3.79/171 urm

Not sure where your numbers will get you? Dying to know where you stand? Come have your palms read by your fellow posters!
User avatar
JamMasterJ
Posts: 6688
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2011 7:17 pm

Re: 3.79/171 urm

Postby JamMasterJ » Tue Oct 18, 2011 3:52 pm

DoubleChecks wrote:
Blessedassurance wrote:
buckilaw wrote:If you are a "box checking" NA with no tribal ties or the like you likely won't receive a bump at all. There are substantially less legitimate NA applicants in a given cycle than AA males, so it follows that they get a larger bump than AA males. I've also heard this somewhere anecdotally but I can't recall where.


That's because you're wrong.


Isn't this where you provide your citations so people can determine for themselves?

burden of proof doesn't rest with him

User avatar
ColtsFan88
Posts: 1432
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2011 5:05 pm

Re: 3.79/171 urm

Postby ColtsFan88 » Tue Oct 18, 2011 4:14 pm

Why does AA male get such a larger boost than AA female? I'm curious and am just wondering.

User avatar
JamMasterJ
Posts: 6688
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2011 7:17 pm

Re: 3.79/171 urm

Postby JamMasterJ » Tue Oct 18, 2011 4:14 pm

ColtsFan88 wrote:Why does AA male get such a larger boost than AA female? I'm curious and am just wondering.

rarer

User avatar
Blessedassurance
Posts: 2081
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 3:42 pm

Re: 3.79/171 urm

Postby Blessedassurance » Tue Oct 18, 2011 4:14 pm


User avatar
Blessedassurance
Posts: 2081
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 3:42 pm

Re: 3.79/171 urm

Postby Blessedassurance » Tue Oct 18, 2011 4:22 pm

DoubleChecks wrote:for OP of this thread, if AA URM, then yeah I think "likely in" is a good prognosis.


The OP is a college freshman. I think he might be a sophomore now.

xmrmckenziex
Posts: 56
Joined: Sat Aug 01, 2009 12:26 pm

Re: 3.79/171 urm

Postby xmrmckenziex » Tue Oct 18, 2011 5:09 pm

vanwinkle wrote:
buckilaw wrote:If you are a "box checking" NA with no tribal ties or the like you likely won't receive a bump at all. There are substantially less legitimate NA applicants in a given cycle than AA males, so it follows that they get a larger bump than AA males. I've also heard this somewhere anecdotally but I can't recall where.

I think this is it. NA isn't always a big bump, and schools appear to be highly skeptical of many who check the NA box. However, someone who provides credentials or who writes a detailed DS that makes clear their ancestry and personal ties to their tribe is likely to get a significant boost, from what I understand. It's complicated, but if you want a simplified version it's something like this:

Registered NA >>> Other URMs >>> unregistered/box-check NA


Someone else beat me to the punch with the information for a previous question I asked months ago. But, I would like to see some verifiable evidence/studies done on the above point (the checking of the box versus the description of the actual "Native" experience). While I am native and did write about my experience in my PS, I would find it hard to somehow quantify someone's "Native-ness" (for lack of a better term) based upon the degree in which they described their experiences. I'd just be curious to hear an application reviewer's take on the subject.

User avatar
Bodhi_mind
Posts: 215
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2011 12:16 pm

Re: 3.79/171 urm

Postby Bodhi_mind » Wed Oct 19, 2011 11:58 am

How else can you quantify someone's "nativeness"? It seems like the best method possible. And I always thought it went AA male > NA, but I'm not sure. Maybe someone with more knowledge could chime in

xmrmckenziex wrote:
vanwinkle wrote:
buckilaw wrote:If you are a "box checking" NA with no tribal ties or the like you likely won't receive a bump at all. There are substantially less legitimate NA applicants in a given cycle than AA males, so it follows that they get a larger bump than AA males. I've also heard this somewhere anecdotally but I can't recall where.

I think this is it. NA isn't always a big bump, and schools appear to be highly skeptical of many who check the NA box. However, someone who provides credentials or who writes a detailed DS that makes clear their ancestry and personal ties to their tribe is likely to get a significant boost, from what I understand. It's complicated, but if you want a simplified version it's something like this:

Registered NA >>> Other URMs >>> unregistered/box-check NA


Someone else beat me to the punch with the information for a previous question I asked months ago. But, I would like to see some verifiable evidence/studies done on the above point (the checking of the box versus the description of the actual "Native" experience). While I am native and did write about my experience in my PS, I would find it hard to somehow quantify someone's "Native-ness" (for lack of a better term) based upon the degree in which they described their experiences. I'd just be curious to hear an application reviewer's take on the subject.




Return to “What are my chances?”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: L'Avocat, roboyle and 1 guest