11 ms·

Despite the increased chances of admission, black students make up a modest 5% of the (e.g.) Harvard student body compared to Asian students and white students

Despite the increased chances of admission, black students make up a modest 5% of the (e.g.) Harvard student body compared to Asian students and white students at 13% and 40% respectively. Ultimately, I can't justify the idea of rejecting students based on race, but when I look at those demographics I just don't see much to get worked up about. From a more cynical angle the problem almost seems like "the total percentage of black people is a few points too high". I understand that there are real people behind these statistics, but this is true no matter which racial bucket you land in. I'll also add, the paper you linked sort of muddies the waters on your point. > Based on complete data for three applicant cohorts to three of the most academically selective research universities, we show that admission bonuses for athletes and legacies rival, and sometimes even exceed, the size of preferences for underrepresented minority applicants. That is to say, there is a lot going on in the admissions process, but it isn't clear to me that much is gained by insisting on a racial perspective. With all that stated, it seems obvious that Asian Americans should fight against discrimination that statistically disadvantages them based on their identity. It's unfortunate that a quality education is a finite pie we have to divvy up into thin slices.

vt100 5y ago
> It's unfortunate that a quality education is a finite pie we have to divvy up into thin slices. I think this belief is part of the problem. Information is infinitely replicable at zero cost, but we create barriers to its dissemination. If there are kids who are eager and able to learn material, they should have access to that it. And if they have mastered the material, they should be granted recognition of that objective fact. Any other policy means we are deliberately dumbing ourselves down. On the other hand, perhaps we need to dissect what it is we mean by "education", because while access to information can be unlimited, the number of places at Harvard IS limited. Inasmuch as membership in an exclusive social club is limited, and inasmuch as the Harvard class is an exercise in social engineering, I can see wny one may want some representation for various groups. In short, knowledge doesn't need to be a finite pie. It only appears to be so because some domains are gate-kept by limited admissions numbers in order to protect the supply of labour in those professions. The tech industry shows that when we don't have professional licensing, talent can find a way regardless of credentialism.
cat_plus_plus 5y ago
> It's unfortunate that a quality education is a finite pie. Good that it's not then? With modern technology, one can get started on ultra cheap automated courses (not necessarily just static lectures, can be interactive/VR experience like good computer games), coupled with one on one help from paid and volunteer tutors around the world. Than those who show potential can in due time be given access to expensive research equipment and world renoun professors. All without a need to make a life making or breaking decision based on a single admission process. Let students decide for themselves if and when to conclude that a subject is not for them. Current system amounts to artificial gatekeeping of success.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- dotancohen 5y ago
  The current system was developed based on almost three thousand years' experience dealing with the finite resource that was education. And if you think that the resource is no longer finite, then are you going to supply and maintain the hardware and infrastructure to provide everybody with an online computer? Are you going to translate the coursework and exams to their languages? Provide the electricity? Provide the meal in the childrens' bellies so that their mind could be on the classwork?
- pewpew2020 5y ago
  >>> With modern technology, one can get started on ultra cheap automated courses You cannot compare a degree from a well known university with cheap/free online courses. The benefits of a degree from a well known university are immeasurable.
  - cutemonster 5y ago
    Did you mean that one learns more there, or that the well-known name of the university makes it simpler to get a nice job?
- raxxorrax 5y ago
  This is why I don't understand. The logistics of education are cheaper than ever, almost free. Having a personal mentor is of course far more efficient, but that isn't the reality of modern education anyway. What elite institutions offer is mainly connections and access directly into the pipeline of companies in a respective field. There is some benefit to have elite institutions because proximity of highly educated people can spawn a lot of innovation, but a successful education system needs to be broad.
TulliusCicero 5y ago
