16 ms·

Asian-American admissions at Harvard

110 points by mathattack 8y ago

supernova87a 8y ago
There was just a story today in the news about the University of Chicago completely doing away with requiring SAT/ACT for admissions. It seems like we're bending over backwards to toss out any kind of test or criterion that could be perceived as discriminatory. With one stated goal to make the student body mirror the general population. But that is a flawed premise. Is it even the role of higher education to remedy the cards that have already been dealt, and even if so what evidence is there that it actually does what people say it does?
- toasterlovin 8y ago
  To say nothing of the logical contortions required to argue that modern standardized tests discriminates based on ancestry or skin color.
  - learc83 8y ago
    They clearly do. The most explicit example is that ancestry correlates with whether you are a native speaker of the dialect the test was written in.
    - fiblye 8y ago
      >The most explicit example is that ancestry correlates with whether you are a native speaker of the dialect the test was written in. What kind of absurd "argument" is this? If you're testing for a university in America, the expectation is that not only will the test be in English, but the vast bulk of your university courses. And Asian Americans, despite a large number coming from families of non-English speakers, still do disproportionately well. But if the local language is something you struggle with, that local university isn't for you, unless we're also going to argue that degree awarding requires lower standards. In which case, just throw university in the dump because it's worthless. If we're at a point where having a majority language and doing important business in that language is bordering on discrimination, this society is lost.
      - learc83 8y ago
        So you disagree with the assertion that native speakers of a specific dialect score higher than non-native speakers of that dialect--all else being equal? Or did you just decide you'd rather argue with something I didn't write?
        bbddg 8y ago
        Ignore this person. They're clearly of the mind that diversity is the number one threat to the civilized world, never mind what reality is.
        colordrops 8y ago
        Even if it is case that native speakers of a specific dialect score higher, it's not clear that the result is due to language barriers, and could be a correlation with socio-economic groups. That is the point of bringing up non-native speakers doing well, as the test is not even their native language, which is certainly a greater disadvantage than a different dialect.
        learc83 8y ago
        So you don't think that there is an advantage gained by being a native speaker of a dialect a test is written in? The academic consensus is that there is. The clearest example is that vocabulary is a large part of most standardized tests and native speakers have larger vocabularies than proficient L2 speakers.
        skookumchuck 8y ago
        How about the math part? Besides, if I was on a college admissions board, I'd give consideration to an L2 speaker if his verbal scores were unusually below his math scores.
        learc83 8y ago
        I'm less familiar with math testing in general, but as far as direct effects go (not something caused by language of instruction) my guess is that it would be limited to instructions and word problems.
    - Teeer 8y ago
      But yet Asians perform the best on standardized tests, not whites who comes from England?
      - learc83 8y ago
        Do you have any data on white English immigrants who take the SAT? I sure don't.
        toasterlovin 8y ago
        The children of East Asian immigrants perform better than the children of white Americans. How does the language hypothesis you put forth account for that?
        learc83 8y ago
        1. We don't know that. We know that Asian Americans outperform whites, but Asian American can refer to 1st, 2nd, 3rd etc... generation immigrants. 2. Asian immigrants tend to learn the prestige dialect (the dialect the SAT is written in), so if their children are native English speakers, they tend to learn that dialect natively. 4. Language differences are a factor in performance but obviously not the only factor or the largest factor.
        toasterlovin 8y ago
        > 1. We don't know that. We know that Asian Americans outperform whites, but Asian American can refer to 1st, 2nd, 3rd etc... generation immigrants. A quick glance at the first graph on this page will tell you that almost all Asian Americans are either first or second generation: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/09/08/key-facts-about-asian-americans/ http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/09/08/key-facts-ab... Key stats: Asian American population in 2015 is slightly more than 20 million. In 1960 it is about 1 million and only about 2.5 million in 1980. > 2. Asian immigrants tend to learn the prestige dialect (the dialect the SAT is written in), so if their children are native English speakers, they tend to learn that dialect natively. Is it somehow easier for Asian immigrants to learn the prestige dialect than Hispanic immigrants?
  - tomdell 8y ago
    That is not the argument. Tests are written by people who talk a certain way, in a way that is easier to process for people who talk the same way. Different communities use different language, and this is reflected in how quickly different students process the problems on standardized tests. There's also the issue that standardized test scores are higher for students who have the time and encouragement to study for them - things which are scarce in poorer families where the student might have to work or help take care of younger siblings. Years of institutionalized racism (loans not given, redlining, denial of employment opportunities) have economically crippled some ethnic communities.
    - throwawayjava 8y ago
      The diversity thing is mostly a red-herring. Admissions offers are abandoning standardized tests because of Goodhart's Law. > for students who have the time and encouragement to study for them It's not just time and encouragement. SAT/ACT prep is serious industry. $100+/hr tutoring sessions. Owners of good SAT prep businesses can make six or seven figures in a few months. And good prep courses really do work. Tests, like coding interviews, are a game you can hack with enough time and effort. The signal is totally washed out; with enough money, you can learn how to take the test well enough.
      - SatvikBeri 8y ago
        The research suggests SAT test prep has an effect of about one seventh of a standard deviation – about 50 points out of 2400[1]. That's significant but not huge. Most of the perception of large gains comes from the fact that people do better as they get older with or without coaching. (None of the research is great, but better than nothing.) [1]: https://www.jefftk.com/p/sat-coaching-what-effect-size https://www.jefftk.com/p/sat-coaching-what-effect-size
        learc83 8y ago
