16 ms·

Yes! Finally the admissions committee can admit exactly who it wants, without any pesky objective criteria to hamper their social justice ideals!

karmasimida 5y ago
I think for Harvard SAT isn't that important anyway right?
- nfw2 5y ago
  It's important if your score is bad
  - karmasimida 5y ago
    I would assume it is already balanced based on various factors before evaluation BTW Canada didn't have SAT requirement for college application I think they are doing OK. They do look at GPA during high school though.
- drak0n1c 5y ago
  During college tours at Harvard in 2007 I had an informational interview with an admissions Dean, and when he learned my SAT was 2110 he asked if I was planning to retake and cut the interview short.
- MR4D 5y ago
  Not nearly as important as who your parents are (or how rich they are).
  - karmasimida 5y ago
    That is my impression as well. It doesn't make too much sense to over indexing on this when it is already discounted in a significant way.
- freyir 5y ago
  It’s extremely important if you’re a white or Asian applicant whose parent didn’t attend or donate a large sum of money to Harvard.
dang 5y ago
I should have posted this earlier, but it's probably still worth saying: this comment broke the site guidelines egregiously, and you started a wretched flamewar with it. That's seriously not ok. If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here, we'd appreciate it. Note these ones—you broke all of them here: "Don't be snarky." "Eschew flamebait." "Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive." "Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something."
- zarkov99 5y ago
  OK, I concede that the comment might have not been particularly articulate or thoughtful, and I will refrain from similar snark in the future. I do not however think it resulted in a wretched flamewar as the replies were, for the most part, respectful, substantiative and not particularly acrimonious. The one-sideness of the upvotes indicates what I posted was not particularly controversial as well.
Glyptodon 5y ago
And no pesky criteria to hamper their desire to admit the children of the 1% either.
- civilized 5y ago
  It turns out you can achieve both social justice and a powerful alumni donation base -- er, competent educated elite -- simply by admitting the top 1% of each race by income. Who knew? If you're Harvard, you can do good AND do well!
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - noah_buddy 5y ago
    Just like Robinhood always says: "take from the rich and give back to the rich."
  - PeterisP 5y ago
    Not necessarily, some of the 0.1% may have poor opinion of the other, may have specific expectations about the environment for their offspring and not every group is equally influential. For example, since we're talking about Harvard - it definitely wasn't purely about money when in 1920s Harvard implemented Lowell's quota to reduce the number of Jewish students.
    - throwawaylinux 5y ago
      I wonder if they believe that this time they're on the right side of history in their quest to reduce the proportion of Asian students.
      - civilized 5y ago
        For sure! To them, Asians are boring robots. Gotta keep civilization interesting!
  - 5y ago
api 5y ago
It probably has more to do with lower scores among "legacy" applicants, and with dodging accusations of bias against Asians.
- pc86 5y ago
  How does elimination of objective admissions criteria do anything other than increase accusations of bias?
  - atlgator 5y ago
    It eliminates the evidence of bias. No evidence, no crime.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- artificialLimbs 5y ago
  For our Uni, it's about getting more numbers because they're scared of numbers falling due to massive tuition increases and the decrease in perception of the necessity of a college education. Source: work at a Uni.
  - caddemon 5y ago
    Maybe universities in general have this problem but Harvard most certainly does not.
    - artificialLimbs 5y ago
      Accurate. Edited. Thank you.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
SquishyPanda23 5y ago
It's not sufficient that a metric be objective. The student's astrological sign is objective. But it's not a useful measure of college readiness. Standardized test scores do very little to predict college success when controlling for other variables. And they're trivial to game. They're a relic of back when people believed in IQ tests were useful selection criteria. Maybe there will be standardized tests in the future that are more useful, but we don't have those yet.
- garbagecoder 5y ago
  This is so dangerously drunk on Kool Aid, I can barely manage to reply. The SAT was begun in the first place to even out the different schools people came from so that elite schools couldn't just slide people in, or due to grade inflation, or whatever (and race!) You make a distinction without a difference in this case, and what other variables are you controlling for? Class rank? That can't be gamed, you think? Rich people will always game the system, whatever it is. In many cases, the alternatives are AP exams, which aren't even available in all schools. What criterion would you suggest? A lottery?
  - unclebucknasty 5y ago
    Read the article.
- glerk 5y ago
