3 ms·

Harvard is the position of Ranking and admitting students. They have a fair number of very high scoring academic performers so they use some other metics. T

Harvard is the position of Ranking and admitting students. They have a fair number of very high scoring academic performers so they use some other metics. They use 4 criteria: Academic, extracurricular, personal, and athletic. Some of the stats are on rankings based on race are here [1]. I suspect its not as cut and dry as the lawsuit alleges: (pg 36) [1]https://projects.iq.harvard.edu/files/diverse-education/files/expert_report_-_2017-12-15_dr._david_card_expert_report_updated_confid_desigs_redacted.pdf https://projects.iq.harvard.edu/files/diverse-education/file... Also for that report: "These data show that even if Harvard wanted to admit every student with elite academic credentials, it could not. Harvard admits roughly 1,800 domestic students each year, yet thousands of applicants have impeccable academic qualifications.9 For example, based on the statistics in Exhibit 2, even if Harvard sought to admit only applicants with a perfect GPA, it would need to reject at least 6,000 such applicants and all other domestic applicants. Similarly, even if Harvard sought to admit only applicants with a perfect Math SAT score, it would need to reject nearly 2,000 such applicants and all other domestic applicants." ( I didn't go the Harvard, but I do work there)

mlthoughts2018 8y ago
Suppose the application was fully race-blind, and Harvard could rank all applicants on the four criteria you listed (academic, extracurricular, personal, athletic), and derive an overall score for each applicant. I would claim that this score would strongly suffer from racial bias. A cohort admitted based on this score would look like a cohort where certain racial groups historically disadvantaged would appear to have been directly disadvantaged by the admissions choices, despite the process being fully race-blind. And the same for religious affiliation, gender, able-bodiedness, and various other designations. So while nobody consciously evaluating admission criteria would have ever considered e.g. race, it nonetheless would have been a major determining factor in the decisions. The question is if society does not want that outcome, then what steps is the university allowed to take to fix it? It seems explicitly considering e.g. race ahead of time, to ensure an acceptable cohort demographic distribution, is not OK. So then what else?
- acomjean 8y ago
  Well the same guy behind this lawsuit filed one in Texas earlier. It went to the supreme court in 2016. The result said that Universities can use Race as one measure of admissions. Having a diverse student body is considered a good thing, but its a balancing act: >>“A university is in large part defined by those intangible ‘qualities which are incapable of objective measurement but which make for greatness,’” Justice Kennedy wrote, quoting from a landmark desegregation case. “Considerable deference is owed to a university in defining those intangible characteristics, like student body diversity, that are central to its identity and educational mission. >>“But still,” Justice Kennedy added, “it remains an enduring challenge to our nation’s education system to reconcile the pursuit of diversity with the constitutional promise of equal treatment and dignity.” https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/24/us/politics/supreme-court-affirmative-action-university-of-texas.html https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/24/us/politics/supreme-court... I guess being transparent about how you are doing admissions is probably the best way forward, but it leads to lawsuits when the data doesn't look like expected. Expect statistical analysis of this data from both sides saying what they want.

mlthoughts2018 8y ago

Suppose the application was fully race-blind, and Harvard could rank all applicants on the four criteria you listed (academic, extracurricular, personal, athletic), and derive an overall score for each applicant. I would claim that this score would strongly suffer from racial bias. A cohort admitted based on this score would look like a cohort where certain racial groups historically disadvantaged would appear to have been directly disadvantaged by the admissions choices, despite the process being fully race-blind. And the same for religious affiliation, gender, able-bodiedness, and various other designations. So while nobody consciously evaluating admission criteria would have ever considered e.g. race, it nonetheless would have been a major determining factor in the decisions. The question is if society does not want that outcome, then what steps is the university allowed to take to fix it? It seems explicitly considering e.g. race ahead of time, to ensure an acceptable cohort demographic distribution, is not OK. So then what else?

acomjean 8y ago
Well the same guy behind this lawsuit filed one in Texas earlier. It went to the supreme court in 2016. The result said that Universities can use Race as one measure of admissions. Having a diverse student body is considered a good thing, but its a balancing act: >>“A university is in large part defined by those intangible ‘qualities which are incapable of objective measurement but which make for greatness,’” Justice Kennedy wrote, quoting from a landmark desegregation case. “Considerable deference is owed to a university in defining those intangible characteristics, like student body diversity, that are central to its identity and educational mission. >>“But still,” Justice Kennedy added, “it remains an enduring challenge to our nation’s education system to reconcile the pursuit of diversity with the constitutional promise of equal treatment and dignity.” https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/24/us/politics/supreme-court-affirmative-action-university-of-texas.html https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/24/us/politics/supreme-court... I guess being transparent about how you are doing admissions is probably the best way forward, but it leads to lawsuits when the data doesn't look like expected. Expect statistical analysis of this data from both sides saying what they want.