        The College Board released new results in 2017 showing a more than 50 point increase out of 1600 versus students who didn't practice. This was with just 20 hours of practice. Many high achieving students practice for 5+ hours per week. South Korean cram school style 2-3 hours per day is in a completely different league than a standard SAT prep course, but much of the research that shows no result counts them the same.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- cdmckay 8y ago
  We don’t use any standardized testing in Canada and I don’t think it’s affected our higher education system at all. Are there any proven advantages to standardized testing?
  - dontbenaive 8y ago
    It gives smart troubled kids in terrible schools a chance to show that they are talented and in a bad situation. Instead of just selecting for the agreeable popular kids who can get recommendation letters.
  - slantyyz 8y ago
    That's true for getting into undergraduate programs, but when it comes to graduate programs, dentistry, medical, law schools etc, I believe we still do use the same standardized tests as in the USA.
    - fooker 8y ago
      For grad school, GRE and the other tests exist to filter out obviously unmotivated candidates. So, a good GRE score can not get you in with any certainty, but a bad one can disqualify you.
      - slantyyz 8y ago
        I think it depends. When I wrote the GMAT (albeit in 1992), a good score would get you into most Canadian business schools even if you had mediocre marks. My recollection of the GMAT's difficulty was that any high school grad with an A average could easily score higher than the 80 percentile on the test. While I was happy my result gave me the ability to choose which business school I wanted to go to (my marks, while not bad, were also nothing to brag about), I also think the GMAT was a useless selection criterion.
        fooker 8y ago
        I am not familiar with business school admissions, but it is very rare nowadays to get into non cash-cow grad school programs in STEM fields on the basis of the GRE score alone.
- tyrust 8y ago
  Your comment and questions are only related to the post as far as they both concern higher education. From your phrasing it's clear what you think the answer to your questions are.
- tzs 8y ago
  There was a fairly long interview on NPR today with the Director of Admissions of University of Chicago on this today. From the part I heard, a big reason given was that you can significantly improve your SAT/ACT scores by taking test prep courses, which reduces the reliability of the test. They believe that can get a better idea of an applicant's academic potential from their grades.
  - DuskStar 8y ago
    My high school graduating class (~15 of the ~250 were "Valedictorians" thanks to grade inflation and a lack of a weighting system; they all had 4.0s) says differently. This was in an inner city public school, mind you.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    - hammock 8y ago
      Admissions officers know individual high schools, and the different grading systems. They can separate the bullshit for the most part
      - DuskStar 8y ago
        In other words, if you're from a shitty high school (or even a "best in the county" high school, if it's a unexceptional county) you're shit out of luck - because now the admissions officers will just reject everyone from that school out of hand, no matter their grades. Objective standards can really help people without the connections to succeed otherwise.
        eanzenberg 8y ago
        That's the literal goal of the SAT. A standardized test across all schools.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
- throwawayjava 8y ago
  > It seems like we're bending over backwards to toss out any kind of test or criterion that could be perceived as discriminatory. Yes. SAT/ACT scores are terrible signals because of Goodhart's law. Professional tutoring in wealthy suburbs starts at $100/hr. Many ambitious students opt for four-figure private prep courses. SAT/ACT scores may have been good signals 20 years ago. But today, those scores discriminate against poor students and students aren't inculcated into the "elite institution rat race" from a young age. That discrimination matters to U Chicago because they are interested in admitting brilliant, creative thinkers. Not perfectly groomed drones. If you don't require test scores, then there's a lot less back-and-forth about admitting that one kid who did publishable research as a high schooler but also happened to do only so-so on the associated SAT subject test. Qualitative evaluations have many problems, but overly quantitative evaluations also have their failure modes. Especially when the candidate knows the quantitative function they're supposed to be optimizing.
- forapurpose 8y ago
  > could be perceived as discriminatory I believe "could be perceived" is incorrect; there is a large amount of evidence that it is discriminatory, and that therefore the most deserving students aren't getting opportunities and that the university is shortchanging itself on the quality of its student body. > one stated goal to make the student body mirror the general population Who stated that? Also, it's not a bad guide given that talent is distributed relatively equally. > Is it even the role of higher education to remedy the cards that have already been dealt, and even if so what evidence is there that it actually does what people say it does? What do you think, and more importantly to fellow users, on what is it based? Shall we stand still until nobody raises another question? > It seems like ... Sentences that begin with those words can end in almost any way the author wishes, and in almost all cases we will have learned nothing.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
CBLT 8y ago
Discussed 13 hours ago with 117 comments[0]. [0]:https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17320360 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17320360
- sridca 8y ago
  I wonder why this posting is not getting as much upvotes when there evidently is so much discussion.
- mathattack 8y ago
  Tyler Cowan’s commentary adds value.
throw1471 8y ago
If Harvard admission criteria leave out the best applicants to other colleges, and they go on to create powerful companies like Google in large number, will Harvard’s prestige decrease despite continued support from the elites? Doing very well in tech entrepreneurship needs intelligence more than great personality and political connections (they should be above a level but you don’t need a very high level of them). Politics is still the most direct route to power but billionaires are also powerful and have longer influence. If next generation moguls are educated elsewhere, the colleges with more merit based criteria can emerge as more elite. By merit, the criteria may include other objectively useful metrics in addition to academics.
- prakashnu 8y ago
  Edit: I read the article, and it makes sense that colleges are seeking to maximize their future revenue stream.
  - throw1471 8y ago
    Note my last sentence above.
- akhilcacharya 8y ago