  > They're a relic of back when people believed in IQ tests were useful selection criteria. IQ tests are a very reliable proxy for academic performance potential. Is this even in dispute?
  - SquishyPanda23 5y ago
    Yes of course it's in dispute. It's so dominant a dispute in intelligence research that it's hard to imagine anyone being familiar with research on IQ and not knowing that it's in dispute. IQ tests are maybe ok at doing population-level correlations, but not at predicting the success of any given individual. Tons of things are correlated with intelligence, and IQ has the virtue that it's easy to measure. So it has uses for things like research studies. But as an actual filter when you care about performance it's not great. Things like high school GPA are easier to measure and more predictive of college success.
unclebucknasty 5y ago
I don't understand the underlying complaint behind this sarcasm. If these schools really did have "social justice ideals", then why does it bother you? Seriously. What, specifically, is so disagreeable to you? And, whatever that reason, why do you feel the need to vocalize it? Why not just not aspire to attend? Seems your need to critique here is itself a form of "social expression", not unlike the social justice that seems to bother you. In the end, it's a private institution, admitting who it wants, using whatever their criteria. Perhaps they believe their institution is made better in ways not measured by a standardized test or whatever criteria you find satisfactory. Why do you think your preferences represent a valid critique WRT who they want to attend their school?
- throwawaylinux 5y ago
  I'm not the OP, but the racism and bigotry inherent in their social justice ideals are disagreeable to me. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/15/us/harvard-asian-enrollment-applicants.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/15/us/harvard-asian-enrollme...
- atonse 5y ago
  Very few institutions this big are truly private. They get tons of research funds from public taxpayer funded grants. A lot of their students pay with publicly secured student loan debt. Just wanted to clarify that it can feel disingenuous to play the private card in these situations.
- wonderwonder 5y ago
  "Why not just not aspire to attend" If the schools remove academic testing credentials OP loses the ability to use test scores as a means of entry, which would have potentially levelled the playing field. Additionally if the schools elect to admit students based on racial / gender criteria and OP is a white heterosexual male, then OP cannot compete on a level playing field at all and his accomplishments are meaningless. You tell OP to aspire to attend but these changes would mean his odds are drastically reduced through no fault of his own except he was not born to the 1% and his skin and gender are wrong. Admitting people based on racial criteria is racist no matter the intention and hurts people that have likely done everything right to attend their school of choice.
smrtinsert 5y ago
If they were really objectively driven I'm pretty sure Harvard etc would accept the graduating class of the same handful of high schools every single year. "Objective" entry is never coming back to college admissions. Broaden your definition of admissions.
pumaontheprowl 5y ago
I wish I could laugh at this, but watching institutional racism come roaring back to life over the last decade has been extremely depressing. Is there any doubt that the goal of this change is to make it easier for them to reject Asian students? The Ivy League schools haven't exactly been discreet about their desire to admit fewer Asians.
- slavboj 5y ago
  A quarter of Harvard's entering class is Asian (vs about 6% of the US population and less in the youth bracket). What proportion would you like?
  - kaczordon 5y ago
    And it’s stayed this way for years. Odd no? Just look at Caltech with its over 40% Asian student demographic. https://www.wsj.com/amp/articles/caltech-college-admissions-asians-11639431134 https://www.wsj.com/amp/articles/caltech-college-admissions-...
  - chii 5y ago
    a proportion that reflects the meritocratic criteria that university admission was founded upon (or at least, was sold as).
    - markdown 5y ago
      Meritocracy might be great for the high achievers, but it's bad for multicultural societies where some cultures are significantly more conscientious and dutiful than others, or simply have different values. It inevitably leads to the one or two cultures dominating positions of leadership in government, commerce, etc, inevitably breeding resentment and racism. If you want a healthy society, you need to set aside the individual in order to create balance across the society. That might mean some high achievers losing out on their first choice college, it might mean affirmative action, etc. Equality of outcome feels horrible at the level of the individual, but across a society, it leads to greater equality and happiness.
analog31 5y ago
