AAST Speech

Introduction 1 minute
Our presentation focuses on the admissions of the University of California, for all
campuses, and how the model minority myth is perpetuated through admissions rates and
within the bureaucracy and officials of the University. This institutionalized belief has
then eclipsed the problems that Asian Americans have faced gaining admissions into the
university.
The event in history that we are anchoring this presentation around is Californias
Proposition 209, which passed in 1996. This proposition will be explained in more depth
throughout our presentation. However as a brief overview, it removed affirmative action
from the state and it prohibited governmental institutions from considering race, gender,
or ethnicity in the job hiring and college admissions.
Therefore, this presentation will compare the admission policies and statistics of the
University of California before and after the proposition in order to establish that there
were Asian Americans biases in the admission process, despite the general belief that
there were none due to the model minority myth.
Establishing the model minority myth, textual analysis 1 minute 30 seconds
In a 2003 report created by the University of California, Berkeley campus about race
underrepresentation at UC schools and inequality in college admissions, Asian Americans
are constantly grouped with Whites when comparing to other minorities such as
Hispanics or African Americans.
The report also mentions the affect that a students circumstances may have on SAT
scores and therefore likelihood of being admitted to the university. However when
explaining these correlations the report states, Asian students score higher
than white students who have similar circumstances, which make it easy to extrapolate
that Asian students will score higher than other races who are in similar circumstances as
them. This is a generalization and direct contribution to the model minority myth, as it
insinuates that Asian Americans hard work will make up for any sort of lack in
circumstances.
This report shows that the university officials buy into the model minority myth, as
within the document, many problems that black and Hispanic students face are not
extended to Asian Americans, although they too may be facing the same issues.
This view from the university officials are then reinforced with the admission statistics
that Erick presented earlier.
Post Proposition 209, Eligibility and admission rates 1 minute 20 seconds
ThischartontheslideisfromareportfromtheUniversityofCaliforniain2003about
theundergraduateadmissionsaftertheProposition209.
HereitshowstheeligibilityrateshighschoolstudentsinCaliforniaofattendingthe
university.Theseratesarecalculatedbytheuniversitybasedonitsownpolicyof
admissions.
Onthiscolumnistherace,andinthelastcolumnyouseetheUCeligibilityrate.Asian
Americanseligibilityisthehighestat30%ofAsianAmericanhighschoolgraduatesare
eligibletoattendtheuniversity,whereasforWhitestheirrateisonlyat12.7%.

Later on in the report it also shows acceptance rates for Asian Americans from California
for the year of 2002, which is at 33%. This is proportionate, and actually a little bit more
than the eligibility rate for Asian Americans.
So what these statistics all mean is that post-Proposition 209, Asian Americans are
receiving proportional admissions rates compared to their eligibility rates.
This not to say that affirmative action is bad for Asian Americans admissions, but only
that affirmative action allowed for race to play a part in admissions, and these findings
suggest an informal racial consideration through affirmative action against Asian
Americans.