  Neither Sergey nor Larry went to Harvard for undergrad, but I’m not aware of any data that says they were rejected. Both went to their states flagship before Stanford. Maybe we should make ladders of opportunity wider, and not just focus on HYPSM and Ivies? Just a guess.
rdtsc 8y ago
The linked report (exhibit A) is interesting to read: http://samv91khoyt2i553a2t1s05i-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Doc-415-1-Arcidiacono-Expert-Report.pdf http://samv91khoyt2i553a2t1s05i-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-c... It would seem at first that Harvard wants to help poor students and race just happens to be a proxy for socioeconomic status, but it turns out that's not what they are doing: > Harvard’s preferential treatment of African-American and Hispanic applicants is not the result of efforts to achieve socioeconomic diversity. Rather, preferences for African Americans and Hispanics are significantly smaller if the applicant is economically disadvantaged. It seems they want to have their cake and eat it too. They want to appear diverse based on physical features. So if someone takes a picture of the class and publishes it everyone would say "Look how diverse they are". But they also don't want poor students because they want donations to keep streaming in.
- doubleunplussed 8y ago
  Yep. Affirmative action has biases of its own, should be blinded to prevent it. Let it be based on family income only. In Australia university admissions are based pretty much solely on one number [1] that represents your high school results (unless you didn't go to high school in Australia), plus bonus points if you are disadvantaged (for which race is not relevant unless you are an indigenous Australian or Torres Strait islander). No interviews, no essays, just high school results plus some data on disadvantage. And handled by a separate organisation, not by the university. It seems like a pretty good system. Loads of disadvantaged people coming through my university all the time (...I've been here far too long). Perhaps hard to implement in the US since there is no national high school curriculum and the country is large and diverse making implementing one difficult. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Tertiary_Admission_Rank https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Tertiary_Admission_...
  - ajross 8y ago
    > race is not relevant unless you are an indigenous Australian or Torres Strait islander So... race is relevant, then? I mean, that's a pretty big "unless".
forapurpose 8y ago
Almost all discussion of racism is not about the facts of discrimination, it's about politics of the 'culture war', including here on HN: 1. Consider whether you can predict with high accuracy a person's attitude toward a racial discrimination issue, while being blind to that issue's facts, based solely on the political beliefs of the person and on the race of the alleged victim. (You can do the same with politicians and, very sadly, with U.S. Supreme Court justices.) For example, I had no doubt what the parent article's position would be based on the publication's politics and the race of the alleged victims. 2. In the U.S., by far the most prevalent amount of discrimination historically and currently has been against African-Americans. Yet I can't remember the last time such an issue was on the front page. To a degree, that could be for lack of novelty, but that doesn't nearly explain the vast omission.
- ralusek 8y ago
  Because the white people who take issue with actually verifiable discrimination against Asians, purely on the basis of their race, have so much to personally gain from speaking out against it. Your world view is so unbelievably flawed.
gnodar 8y ago
For those interested in Harvard's point of view: https://www.harvard.edu/president/news/2018/defending-diversity https://www.harvard.edu/president/news/2018/defending-divers... https://projects.iq.harvard.edu/diverse-education https://projects.iq.harvard.edu/diverse-education
- wallace_f 8y ago
  I like how Harvard sings praises of opportunity and diversity from ivory towers while literally discussing their will to hold up barriers to entry to education. There's no good reason to hold education hostage. The goal should be to create as much opportunity as possible.
  - arcturus17 8y ago
    Harvard is one of the founding partners of edX and has a ton of high-quality courses there. It also has the Harvard Extension School, which offers high-quality degrees at a fraction of the cost of the other schools. Probably unfair to say that they hold educatio hostage.
    - wallace_f 8y ago
      I know, but what I'm trying to say is that this whole discussion is misguided and ridiculous. The shame is that those "49%" of students who are, according to Harvard, fully qualified, are not given access. The whole discussion should be about how to give every qualified person--and in fact, every person: barriers to entry will always be deleterious to competitive results--access to their degree programs. But that's not how the world works. Harvard sells prestige and privilege, and profits from limiting access to it. So we end up in these ridiculous discussions about who should get access to that prestige and privilege.
Proven 8y ago
Racists discriminate in one way, socialists discriminate in many. Having said that, people should mind their own business. Harvard should be free to discriminate (if they don't take any gov funding) - it's a private institution.
randyrand 8y ago
> "It is incorrect to call it “racism,” Citation needed.
yashevde 8y ago
"A group that claims Harvard puts quotas on Asian-American applicants contends the university scores them higher than students of other races on academics and extracurricular activities but ranks them lowest in a "personal" category covering such traits as likability and 'attractive to be with.' " - https://cnn.it/2ldoPd1 https://cnn.it/2ldoPd1 That last parameter - "attractive to be with" - is aggravating. What is this, a matchmaking institution or something? It's just bizarre that they would have the gall to feature engineer that..
- lotsofpulp 8y ago
  Yes, it is. At the higher end of the socioeconomic scale, your network becomes extremely important, and who you marry will certainly form a huge part of your network. Many people don't realize, but that actually is a core purpose of selective higher education institutions. Biology and physics is the same at a community college versus Princeton, but you don't get the opportunity to meet the kids of diplomats and board members etc. You also want to sprinkle some natural, hard working geniuses in there and you have a good recipe for a network that can take advantage. Usually for their own monetary gain.
pwaai 8y ago
why does america systematically discriminate minorities? ex. media emasculates/villifies minority men while fetishizing minority women.
- specializeded 8y ago
  Don’t lump minorities together under that single banner, it’s gross and shows ignorance. The situation you’re talking about applies almost purely to Asian (south/east) Americans. It’s the complete reverse in regards to black folks, and nonexistent in Hispanic Americans (look up intermarriage statistics).
  - pwaai 8y ago