Ironically, I think they can't. Their brand depends on public perception of their admissions process, and careful curation of their student body. The point of an "elite" college is that everything about it is on display. The value offered to each student depends in part on expectations about the characteristics of the student body. It's like a human menagerie. Imagine choosing the animals for a zoo. Even if it were agreed which kind of animal was best (I like zebras), a zoo full of nothing but zebras would lose the interest and support of the public. Therefore, some "lesser" animals must be included, to provide the variety that makes it a zoo. The "elite" college needs a curation process, and it has to be opaque, or it will be easily gamed, and the student body will turn into a freak show, spoiling its brand. There is enough demand, and little enough true variety among high school students, that a straight numerical admissions threshold will produce a class of effectively identical students.
- somethoughts 5y ago
  I agree with this. The biggest issue I see is not that the Harvard admissions process is arbitrary and perhaps biased. No, the biggest issue is the size of the student bodyis kept stagnantly small to maintain exclusivity. Perhaps this made sense in an analog age but at some point in the digital world of plenty this will get/needs to be disrupted. The game changer will be when some University figures out how to become the Apple of higher education. Previously high end phones achieved prestige by adding diamonds, gold plating, a high price tag and only a select few stores that people in the know could find (i.e. the Nokia Vertu). Somehow Apple figured out how to maintain prestige/exclusivity while essentially servicing the entire market. It will be a breakthrough for humanity when a University figures out how to replicate this combo of prestige and quality at scale for higher education.
  - solatic 5y ago
    > The game changer will be when some University figures out how to become the Apple of higher education. You think it hasn't been tried? First, there's a chicken-or-egg problem. By virtue of being one of the oldest universities in America, Harvard was originally an elite institution that was powered by the tuition paid for by the children of elite parents. To start a new "Harvard-but-bigger", you need to figure out where the "elite" part comes from. In the absence of a pre-existing elite alumni body, you need to enforce rigorous academic standards on your early graduating classes and let your reputation grow from there. But, you also need to deliver the rigorous academic standards at scale. MOOCs were one attempt, but it's impossible to defend against cheating online. It's hard enough to stop cheating in real-world exam rooms, letting people go through examinations at home makes it impossible. If you require people to show up in-person, then you reach physical limits to scale very quickly. Even if you try to combine MOOC-style lectures with building out a network of controlled examination centers in the real world, the attempts to expand American standardized testing abroad show that you begin to run into problems of corrupt test center administrators. It's like the fast food franchise model, where the restaurant corporate headquarters finds it increasingly difficult to maintain the same standards across all of their franchised locations, except that with examinations, your day-to-day users want your standards to be compromised.
gwbas1c 5y ago
I never thought the tests were "objective." Anyone can practice and improve their score. They're biased towards students whos parents or school pushes them to practice. In the late 1990s I practiced and bumped my score up about 100 points. Do I think it made a difference to the college I went to? Doubtful. I think the better question is: Do the tests accurately predict if a student will do well in college? That's their point, and if schools have better ways to predict if an applicant will succeed, there's no point in using the test.
- imgabe 5y ago
  Grades are also biased towards kids whose parents and schools push them to practice. Being good at your job is biased towards being pushed to practice. Achieving the things you want in life is biased towards being pushed to practice. Maybe instead of lowering standards, we should push kids to practice.
- freewilly1040 5y ago
  Critiques of the bias of testing need to come with a defense of what replaces them. Can extra curriculars be gamed? Of course. What makes a good essay? That would depend on the eye of the evaluator. The dismay here is not due to a believe that testing correctly plucks the best minuscule number of deserving applicants that get in. It’s that everything else that is used is worse.
  - hiptobecubic 5y ago
    You don't need to offer an improvement to the SAT to complain about its obvious faults.
    - kolbe 5y ago
      Unless the complaints result in the elimination of the SAT without a good replacement. Which is exactly what is happening. I find it to be extremely destructive to spend all your time complaining about problems, and none finding solutions. That’s more or less what Maxism is: a long list of faults with capitalism and a half-baked untested idea of what could maybe be a solution. And we’ve seen the damage that ideology has done.
austincheney 5y ago
That makes the assumption that tests reflective of preparation are an objective criteria of academic performance. I would argue that such tests are only reflective of preparation.
sul_tasto 5y ago
Seems like the message of Lori Laughlin’s prosecution was received loud and clear.