> Ultimately, I can't justify the idea of rejecting students based on race, but when I look at those demographics I just don't see much to get worked up about. If you look at those particular stats, sure, it doesn't sound particularly objectionable. But if you look at others: https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/15/politics/harvard-affirmative-action-opening-arguments/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/15/politics/harvard-affirmative-... > Under questioning from SFFA lawyer John Hughes, Fitzsimmons detailed some of the recruitment efforts that begin the selection process. Harvard mails recruitment letters to black and Hispanic high schoolers with middle-range SAT scores, Fitzsimmons acknowledged, yet only sends such letters to Asian Americans if they have scored more than 200 points higher. > According to charts Hughes displayed, Harvard sends such recruiting letters to black, Hispanic, and Native American students with top grades who hit at least 1100 on the combined math and verbal SAT score (the top score is 1600). To receive such letters under similar circumstances, Asian American men must have a combined score of 1380, and Asian American women, a combined score of 1350. So, an individual Asian student needs to score much higher to have a chance at Harvard, compared to students of other ethnicities. That's very blatantly racial discrimination. This amounts to, "sorry, we have enough people of your color, so we're gonna make it harder for you to get in." That's wrong. Period.
- csa 5y ago
  > So, an individual Asian student needs to score much higher to have a chance at Harvard, compared to students of other ethnicities. That's very blatantly racial discrimination. A little late to this, but… 1. Your quotes refer to recruiting, not admissions. 2. Even if your conjecture that Asians admitted to elite schools have higher scores on average than other minorities holds water (it probably does), I think this focus on SAT scores and grades sort of misses the point of the admissions processes in many elite schools (including, and perhaps especially, Harvard). Specifically, they are typically looking for people who have been at the top of something or had an impact on something at a regional, national, or international level. Lots of folks (Asians and otherwise) have great grades and SAT scores, but they don’t really stand out in other ways. > This amounts to, "sorry, we have enough people of your color, so we're gonna make it harder for you to get in." It’s more like “sorry, you were only above average (not outstanding) in one of the five criteria we evaluate, so we will take a hard pass”. Note that academics is only one of five factors used in Harvard admissions (iirc). Getting the top rating in academics might be something like winning a prestigious math or science competition, so having “great grades and high SAT scores” doesn’t even merit the top rating in one category. I think many people don’t realize this. You don’t need top ratings in any single category to get in, but if you don’t have a top rating for any of the evaluation criteria, you need to be above average in several of them.
fmajid 5y ago
This discrimination is not to protect Black or Hispanic students from being outcompeted by Asians, it is there to protect Whites, just like anti-Jewish discrimination before WW2 when Jews were not considered white. Bringing Blacks and Hispanics into the conversation is a red herring used by elite universities to defend the indefensible. If you want to see what a truly meritocratic admissions policy would look like, at least in STEM, just see Caltech, where Asians make up 44% of the student body, not the paltry 15% quota the Ivies have consented to grant them. https://www.registrar.caltech.edu/records/enrollment-statistics https://www.registrar.caltech.edu/records/enrollment-statist... The other thing to consider is that “diversity” somehow fails to consider class. Have you noticed how universities prattle on about racial statistics but getting stats on socio-economic background is like pulling teeth, if you can get data at all?
- bzbarsky 5y ago
  > it is there to protect Whites Is it? The estimate at https://cdn.substack.com/image/fetch/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fbucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F300c84b0-4407-4a7c-aa90-53a88c81b183_1220x784.png https://cdn.substack.com/image/fetch/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_p... disagrees, but if you have other data I would be interested. > at least in STEM This is an important caveat, by the way. The racial breakdown differs quite a bit by major at many of these schools. I doubt Harvard would be 44% Asian even without the discrimination they engage in (and so do the authors of the study linked above, who put it at 37% Asian admittees if all the racial/atheletic/legacy preferences went away). > not the paltry 15% quota the Ivies have consented to grant them. 15% when? The data I've seen has Harvard at 15% Asian about 10 years ago. Per the chart above the fraction of Asians in the set of people who get _admitted_ is 24%. Per the numbers at https://www.collegefactual.com/colleges/harvard-university/student-life/diversity/ https://www.collegefactual.com/colleges/harvard-university/s... Harvard's _enrolled_ undergrads are 21% Asian. Not sure whether the discrepancy has tso do with systematic differences in how often people accept the offer of admission or whether something else is going on. > The other thing to consider is that “diversity” somehow fails to consider class. Yes, fully agreed.
- twic 5y ago
  I think universities are judged to some extent on class. There are statistics about how many Pell grant recipients they admit, i believe. But one consequence of that is that if you are just slightly too well-off to get a Pell grant, you have no chance, because admitting you won't boost the university's score.
Gareth321 5y ago