    how is it ignorant to suggest amerikkka has a racist past and it's still being pushed today as you've described casually. So blacks and hispanics are not villified at all in your view? being grouped into economic apartheid that is repeatedly paraded on media as thugs, gangbangers and of low intellectual capacity? For example, it is generally accepted in mainstream american culture that making fun of blacks, as a result of slavery, is very taboo but other minorities tend to get a pass. I've encountered this many times in the so called "liberal and mutlicultural society" powerhouse of the West. You are either Black or White in America I've been told. People in between don't matter.
    - specializeded 8y ago
      I’m addressing: media emasculates/villifies minority men while fetishizing minority women. Black men face issues of fetishization and hyper masculine caricatures, while black women are villified and systemically unwanted by other races, intermarrying at lower rates of any other group save Asian men. It is quite literally the opposite of what you’ve stated. Hispanic men and women don’t have any significant differences in intermarriage, and at that have the highest rates of intermarriage (because >50% are white probably). I do hope you’ll note the absurdity of preaching Amerikkka while lacking a basic understanding of the racial dynamics within it. It’s reminiscent of JS only devs decrying strong typing, and carries about as much weight!
KKKKkkkk1 8y ago
There's an article in the NYT about this story. Here are key quotes: Alumni interviewers give Asian-Americans personal ratings comparable to those of whites. But the admissions office gives them the worst scores of any racial group, often without even meeting them, according to Professor Arcidiacono. and then At the end of the admissions process, the class of applicants is fine-tuned through a so-called “lop list,” which includes race. Almost the entire page in which the plaintiffs describe that fine-tuning has been blacked out. Mr. Blum, the founder of Students for Fair Admissions, said Friday that it was “disreputable” of Harvard to complain that information was being taken out of context while at the same time insisting on significant redactions of the evidence. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/15/us/harvard-asian-enrollment-applicants.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/15/us/harvard-asian-enrollme...
pessimizer 8y ago
Let's be honest here; bias towards blacks and hispanics is intended to address larger societal inequities, and assumes a rough justice is to aim for representation of those groups at their proportion of the population. Bias against Asian admissions is aiming for the same outcome - maintaining white proportion in the student body at a similar level as the wider population, though without the aim of addressing societal ills, but instead simply to preserve white majority. That's where "diversity" arguments lead you. The real argument for bias toward disadvantaged groups is that discrimination in society leads to members of advantaged groups looking better on paper than they really are, and following the results of a biased system blindly would both predictably lead to a lower quality of student and recursively contribute to the original bias. Separately: minorities face material discrimination at every income and wealth level. I understand that it's tough for some white people to support anything positive that they're left out of, but racial bias in college admissions is meant to be a counterbalance to other, negative things that white people were also left out of, at every income and wealth level. But Asians were also suppressed by force of US law, and by angry, murderous mobs. If anything, they should be favored instead of pushed out, regardless of their level of achievement.
- int_19h 8y ago
  > Separately: minorities face material discrimination at every income and wealth level. I understand that it's tough for some white people to support anything positive that they're left out of, but racial bias in college admissions is meant to be a counterbalance to other, negative things that white people were also left out of, at every income and wealth level. Thing is, it's just not sustainable. No matter how it is justified in the grand scope of things, for an individual that was rejected over someone on the basis of race (or any other trait they have no control over), it will feel unfair, and rightly so. In aggregate, this creates long-term resentment that is focused on the very traits you're trying to mitigate discrimination over. Eventually, you get pushback - and since the group pushing back is the majority, it can get really nasty (indeed, to some extent, we're already observing it).
Teeer 8y ago
Harvard, along with most other private universities, use racism in their college admissions. It's very sad that we still have to deal with this, after history has showed favoritism towards certain races has never ended well.
rdl 8y ago
With computer based testing, we should be able to make a far better test than the SAT -- something where being able to master it would actually be solid evidence of both "g" and knowledge.
- zeth___ 8y ago
  You mean something that throws out g completely?
  - rdl 8y ago
    No, something that has multiple parts -- "g" (i.e. not requiring demonstrating external domain knowledge already known before the test), tests of domain expertise in whatever common body of knowledge a university wants, and a section which demonstrates previous effort to study/prepare. All 3 of these are worth knowing independently -- for some degrees programs, IQ alone would likely be sufficient. For others, a moderate level of IQ and a high level of willingness to study. For short certificate type programs, showing extensive pre-existing knowledge could be a big factor.
bsaul 8y ago
And then one day they'll just create an asian university, full of high scoring asian students, flipping the finger to politically correct universities walking on their heads. Or simply , with time, universities applying those kind of discrimination will fall behind the ones that don't in rankings.
abby_cohen_221 8y ago
There's a similar issue going on at the NYC elite public schools like Stuyvesant and Bronx Science. This guy discusses it in this Youtube video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QixRuK68lk4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QixRuK68lk4
seneca14 8y ago
While Jewish people make up less than 2% of the American population. They constitute 67% (yes you read correctly!) of Harvard graduates. In many cases "white privilege" is in fact Jewish privilege. Even after correcting for higher mean verbal IQ, there is still a high overrepresentation. Which leads to nepotism (Harvard leadership is predominantly Jewish) as the most likely explanation. This sounds to me like institutional racism against Asian- and European Americans. http://www.hillel.org/college-guide/list/record/harvard-university http://www.hillel.org/college-guide/list/record/harvard-univ... http://www.unz.com/runz/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/ http://www.unz.com/runz/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/