karmasimida 5y ago

I think for Harvard SAT isn't that important anyway right?

nfw2 5y ago
It's important if your score is bad
- karmasimida 5y ago
  I would assume it is already balanced based on various factors before evaluation BTW Canada didn't have SAT requirement for college application I think they are doing OK. They do look at GPA during high school though.
drak0n1c 5y ago
During college tours at Harvard in 2007 I had an informational interview with an admissions Dean, and when he learned my SAT was 2110 he asked if I was planning to retake and cut the interview short.
MR4D 5y ago
Not nearly as important as who your parents are (or how rich they are).
- karmasimida 5y ago
  That is my impression as well. It doesn't make too much sense to over indexing on this when it is already discounted in a significant way.
freyir 5y ago
It’s extremely important if you’re a white or Asian applicant whose parent didn’t attend or donate a large sum of money to Harvard.

dang 5y ago

I should have posted this earlier, but it's probably still worth saying: this comment broke the site guidelines egregiously, and you started a wretched flamewar with it. That's seriously not ok. If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here, we'd appreciate it. Note these ones—you broke all of them here: "Don't be snarky." "Eschew flamebait." "Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive." "Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something."

zarkov99 5y ago
OK, I concede that the comment might have not been particularly articulate or thoughtful, and I will refrain from similar snark in the future. I do not however think it resulted in a wretched flamewar as the replies were, for the most part, respectful, substantiative and not particularly acrimonious. The one-sideness of the upvotes indicates what I posted was not particularly controversial as well.

Glyptodon 5y ago

And no pesky criteria to hamper their desire to admit the children of the 1% either.

civilized 5y ago
It turns out you can achieve both social justice and a powerful alumni donation base -- er, competent educated elite -- simply by admitting the top 1% of each race by income. Who knew? If you're Harvard, you can do good AND do well!
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- noah_buddy 5y ago
  Just like Robinhood always says: "take from the rich and give back to the rich."
- PeterisP 5y ago
  Not necessarily, some of the 0.1% may have poor opinion of the other, may have specific expectations about the environment for their offspring and not every group is equally influential. For example, since we're talking about Harvard - it definitely wasn't purely about money when in 1920s Harvard implemented Lowell's quota to reduce the number of Jewish students.
  - throwawaylinux 5y ago
    I wonder if they believe that this time they're on the right side of history in their quest to reduce the proportion of Asian students.
    - civilized 5y ago
      For sure! To them, Asians are boring robots. Gotta keep civilization interesting!
- 5y ago

api 5y ago

It probably has more to do with lower scores among "legacy" applicants, and with dodging accusations of bias against Asians.

pc86 5y ago
How does elimination of objective admissions criteria do anything other than increase accusations of bias?
- atlgator 5y ago
  It eliminates the evidence of bias. No evidence, no crime.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
artificialLimbs 5y ago
For our Uni, it's about getting more numbers because they're scared of numbers falling due to massive tuition increases and the decrease in perception of the necessity of a college education. Source: work at a Uni.
- caddemon 5y ago
  Maybe universities in general have this problem but Harvard most certainly does not.
  - artificialLimbs 5y ago
    Accurate. Edited. Thank you.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

SquishyPanda23 5y ago

It's not sufficient that a metric be objective. The student's astrological sign is objective. But it's not a useful measure of college readiness. Standardized test scores do very little to predict college success when controlling for other variables. And they're trivial to game. They're a relic of back when people believed in IQ tests were useful selection criteria. Maybe there will be standardized tests in the future that are more useful, but we don't have those yet.

