicant is a female, low SES, and from a minority group, it doesn't mean that she will get into Harvard.There is no department that will admit an "unqualified" applicant just because of race and gender. There is no department who will "lower the bar" for those who are from a minority group. No department will ever, "give privileges" to those applicants based on race and gender.
 
You need to have strong credentials and relevant experience to apply to grad schools in first place.  We will never know what really goes on inside the admissions committee, but generally speaking, the factor about your background never comes up in early stage of the process. That is, admissions committees usually look at GPA and GRE scores first, and reject those who do not pass their minimum standard, whatever that may be. Then they will probably look at LoR's, and make sure all three of your letters are strong. I've come across a comment that even one average-letter may put your application in a reject-pile because all applicants these days have strong letters. Then it will probably the statement of purpose and writing sample to determine who will be more fit to the program, and to discern whether your research experience can contribute to the department and if department has the right tools available for you to succeed.
 
At the last stage, this will be probably the stage where the factors on gender, race, SES, and personal background will come into play. But at this stage, though, there are TONS of other factors being considered, not just race and gender. And who knows which factor will top another? Besides race and gender, they may look at whether you have family members working at the institution (come on, applications ask us if we have any family/relatives working at the school, and they are asking for a reason), your outside experience, internship/volunteer/work experience even though they may not be relevant to the field, the school you went to, etc... This will be rather a rare case, but if your family was rich and donated $$ to the department or school in the past, that might be a factor, too. All these things are pretty much equally considered at the later stage, once they believe all the applicants who passed up to the last stage are strong applicants with good fit.
 
Are these fair? Hard to tell. But by the last stage of their admissions process, all applicants will have strong credentials, good amount of research experience, and a good fit. They just need to consider other factors to finalize their decision. Personally, I don't think these factors by themselves are good indicators of whether the applicant will be successful. But given that the race/gender is just one of the many factors, I don't understand the frustration particularly with race/gender, when the rest of other factors seem equally arbitrary to me. 

I am a woman in science from a low income background. I do not want preference in admissions based on these factors at all. I want my application to be considered against a white wealthy male from a long line of academics and if admitted, I want it to be because my application is better than his.
 
Giving me an advantage because I am female is no better than giving white males an advantage. In either case, you discriminate against a specific group based on factors that are out of their control. I find the concept of admitting less qualified students based on gender, ethnicity, etc insulting and discriminatory and I would never accept an offer if I thought these factors contributed to my acceptance. By not holding me to the same admission standards as males, you imply that I am not as capable as they are. You lower the bar for me and only perpetuate the gap between performance.

Send a ton of emails with subjects like:
 
"We are pleased to announce...our fall seminar series on xyz"
"Congratulations! ... you're on our mailing list!"
"WELCOME...to spring! Here are the top 5 ways to enjoy YOUR spring equinox"
"ADMISSIONS DECISIONs for undergraduate programs came at a slower pace in 2015 than previous years...more analysis inside"
 
 

I use to only check gradcafe results like 3-4 times a day and I was doing pretty well about refraining from checking my email. That was until five people posted that they heard back from my program today.
 
Now...
 
Refresh email every 5 minutes even though it gets pushed to my phone anyway. In between refreshes, I check the cafe results search to see anyone else posted from my program. Occasionally, I'll eat and sleep. lol...but seriously.

Funding is the word of the day for me....I feel like everyday is a battle with anxiety and endless waitinnnnggggggg....