110 points by mathattack 8y ago

There was just a story today in the news about the University of Chicago completely doing away with requiring SAT/ACT for admissions. It seems like we're bending over backwards to toss out any kind of test or criterion that could be perceived as discriminatory. With one stated goal to make the student body mirror the general population. But that is a flawed premise. Is it even the role of higher education to remedy the cards that have already been dealt, and even if so what evidence is there that it actually does what people say it does?

toasterlovin 8y ago
To say nothing of the logical contortions required to argue that modern standardized tests discriminates based on ancestry or skin color.
- learc83 8y ago
  They clearly do. The most explicit example is that ancestry correlates with whether you are a native speaker of the dialect the test was written in.
  - fiblye 8y ago
    >The most explicit example is that ancestry correlates with whether you are a native speaker of the dialect the test was written in. What kind of absurd "argument" is this? If you're testing for a university in America, the expectation is that not only will the test be in English, but the vast bulk of your university courses. And Asian Americans, despite a large number coming from families of non-English speakers, still do disproportionately well. But if the local language is something you struggle with, that local university isn't for you, unless we're also going to argue that degree awarding requires lower standards. In which case, just throw university in the dump because it's worthless. If we're at a point where having a majority language and doing important business in that language is bordering on discrimination, this society is lost.
    - learc83 8y ago
      So you disagree with the assertion that native speakers of a specific dialect score higher than non-native speakers of that dialect--all else being equal? Or did you just decide you'd rather argue with something I didn't write?
      - bbddg 8y ago
        Ignore this person. They're clearly of the mind that diversity is the number one threat to the civilized world, never mind what reality is.
      - colordrops 8y ago
        Even if it is case that native speakers of a specific dialect score higher, it's not clear that the result is due to language barriers, and could be a correlation with socio-economic groups. That is the point of bringing up non-native speakers doing well, as the test is not even their native language, which is certainly a greater disadvantage than a different dialect.
        learc83 8y ago
        So you don't think that there is an advantage gained by being a native speaker of a dialect a test is written in? The academic consensus is that there is. The clearest example is that vocabulary is a large part of most standardized tests and native speakers have larger vocabularies than proficient L2 speakers.
        skookumchuck 8y ago
        How about the math part? Besides, if I was on a college admissions board, I'd give consideration to an L2 speaker if his verbal scores were unusually below his math scores.
        learc83 8y ago
        I'm less familiar with math testing in general, but as far as direct effects go (not something caused by language of instruction) my guess is that it would be limited to instructions and word problems.
  - Teeer 8y ago
    But yet Asians perform the best on standardized tests, not whites who comes from England?
    - learc83 8y ago
      Do you have any data on white English immigrants who take the SAT? I sure don't.
      - toasterlovin 8y ago
        The children of East Asian immigrants perform better than the children of white Americans. How does the language hypothesis you put forth account for that?
        learc83 8y ago
        1. We don't know that. We know that Asian Americans outperform whites, but Asian American can refer to 1st, 2nd, 3rd etc... generation immigrants. 2. Asian immigrants tend to learn the prestige dialect (the dialect the SAT is written in), so if their children are native English speakers, they tend to learn that dialect natively. 4. Language differences are a factor in performance but obviously not the only factor or the largest factor.
        toasterlovin 8y ago
        > 1. We don't know that. We know that Asian Americans outperform whites, but Asian American can refer to 1st, 2nd, 3rd etc... generation immigrants. A quick glance at the first graph on this page will tell you that almost all Asian Americans are either first or second generation: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/09/08/key-facts-about-asian-americans/ http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/09/08/key-facts-ab... Key stats: Asian American population in 2015 is slightly more than 20 million. In 1960 it is about 1 million and only about 2.5 million in 1980. > 2. Asian immigrants tend to learn the prestige dialect (the dialect the SAT is written in), so if their children are native English speakers, they tend to learn that dialect natively. Is it somehow easier for Asian immigrants to learn the prestige dialect than Hispanic immigrants?
- tomdell 8y ago
  That is not the argument. Tests are written by people who talk a certain way, in a way that is easier to process for people who talk the same way. Different communities use different language, and this is reflected in how quickly different students process the problems on standardized tests. There's also the issue that standardized test scores are higher for students who have the time and encouragement to study for them - things which are scarce in poorer families where the student might have to work or help take care of younger siblings. Years of institutionalized racism (loans not given, redlining, denial of employment opportunities) have economically crippled some ethnic communities.
  - throwawayjava 8y ago
    The diversity thing is mostly a red-herring. Admissions offers are abandoning standardized tests because of Goodhart's Law. > for students who have the time and encouragement to study for them It's not just time and encouragement. SAT/ACT prep is serious industry. $100+/hr tutoring sessions. Owners of good SAT prep businesses can make six or seven figures in a few months. And good prep courses really do work. Tests, like coding interviews, are a game you can hack with enough time and effort. The signal is totally washed out; with enough money, you can learn how to take the test well enough.
    - SatvikBeri 8y ago
      The research suggests SAT test prep has an effect of about one seventh of a standard deviation – about 50 points out of 2400[1]. That's significant but not huge. Most of the perception of large gains comes from the fact that people do better as they get older with or without coaching. (None of the research is great, but better than nothing.) [1]: https://www.jefftk.com/p/sat-coaching-what-effect-size https://www.jefftk.com/p/sat-coaching-what-effect-size
      - learc83 8y ago
        The College Board released new results in 2017 showing a more than 50 point increase out of 1600 versus students who didn't practice. This was with just 20 hours of practice. Many high achieving students practice for 5+ hours per week. South Korean cram school style 2-3 hours per day is in a completely different league than a standard SAT prep course, but much of the research that shows no result counts them the same.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
cdmckay 8y ago
We don’t use any standardized testing in Canada and I don’t think it’s affected our higher education system at all. Are there any proven advantages to standardized testing?
- dontbenaive 8y ago
  It gives smart troubled kids in terrible schools a chance to show that they are talented and in a bad situation. Instead of just selecting for the agreeable popular kids who can get recommendation letters.
- slantyyz 8y ago
  That's true for getting into undergraduate programs, but when it comes to graduate programs, dentistry, medical, law schools etc, I believe we still do use the same standardized tests as in the USA.
  - fooker 8y ago
    For grad school, GRE and the other tests exist to filter out obviously unmotivated candidates. So, a good GRE score can not get you in with any certainty, but a bad one can disqualify you.
    - slantyyz 8y ago
      I think it depends. When I wrote the GMAT (albeit in 1992), a good score would get you into most Canadian business schools even if you had mediocre marks. My recollection of the GMAT's difficulty was that any high school grad with an A average could easily score higher than the 80 percentile on the test. While I was happy my result gave me the ability to choose which business school I wanted to go to (my marks, while not bad, were also nothing to brag about), I also think the GMAT was a useless selection criterion.
      - fooker 8y ago
        I am not familiar with business school admissions, but it is very rare nowadays to get into non cash-cow grad school programs in STEM fields on the basis of the GRE score alone.
tyrust 8y ago
Your comment and questions are only related to the post as far as they both concern higher education. From your phrasing it's clear what you think the answer to your questions are.
tzs 8y ago
There was a fairly long interview on NPR today with the Director of Admissions of University of Chicago on this today. From the part I heard, a big reason given was that you can significantly improve your SAT/ACT scores by taking test prep courses, which reduces the reliability of the test. They believe that can get a better idea of an applicant's academic potential from their grades.
- DuskStar 8y ago
  My high school graduating class (~15 of the ~250 were "Valedictorians" thanks to grade inflation and a lack of a weighting system; they all had 4.0s) says differently. This was in an inner city public school, mind you.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - hammock 8y ago
    Admissions officers know individual high schools, and the different grading systems. They can separate the bullshit for the most part
    - DuskStar 8y ago
      In other words, if you're from a shitty high school (or even a "best in the county" high school, if it's a unexceptional county) you're shit out of luck - because now the admissions officers will just reject everyone from that school out of hand, no matter their grades. Objective standards can really help people without the connections to succeed otherwise.
      - eanzenberg 8y ago
        That's the literal goal of the SAT. A standardized test across all schools.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
throwawayjava 8y ago
> It seems like we're bending over backwards to toss out any kind of test or criterion that could be perceived as discriminatory. Yes. SAT/ACT scores are terrible signals because of Goodhart's law. Professional tutoring in wealthy suburbs starts at $100/hr. Many ambitious students opt for four-figure private prep courses. SAT/ACT scores may have been good signals 20 years ago. But today, those scores discriminate against poor students and students aren't inculcated into the "elite institution rat race" from a young age. That discrimination matters to U Chicago because they are interested in admitting brilliant, creative thinkers. Not perfectly groomed drones. If you don't require test scores, then there's a lot less back-and-forth about admitting that one kid who did publishable research as a high schooler but also happened to do only so-so on the associated SAT subject test. Qualitative evaluations have many problems, but overly quantitative evaluations also have their failure modes. Especially when the candidate knows the quantitative function they're supposed to be optimizing.
forapurpose 8y ago
> could be perceived as discriminatory I believe "could be perceived" is incorrect; there is a large amount of evidence that it is discriminatory, and that therefore the most deserving students aren't getting opportunities and that the university is shortchanging itself on the quality of its student body. > one stated goal to make the student body mirror the general population Who stated that? Also, it's not a bad guide given that talent is distributed relatively equally. > Is it even the role of higher education to remedy the cards that have already been dealt, and even if so what evidence is there that it actually does what people say it does? What do you think, and more importantly to fellow users, on what is it based? Shall we stand still until nobody raises another question? > It seems like ... Sentences that begin with those words can end in almost any way the author wishes, and in almost all cases we will have learned nothing.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