>Ultimately, I can't justify the idea of rejecting students based on race, but when I look at those demographics I just don't see much to get worked up about. Really? I find it very easy. Racial discrimination is wrong. Period. You're pointing to a social discrepancy and saying "eh, maybe racial discrimination is okay because it might make the demographics more equal." I urge you to fully consider what this entails. If we want to live in a multicultural society, we must accept that different groups have different values, preferences, and practises. We choose to allow groups to be different, so we must accept that this means groups end up in different places. Asian parents in the U.S. exhibit high propensity to encourage that their children study more than all other ethnic groups(https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/05/110505103345.htm https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/05/110505103345.h...) (data here: https://www.bls.gov/tus/ https://www.bls.gov/tus/). Unsurprisingly, Asian children grow up to earn more than all other ethnic groups, and display lower levels of crime. In other words, this cultural difference results in an income and wealth disparity. I am not of Asian descent, and I believe that a child should not be studying their childhood away. Who is right? Should I be making my children study 13 hours every week? Or should the Asian parents have their children study less? After all, if the existence of a disparity alone is morally wrong, one group must bend. Or can we accept that different groups are different. This is indeed the premise behind multiculturalism. This will result in disparities between groups as a necessary and healthy outcome. Not something to be feared, but something to be celebrated as an expression of free will and cultural autonomy.
- DocTomoe 5y ago
  > I am not of Asian descent, and I believe that a child should not be studying their childhood away. Most likely, by raising the bar for college entry in desirable schools, you only make them study more.
  - Gareth321 5y ago
    I would if I valued my children going to Harvard as highly as Asian parents. But I don't think that I do.
- criddell 5y ago
cafard 5y ago
Is a quality education really what is at stake here? Are the faculty teaching undergraduate courses that much superior to those who teach elsewhere? I suspect that if the quality of education is better, it is because of the college-readiness of the students admitted. (So kids, you are the customer, but you are also the product.)
mbg721 5y ago
A much cheaper state school in a cornfield can get you a quality education. Harvard and Yale are more about getting invited to the right dinner-parties.
- DocTomoe 5y ago
  If you wanted to rephrase that: The cornfield-state-school teaches you how to be a better serf. Ivy League teaches you how to become a master. It's no coincidence that most founders come from ivy-league schools.
  - paulcole 5y ago
    I’m assuming you mean startup founders (be sure to genuflect when you say that) but I can all but guarantee that the overwhelming majority of business founders in the US did not attend Ivy League schools.
    - cyber_kinetist 5y ago
      Though these startup founders are both directly and indirectly funded by the power structures (investment firms, think tanks, the government) maintained by these Ivy League school graduates. Think how all these startups are getting loads of "trickled-down" money from the Fed's money printer. Look at the list of chairs of the Federal Reserve and most of them are from prestigious Ivy League schools, you get what I mean.
      - paulcole 5y ago
        The take that the economic elite are mostly from Ivy League schools feels markedly different than the take that most people who found startups are from Ivy League schools.
        mbg721 5y ago
        Startup founders are more likely to be here than old-money elites are.
rayiner 5y ago
Black representation is one thing, but it’s almost a red herring. You can make Harvard 10-12% Black without changing the demographics too much.[1] The bigger question for Asians I think is competition with elite whites. A “proportional representation” type system handicaps Asians against whites, for no comprehensible reason. Harvard is 13% Asian, but Caltech is 40%. Why should white students be insulated from that competition? [1] In my opinion there is no similar justification for preferences in favor of Hispanics. Studies show that Hispanics are similarly situated to previous generations of white immigrants: https://academic.oup.com/qje/article/135/2/711/5687353 https://academic.oup.com/qje/article/135/2/711/5687353. Their income disparity is explained by recency and character of immigration, and disappears over time. You see the same phenomenon about Asian groups that comprise primarily refugees. Vietnamese people were as poor as Black people in the 1970s. Today their household income is slightly higher than white people. By contrast, Black and indigenous people face persistent disparities that are not disappearing over time.
everforward 5y ago
> Despite the increased chances of admission, black students make up a modest 5% of the (e.g.) Harvard student body compared to Asian students and white students at 13% and 40% respectively. The numbers are a little misleading because 25% of the students have their race listed as "non-resident alien", aka no race assigned. Removing that group and adjusting the other percentages accordingly gives: * 55% White (61.5% of US population) * 20.4% Asian (5.4% of US population) * 12.2% Hispanic (17.6% of US population) * 7% Black (12.3 % of US population) * 4.7% Biracial (3.1% of US population) I was just curious about the numbers and how they stacked up to the national average, and thought others might be as well.