garbagecoder 5y ago
This is so dangerously drunk on Kool Aid, I can barely manage to reply. The SAT was begun in the first place to even out the different schools people came from so that elite schools couldn't just slide people in, or due to grade inflation, or whatever (and race!) You make a distinction without a difference in this case, and what other variables are you controlling for? Class rank? That can't be gamed, you think? Rich people will always game the system, whatever it is. In many cases, the alternatives are AP exams, which aren't even available in all schools. What criterion would you suggest? A lottery?
- unclebucknasty 5y ago
  Read the article.
glerk 5y ago
> They're a relic of back when people believed in IQ tests were useful selection criteria. IQ tests are a very reliable proxy for academic performance potential. Is this even in dispute?
- SquishyPanda23 5y ago
  Yes of course it's in dispute. It's so dominant a dispute in intelligence research that it's hard to imagine anyone being familiar with research on IQ and not knowing that it's in dispute. IQ tests are maybe ok at doing population-level correlations, but not at predicting the success of any given individual. Tons of things are correlated with intelligence, and IQ has the virtue that it's easy to measure. So it has uses for things like research studies. But as an actual filter when you care about performance it's not great. Things like high school GPA are easier to measure and more predictive of college success.

unclebucknasty 5y ago

I don't understand the underlying complaint behind this sarcasm. If these schools really did have "social justice ideals", then why does it bother you? Seriously. What, specifically, is so disagreeable to you? And, whatever that reason, why do you feel the need to vocalize it? Why not just not aspire to attend? Seems your need to critique here is itself a form of "social expression", not unlike the social justice that seems to bother you. In the end, it's a private institution, admitting who it wants, using whatever their criteria. Perhaps they believe their institution is made better in ways not measured by a standardized test or whatever criteria you find satisfactory. Why do you think your preferences represent a valid critique WRT who they want to attend their school?

throwawaylinux 5y ago
I'm not the OP, but the racism and bigotry inherent in their social justice ideals are disagreeable to me. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/15/us/harvard-asian-enrollment-applicants.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/15/us/harvard-asian-enrollme...
atonse 5y ago
Very few institutions this big are truly private. They get tons of research funds from public taxpayer funded grants. A lot of their students pay with publicly secured student loan debt. Just wanted to clarify that it can feel disingenuous to play the private card in these situations.
wonderwonder 5y ago
"Why not just not aspire to attend" If the schools remove academic testing credentials OP loses the ability to use test scores as a means of entry, which would have potentially levelled the playing field. Additionally if the schools elect to admit students based on racial / gender criteria and OP is a white heterosexual male, then OP cannot compete on a level playing field at all and his accomplishments are meaningless. You tell OP to aspire to attend but these changes would mean his odds are drastically reduced through no fault of his own except he was not born to the 1% and his skin and gender are wrong. Admitting people based on racial criteria is racist no matter the intention and hurts people that have likely done everything right to attend their school of choice.

smrtinsert 5y ago

If they were really objectively driven I'm pretty sure Harvard etc would accept the graduating class of the same handful of high schools every single year. "Objective" entry is never coming back to college admissions. Broaden your definition of admissions.

pumaontheprowl 5y ago

I wish I could laugh at this, but watching institutional racism come roaring back to life over the last decade has been extremely depressing. Is there any doubt that the goal of this change is to make it easier for them to reject Asian students? The Ivy League schools haven't exactly been discreet about their desire to admit fewer Asians.

slavboj 5y ago
A quarter of Harvard's entering class is Asian (vs about 6% of the US population and less in the youth bracket). What proportion would you like?
- kaczordon 5y ago
  And it’s stayed this way for years. Odd no? Just look at Caltech with its over 40% Asian student demographic. https://www.wsj.com/amp/articles/caltech-college-admissions-asians-11639431134 https://www.wsj.com/amp/articles/caltech-college-admissions-...
- chii 5y ago
  a proportion that reflects the meritocratic criteria that university admission was founded upon (or at least, was sold as).
  - markdown 5y ago
    Meritocracy might be great for the high achievers, but it's bad for multicultural societies where some cultures are significantly more conscientious and dutiful than others, or simply have different values. It inevitably leads to the one or two cultures dominating positions of leadership in government, commerce, etc, inevitably breeding resentment and racism. If you want a healthy society, you need to set aside the individual in order to create balance across the society. That might mean some high achievers losing out on their first choice college, it might mean affirmative action, etc. Equality of outcome feels horrible at the level of the individual, but across a society, it leads to greater equality and happiness.