CBLT 8y ago

Discussed 13 hours ago with 117 comments[0]. [0]:https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17320360 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17320360

sridca 8y ago
I wonder why this posting is not getting as much upvotes when there evidently is so much discussion.
mathattack 8y ago
Tyler Cowan’s commentary adds value.

throw1471 8y ago

If Harvard admission criteria leave out the best applicants to other colleges, and they go on to create powerful companies like Google in large number, will Harvard’s prestige decrease despite continued support from the elites? Doing very well in tech entrepreneurship needs intelligence more than great personality and political connections (they should be above a level but you don’t need a very high level of them). Politics is still the most direct route to power but billionaires are also powerful and have longer influence. If next generation moguls are educated elsewhere, the colleges with more merit based criteria can emerge as more elite. By merit, the criteria may include other objectively useful metrics in addition to academics.

prakashnu 8y ago
Edit: I read the article, and it makes sense that colleges are seeking to maximize their future revenue stream.
- throw1471 8y ago
  Note my last sentence above.
akhilcacharya 8y ago
Neither Sergey nor Larry went to Harvard for undergrad, but I’m not aware of any data that says they were rejected. Both went to their states flagship before Stanford. Maybe we should make ladders of opportunity wider, and not just focus on HYPSM and Ivies? Just a guess.

