GUEST COLUMNIST: The truly underrepresented group

Although the Admissions Office tries to obfuscate admissions information, the numbers are easily deduced from numerous articles printed in The Daily Pennsylvanian. Of all categories of students accepted to Penn, the group which accepted Penn's offer of admission at the highest rate were those who did not self-identify as a member of a minority. Such students -- the vast majority of whom are assumed to be white --matriculated at a rate of 53 percent. By comparison, the groups that complain the most about underrepresentation actually have lower matriculation rates: Only 39 percent of African Americans decided to matriculate at Penn. For Hispanics, the rate was also 39 percent. And for Asians, the rate was 44 percent. Also, the minority groups who say that Penn "doesn't care about" them and "isn't interested in representing" them are being accepted at a higher percentage even as a lower percentage of accepted applicants matriculate. After examining the data published in the DP, I have found that African American applicants were accepted at a rate of 36 percent to the class of 2002. This number is 20 percent higher than the average acceptance rate of 30 percent for students self-identifying as white or "other." Hispanics were accepted at a rate of 38 percent, almost 27 percent higher than the average acceptance rate for whites and "others." In fact, assuming accepted African American applicants continued to matriculate at a rate of 39 percent, for Penn to have a class with the same 12 percent share of African American students as society as a whole, it would have to accept a whopping 74 percent of those that decided to apply. That sounds a bit far from "fair." Similarly, for Hispanics, Penn would have to accept 88 percent of those that applied to achieve a representation proportional to their numbers in society. Asians represent another facet of the underrepresentation issue -- namely, overrepresentation. Asian applicants were accepted to the University at a 25 percent rate. And while 44 percent of Asians matriculated -- nine points below the rate for whites and "others" -- they remain overrepresented at the University as a whole. For example, assuming a constant yield, Penn would only have to accept 3.4 percent of those that applied to get a level of representation equal to their 2 to 3 percent share of the population. But it's not just whites who are underrepresented at Penn -- it is white Christians. Penn's student body is widely estimated to be between 30 and 40 percent Jewish, and about 63 percent white or "other." Therefore, since the vast majority of non-Jewish whites are Christians, at most about 30 percent of Penn's incoming class are white Christians -- while they make up approximately 75 percent of society. Quite a stark disparity, yet there is no outcry. Jews, who make up about 30 percent of Penn's Class of 2002, are only 2 to 3 percent of the American population. Therefore, Jews are 10 times more represented at Penn than in society. Asians make up a dramatic 25 percent of the class, around eight times more than their share of the population. However, white Christians are the most underrepresented group in proportion to their numbers in society, roughly 40 percent of their share of the general population. That share is even less than Blacks, who are represented at Penn in about half their numbers in society at large. I think it is quite obvious that some numbers have been conveniently ignored for far too long. This information brings me back to my original point. It seems that the demand of certain minority groups is as follows: Admit more of us even though we already have a disproportionately high acceptance rate. Then, since we usually refuse Penn, the school needs to admit even more of us so it can look bad and have a low yield. With these statistics in hand, it is time to do battle with the proponents of politically correct diversity. Their brand of diversity is not about making Penn look like America. It is about favoring certain groups at the expense of others, the motivations for which range from career opportunism to blatant racism, both of which are dead wrong. Next time someone tells you certain groups are underrepresented, ask them who we should get rid of. Slots at this school are a zero sum game, so if I get in, someone else necessarily doesn't. It is time to stop pretending that this is not the case. Penn is a great school and is certainly scholarly enough to examine statistics before lavishly funding minority retention for groups that already receive a great deal of consideration and assistance from the University.

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.