analog31 5y ago

Ironically, I think they can't. Their brand depends on public perception of their admissions process, and careful curation of their student body. The point of an "elite" college is that everything about it is on display. The value offered to each student depends in part on expectations about the characteristics of the student body. It's like a human menagerie. Imagine choosing the animals for a zoo. Even if it were agreed which kind of animal was best (I like zebras), a zoo full of nothing but zebras would lose the interest and support of the public. Therefore, some "lesser" animals must be included, to provide the variety that makes it a zoo. The "elite" college needs a curation process, and it has to be opaque, or it will be easily gamed, and the student body will turn into a freak show, spoiling its brand. There is enough demand, and little enough true variety among high school students, that a straight numerical admissions threshold will produce a class of effectively identical students.

somethoughts 5y ago
I agree with this. The biggest issue I see is not that the Harvard admissions process is arbitrary and perhaps biased. No, the biggest issue is the size of the student bodyis kept stagnantly small to maintain exclusivity. Perhaps this made sense in an analog age but at some point in the digital world of plenty this will get/needs to be disrupted. The game changer will be when some University figures out how to become the Apple of higher education. Previously high end phones achieved prestige by adding diamonds, gold plating, a high price tag and only a select few stores that people in the know could find (i.e. the Nokia Vertu). Somehow Apple figured out how to maintain prestige/exclusivity while essentially servicing the entire market. It will be a breakthrough for humanity when a University figures out how to replicate this combo of prestige and quality at scale for higher education.
- solatic 5y ago
  > The game changer will be when some University figures out how to become the Apple of higher education. You think it hasn't been tried? First, there's a chicken-or-egg problem. By virtue of being one of the oldest universities in America, Harvard was originally an elite institution that was powered by the tuition paid for by the children of elite parents. To start a new "Harvard-but-bigger", you need to figure out where the "elite" part comes from. In the absence of a pre-existing elite alumni body, you need to enforce rigorous academic standards on your early graduating classes and let your reputation grow from there. But, you also need to deliver the rigorous academic standards at scale. MOOCs were one attempt, but it's impossible to defend against cheating online. It's hard enough to stop cheating in real-world exam rooms, letting people go through examinations at home makes it impossible. If you require people to show up in-person, then you reach physical limits to scale very quickly. Even if you try to combine MOOC-style lectures with building out a network of controlled examination centers in the real world, the attempts to expand American standardized testing abroad show that you begin to run into problems of corrupt test center administrators. It's like the fast food franchise model, where the restaurant corporate headquarters finds it increasingly difficult to maintain the same standards across all of their franchised locations, except that with examinations, your day-to-day users want your standards to be compromised.

gwbas1c 5y ago

I never thought the tests were "objective." Anyone can practice and improve their score. They're biased towards students whos parents or school pushes them to practice. In the late 1990s I practiced and bumped my score up about 100 points. Do I think it made a difference to the college I went to? Doubtful. I think the better question is: Do the tests accurately predict if a student will do well in college? That's their point, and if schools have better ways to predict if an applicant will succeed, there's no point in using the test.

imgabe 5y ago
Grades are also biased towards kids whose parents and schools push them to practice. Being good at your job is biased towards being pushed to practice. Achieving the things you want in life is biased towards being pushed to practice. Maybe instead of lowering standards, we should push kids to practice.
freewilly1040 5y ago
Critiques of the bias of testing need to come with a defense of what replaces them. Can extra curriculars be gamed? Of course. What makes a good essay? That would depend on the eye of the evaluator. The dismay here is not due to a believe that testing correctly plucks the best minuscule number of deserving applicants that get in. It’s that everything else that is used is worse.
- hiptobecubic 5y ago
  You don't need to offer an improvement to the SAT to complain about its obvious faults.
  - kolbe 5y ago
    Unless the complaints result in the elimination of the SAT without a good replacement. Which is exactly what is happening. I find it to be extremely destructive to spend all your time complaining about problems, and none finding solutions. That’s more or less what Maxism is: a long list of faults with capitalism and a half-baked untested idea of what could maybe be a solution. And we’ve seen the damage that ideology has done.

austincheney 5y ago

That makes the assumption that tests reflective of preparation are an objective criteria of academic performance. I would argue that such tests are only reflective of preparation.

sul_tasto 5y ago

Seems like the message of Lori Laughlin’s prosecution was received loud and clear.