rdtsc 8y ago

The linked report (exhibit A) is interesting to read: http://samv91khoyt2i553a2t1s05i-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Doc-415-1-Arcidiacono-Expert-Report.pdf http://samv91khoyt2i553a2t1s05i-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-c... It would seem at first that Harvard wants to help poor students and race just happens to be a proxy for socioeconomic status, but it turns out that's not what they are doing: > Harvard’s preferential treatment of African-American and Hispanic applicants is not the result of efforts to achieve socioeconomic diversity. Rather, preferences for African Americans and Hispanics are significantly smaller if the applicant is economically disadvantaged. It seems they want to have their cake and eat it too. They want to appear diverse based on physical features. So if someone takes a picture of the class and publishes it everyone would say "Look how diverse they are". But they also don't want poor students because they want donations to keep streaming in.

doubleunplussed 8y ago
Yep. Affirmative action has biases of its own, should be blinded to prevent it. Let it be based on family income only. In Australia university admissions are based pretty much solely on one number [1] that represents your high school results (unless you didn't go to high school in Australia), plus bonus points if you are disadvantaged (for which race is not relevant unless you are an indigenous Australian or Torres Strait islander). No interviews, no essays, just high school results plus some data on disadvantage. And handled by a separate organisation, not by the university. It seems like a pretty good system. Loads of disadvantaged people coming through my university all the time (...I've been here far too long). Perhaps hard to implement in the US since there is no national high school curriculum and the country is large and diverse making implementing one difficult. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Tertiary_Admission_Rank https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Tertiary_Admission_...
- ajross 8y ago
  > race is not relevant unless you are an indigenous Australian or Torres Strait islander So... race is relevant, then? I mean, that's a pretty big "unless".

forapurpose 8y ago

Almost all discussion of racism is not about the facts of discrimination, it's about politics of the 'culture war', including here on HN: 1. Consider whether you can predict with high accuracy a person's attitude toward a racial discrimination issue, while being blind to that issue's facts, based solely on the political beliefs of the person and on the race of the alleged victim. (You can do the same with politicians and, very sadly, with U.S. Supreme Court justices.) For example, I had no doubt what the parent article's position would be based on the publication's politics and the race of the alleged victims. 2. In the U.S., by far the most prevalent amount of discrimination historically and currently has been against African-Americans. Yet I can't remember the last time such an issue was on the front page. To a degree, that could be for lack of novelty, but that doesn't nearly explain the vast omission.

ralusek 8y ago
Because the white people who take issue with actually verifiable discrimination against Asians, purely on the basis of their race, have so much to personally gain from speaking out against it. Your world view is so unbelievably flawed.

gnodar 8y ago

For those interested in Harvard's point of view: https://www.harvard.edu/president/news/2018/defending-diversity https://www.harvard.edu/president/news/2018/defending-divers... https://projects.iq.harvard.edu/diverse-education https://projects.iq.harvard.edu/diverse-education

wallace_f 8y ago
I like how Harvard sings praises of opportunity and diversity from ivory towers while literally discussing their will to hold up barriers to entry to education. There's no good reason to hold education hostage. The goal should be to create as much opportunity as possible.
- arcturus17 8y ago
  Harvard is one of the founding partners of edX and has a ton of high-quality courses there. It also has the Harvard Extension School, which offers high-quality degrees at a fraction of the cost of the other schools. Probably unfair to say that they hold educatio hostage.
  - wallace_f 8y ago
    I know, but what I'm trying to say is that this whole discussion is misguided and ridiculous. The shame is that those "49%" of students who are, according to Harvard, fully qualified, are not given access. The whole discussion should be about how to give every qualified person--and in fact, every person: barriers to entry will always be deleterious to competitive results--access to their degree programs. But that's not how the world works. Harvard sells prestige and privilege, and profits from limiting access to it. So we end up in these ridiculous discussions about who should get access to that prestige and privilege.

Proven 8y ago

Racists discriminate in one way, socialists discriminate in many. Having said that, people should mind their own business. Harvard should be free to discriminate (if they don't take any gov funding) - it's a private institution.

randyrand 8y ago

> "It is incorrect to call it “racism,” Citation needed.

yashevde 8y ago

"A group that claims Harvard puts quotas on Asian-American applicants contends the university scores them higher than students of other races on academics and extracurricular activities but ranks them lowest in a "personal" category covering such traits as likability and 'attractive to be with.' " - https://cnn.it/2ldoPd1 https://cnn.it/2ldoPd1 That last parameter - "attractive to be with" - is aggravating. What is this, a matchmaking institution or something? It's just bizarre that they would have the gall to feature engineer that..

lotsofpulp 8y ago
Yes, it is. At the higher end of the socioeconomic scale, your network becomes extremely important, and who you marry will certainly form a huge part of your network. Many people don't realize, but that actually is a core purpose of selective higher education institutions. Biology and physics is the same at a community college versus Princeton, but you don't get the opportunity to meet the kids of diplomats and board members etc. You also want to sprinkle some natural, hard working geniuses in there and you have a good recipe for a network that can take advantage. Usually for their own monetary gain.

pwaai 8y ago

why does america systematically discriminate minorities? ex. media emasculates/villifies minority men while fetishizing minority women.

