7 ms·

In a system based on merit, they would get more placements.

dwaltrip 6y ago
Merit is not a perfectly objective concept. Someone has to come up with criteria based on whatever goals and values they think are important.
- nordsieck 6y ago
  > Someone has to come up with criteria based on whatever goals and values they think are important. The most obvious criteria is: most likely to graduate. Some others that aren't bad: * Highest expected value of future donations * Highest expected value of impact (publication) * Highest expected value of future salary * Highest expected value of holding public office (the weighting here might be contentious) As long as all of the criterion are achievement based, I expect them to screen for roughly the same people, demographically.
  - harryh 6y ago
    Highest expected value of future donations This. This is the one. If you view everything Harvard does as supporting this goal, it all makes perfect sense. You don't necessarily want the smartest kids. You want the kids that are most likely to go on to make the most money AND the kids who are most likely to have a strong emotional connection to the university so they write big checks.
  - kenjackson 6y ago
    I’d add “most likely to become famous for a good reason.” Most likely to graduate is interesting. Almost everyone I know who didn’t graduate, it was due to finances. Purely academic reasons, at least anecdotally, seem relatively uncommon now.
    - nordsieck 6y ago
      > Almost everyone I know who didn’t graduate, it was due to finances. Purely academic reasons, at least anecdotally, seem relatively uncommon now. That's probably true for the Ivy's since they get the cream of the crop. The community colleges near me have a 25% 6 year graduation rate. I guarantee you that's not all due to finances.
  - cousin_it 6y ago
    Not sure that's the right approach. Admitting people who are most likely to succeed is credit-taking in the guise of teaching. To maximize college's benefit to society, I think you should admit people whose success would be most improved by college. It would be a bit counterintuitive though, you would mostly admit average applicants (because top ones will succeed anyway).
    - nordsieck 6y ago
      > To maximize college's benefit to society, I think you should admit people whose success would be most improved by college. 1. I'm have yet to be convinced that Harvard is trying to maximize its benefit to society. 2. Even if we stipulate that Harvard's sole goal is to maximize its benefit to society, it may be that increasing the number of Jeff Deans or Jim Kellers, even by a small amount, is more beneficial to society than better educating a lot of average people. ... or it may not be. My point is that the approach you suggest is not obviously correct.
  - shreygineer 6y ago
    Two of Harvard's most famous students: Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg didn't graduate, but the Harvard name still got boosted by the fact that they attended.
- cambalache 6y ago
  > Merit is not a perfectly objective concept Perhaps, but sure as hell is better than race to qualify a candidate.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- commandlinefan 6y ago
  > Merit is not a perfectly objective concept Well, it used to be, but it isn't any more now that they're rejecting standardized tests.
  - cbm-vic-20 6y ago
    Those kids should then go on to and excel elsewhere with their "Master of Standardized Tests" degree.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

Merit is not a perfectly objective concept. Someone has to come up with criteria based on whatever goals and values they think are important.

nordsieck 6y ago
> Someone has to come up with criteria based on whatever goals and values they think are important. The most obvious criteria is: most likely to graduate. Some others that aren't bad: * Highest expected value of future donations * Highest expected value of impact (publication) * Highest expected value of future salary * Highest expected value of holding public office (the weighting here might be contentious) As long as all of the criterion are achievement based, I expect them to screen for roughly the same people, demographically.
- harryh 6y ago
  Highest expected value of future donations This. This is the one. If you view everything Harvard does as supporting this goal, it all makes perfect sense. You don't necessarily want the smartest kids. You want the kids that are most likely to go on to make the most money AND the kids who are most likely to have a strong emotional connection to the university so they write big checks.
- kenjackson 6y ago
  I’d add “most likely to become famous for a good reason.” Most likely to graduate is interesting. Almost everyone I know who didn’t graduate, it was due to finances. Purely academic reasons, at least anecdotally, seem relatively uncommon now.
  - nordsieck 6y ago
    > Almost everyone I know who didn’t graduate, it was due to finances. Purely academic reasons, at least anecdotally, seem relatively uncommon now. That's probably true for the Ivy's since they get the cream of the crop. The community colleges near me have a 25% 6 year graduation rate. I guarantee you that's not all due to finances.
- cousin_it 6y ago
  Not sure that's the right approach. Admitting people who are most likely to succeed is credit-taking in the guise of teaching. To maximize college's benefit to society, I think you should admit people whose success would be most improved by college. It would be a bit counterintuitive though, you would mostly admit average applicants (because top ones will succeed anyway).
  - nordsieck 6y ago
    > To maximize college's benefit to society, I think you should admit people whose success would be most improved by college. 1. I'm have yet to be convinced that Harvard is trying to maximize its benefit to society. 2. Even if we stipulate that Harvard's sole goal is to maximize its benefit to society, it may be that increasing the number of Jeff Deans or Jim Kellers, even by a small amount, is more beneficial to society than better educating a lot of average people. ... or it may not be. My point is that the approach you suggest is not obviously correct.
- shreygineer 6y ago
  Two of Harvard's most famous students: Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg didn't graduate, but the Harvard name still got boosted by the fact that they attended.
cambalache 6y ago
> Merit is not a perfectly objective concept Perhaps, but sure as hell is better than race to qualify a candidate.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
commandlinefan 6y ago
> Merit is not a perfectly objective concept Well, it used to be, but it isn't any more now that they're rejecting standardized tests.
- cbm-vic-20 6y ago
  Those kids should then go on to and excel elsewhere with their "Master of Standardized Tests" degree.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]