3 ms·

I am cynical enough to believe it's a loophole to keep overachieving Asians or Indians from owning a rightful slot instead of a son or daughter of a wealthy don

I am cynical enough to believe it's a loophole to keep overachieving Asians or Indians from owning a rightful slot instead of a son or daughter of a wealthy donor, politician, or celebrity.

tathougies 6y ago
Yup. The SAT exam fee is affordable (even if expensive) to everyday people. Other qualifications like intel science fairs, extra-curriculars, trips internationally, etc are all really expensive. As the child of middle-class immigrants from Asia, it's meant to keep people like me out, and instead select for the exclusive neighborhood I now live in and the Jones's who want to keep up. Great...
jhowell 6y ago
Why not both? Reconsidering the "rightful slots" of either group would diversify the institution significantly, though there are many who believe diversity is not beneficial. Perhaps Harvard sees a path to increased value in their endeavor to be more representative society.
eesmith 6y ago
Is "owning" a typo for "earning"? I don't see how anyone can own a slot. To add to your cynicism, university exams started as way to select WASPy prep school students instead of "overachieving" Jewish public school students. See, the tests included a section on Latin, which was much more often taught in private prep schools than public high schools. To detract from your cynicism, the intrinsic assumption is the SATs are meaningful indicator of "rightfulness." My understanding is that at best it shows a correlation with the first year of college, and that high school grades show a better correlation than the (gameable) SAT. Don't know if the WSJ article covers any of this - don't have a subscription. But the header suggests this change is only for the next year, as a response to the pandemic, and not (yet?) a long-term change, so it likely doesn't touch on these issues.
vgtheone 6y ago
Agreed.

3 ms·

I am cynical enough to believe it's a loophole to keep overachieving Asians or Indians from owning a rightful slot instead of a son or daughter of a wealthy don

by SCAQTony 6y ago

I am cynical enough to believe it's a loophole to keep overachieving Asians or Indians from owning a rightful slot instead of a son or daughter of a wealthy donor, politician, or celebrity.

tathougies 6y ago
Yup. The SAT exam fee is affordable (even if expensive) to everyday people. Other qualifications like intel science fairs, extra-curriculars, trips internationally, etc are all really expensive. As the child of middle-class immigrants from Asia, it's meant to keep people like me out, and instead select for the exclusive neighborhood I now live in and the Jones's who want to keep up. Great...
jhowell 6y ago
Why not both? Reconsidering the "rightful slots" of either group would diversify the institution significantly, though there are many who believe diversity is not beneficial. Perhaps Harvard sees a path to increased value in their endeavor to be more representative society.
eesmith 6y ago
Is "owning" a typo for "earning"? I don't see how anyone can own a slot. To add to your cynicism, university exams started as way to select WASPy prep school students instead of "overachieving" Jewish public school students. See, the tests included a section on Latin, which was much more often taught in private prep schools than public high schools. To detract from your cynicism, the intrinsic assumption is the SATs are meaningful indicator of "rightfulness." My understanding is that at best it shows a correlation with the first year of college, and that high school grades show a better correlation than the (gameable) SAT. Don't know if the WSJ article covers any of this - don't have a subscription. But the header suggests this change is only for the next year, as a response to the pandemic, and not (yet?) a long-term change, so it likely doesn't touch on these issues.
vgtheone 6y ago
Agreed.