specializeded 8y ago
Don’t lump minorities together under that single banner, it’s gross and shows ignorance. The situation you’re talking about applies almost purely to Asian (south/east) Americans. It’s the complete reverse in regards to black folks, and nonexistent in Hispanic Americans (look up intermarriage statistics).
- pwaai 8y ago
  how is it ignorant to suggest amerikkka has a racist past and it's still being pushed today as you've described casually. So blacks and hispanics are not villified at all in your view? being grouped into economic apartheid that is repeatedly paraded on media as thugs, gangbangers and of low intellectual capacity? For example, it is generally accepted in mainstream american culture that making fun of blacks, as a result of slavery, is very taboo but other minorities tend to get a pass. I've encountered this many times in the so called "liberal and mutlicultural society" powerhouse of the West. You are either Black or White in America I've been told. People in between don't matter.
  - specializeded 8y ago
    I’m addressing: media emasculates/villifies minority men while fetishizing minority women. Black men face issues of fetishization and hyper masculine caricatures, while black women are villified and systemically unwanted by other races, intermarrying at lower rates of any other group save Asian men. It is quite literally the opposite of what you’ve stated. Hispanic men and women don’t have any significant differences in intermarriage, and at that have the highest rates of intermarriage (because >50% are white probably). I do hope you’ll note the absurdity of preaching Amerikkka while lacking a basic understanding of the racial dynamics within it. It’s reminiscent of JS only devs decrying strong typing, and carries about as much weight!

KKKKkkkk1 8y ago

There's an article in the NYT about this story. Here are key quotes: Alumni interviewers give Asian-Americans personal ratings comparable to those of whites. But the admissions office gives them the worst scores of any racial group, often without even meeting them, according to Professor Arcidiacono. and then At the end of the admissions process, the class of applicants is fine-tuned through a so-called “lop list,” which includes race. Almost the entire page in which the plaintiffs describe that fine-tuning has been blacked out. Mr. Blum, the founder of Students for Fair Admissions, said Friday that it was “disreputable” of Harvard to complain that information was being taken out of context while at the same time insisting on significant redactions of the evidence. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/15/us/harvard-asian-enrollment-applicants.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/15/us/harvard-asian-enrollme...

pessimizer 8y ago

Let's be honest here; bias towards blacks and hispanics is intended to address larger societal inequities, and assumes a rough justice is to aim for representation of those groups at their proportion of the population. Bias against Asian admissions is aiming for the same outcome - maintaining white proportion in the student body at a similar level as the wider population, though without the aim of addressing societal ills, but instead simply to preserve white majority. That's where "diversity" arguments lead you. The real argument for bias toward disadvantaged groups is that discrimination in society leads to members of advantaged groups looking better on paper than they really are, and following the results of a biased system blindly would both predictably lead to a lower quality of student and recursively contribute to the original bias. Separately: minorities face material discrimination at every income and wealth level. I understand that it's tough for some white people to support anything positive that they're left out of, but racial bias in college admissions is meant to be a counterbalance to other, negative things that white people were also left out of, at every income and wealth level. But Asians were also suppressed by force of US law, and by angry, murderous mobs. If anything, they should be favored instead of pushed out, regardless of their level of achievement.

int_19h 8y ago
> Separately: minorities face material discrimination at every income and wealth level. I understand that it's tough for some white people to support anything positive that they're left out of, but racial bias in college admissions is meant to be a counterbalance to other, negative things that white people were also left out of, at every income and wealth level. Thing is, it's just not sustainable. No matter how it is justified in the grand scope of things, for an individual that was rejected over someone on the basis of race (or any other trait they have no control over), it will feel unfair, and rightly so. In aggregate, this creates long-term resentment that is focused on the very traits you're trying to mitigate discrimination over. Eventually, you get pushback - and since the group pushing back is the majority, it can get really nasty (indeed, to some extent, we're already observing it).

Teeer 8y ago

Harvard, along with most other private universities, use racism in their college admissions. It's very sad that we still have to deal with this, after history has showed favoritism towards certain races has never ended well.

rdl 8y ago

With computer based testing, we should be able to make a far better test than the SAT -- something where being able to master it would actually be solid evidence of both "g" and knowledge.

zeth___ 8y ago
You mean something that throws out g completely?
- rdl 8y ago
  No, something that has multiple parts -- "g" (i.e. not requiring demonstrating external domain knowledge already known before the test), tests of domain expertise in whatever common body of knowledge a university wants, and a section which demonstrates previous effort to study/prepare. All 3 of these are worth knowing independently -- for some degrees programs, IQ alone would likely be sufficient. For others, a moderate level of IQ and a high level of willingness to study. For short certificate type programs, showing extensive pre-existing knowledge could be a big factor.

bsaul 8y ago

And then one day they'll just create an asian university, full of high scoring asian students, flipping the finger to politically correct universities walking on their heads. Or simply , with time, universities applying those kind of discrimination will fall behind the ones that don't in rankings.

abby_cohen_221 8y ago

There's a similar issue going on at the NYC elite public schools like Stuyvesant and Bronx Science. This guy discusses it in this Youtube video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QixRuK68lk4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QixRuK68lk4

seneca14 8y ago

While Jewish people make up less than 2% of the American population. They constitute 67% (yes you read correctly!) of Harvard graduates. In many cases "white privilege" is in fact Jewish privilege. Even after correcting for higher mean verbal IQ, there is still a high overrepresentation. Which leads to nepotism (Harvard leadership is predominantly Jewish) as the most likely explanation. This sounds to me like institutional racism against Asian- and European Americans. http://www.hillel.org/college-guide/list/record/harvard-university http://www.hillel.org/college-guide/list/record/harvard-univ... http://www.unz.com/runz/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/ http://www.unz.com/runz/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/