vt100 5y ago

> It's unfortunate that a quality education is a finite pie we have to divvy up into thin slices. I think this belief is part of the problem. Information is infinitely replicable at zero cost, but we create barriers to its dissemination. If there are kids who are eager and able to learn material, they should have access to that it. And if they have mastered the material, they should be granted recognition of that objective fact. Any other policy means we are deliberately dumbing ourselves down. On the other hand, perhaps we need to dissect what it is we mean by "education", because while access to information can be unlimited, the number of places at Harvard IS limited. Inasmuch as membership in an exclusive social club is limited, and inasmuch as the Harvard class is an exercise in social engineering, I can see wny one may want some representation for various groups. In short, knowledge doesn't need to be a finite pie. It only appears to be so because some domains are gate-kept by limited admissions numbers in order to protect the supply of labour in those professions. The tech industry shows that when we don't have professional licensing, talent can find a way regardless of credentialism.

cat_plus_plus 5y ago

> It's unfortunate that a quality education is a finite pie. Good that it's not then? With modern technology, one can get started on ultra cheap automated courses (not necessarily just static lectures, can be interactive/VR experience like good computer games), coupled with one on one help from paid and volunteer tutors around the world. Than those who show potential can in due time be given access to expensive research equipment and world renoun professors. All without a need to make a life making or breaking decision based on a single admission process. Let students decide for themselves if and when to conclude that a subject is not for them. Current system amounts to artificial gatekeeping of success.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
dotancohen 5y ago
The current system was developed based on almost three thousand years' experience dealing with the finite resource that was education. And if you think that the resource is no longer finite, then are you going to supply and maintain the hardware and infrastructure to provide everybody with an online computer? Are you going to translate the coursework and exams to their languages? Provide the electricity? Provide the meal in the childrens' bellies so that their mind could be on the classwork?
pewpew2020 5y ago
>>> With modern technology, one can get started on ultra cheap automated courses You cannot compare a degree from a well known university with cheap/free online courses. The benefits of a degree from a well known university are immeasurable.
- cutemonster 5y ago
  Did you mean that one learns more there, or that the well-known name of the university makes it simpler to get a nice job?
raxxorrax 5y ago
This is why I don't understand. The logistics of education are cheaper than ever, almost free. Having a personal mentor is of course far more efficient, but that isn't the reality of modern education anyway. What elite institutions offer is mainly connections and access directly into the pipeline of companies in a respective field. There is some benefit to have elite institutions because proximity of highly educated people can spawn a lot of innovation, but a successful education system needs to be broad.

TulliusCicero 5y ago

> Ultimately, I can't justify the idea of rejecting students based on race, but when I look at those demographics I just don't see much to get worked up about. If you look at those particular stats, sure, it doesn't sound particularly objectionable. But if you look at others: https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/15/politics/harvard-affirmative-action-opening-arguments/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/15/politics/harvard-affirmative-... > Under questioning from SFFA lawyer John Hughes, Fitzsimmons detailed some of the recruitment efforts that begin the selection process. Harvard mails recruitment letters to black and Hispanic high schoolers with middle-range SAT scores, Fitzsimmons acknowledged, yet only sends such letters to Asian Americans if they have scored more than 200 points higher. > According to charts Hughes displayed, Harvard sends such recruiting letters to black, Hispanic, and Native American students with top grades who hit at least 1100 on the combined math and verbal SAT score (the top score is 1600). To receive such letters under similar circumstances, Asian American men must have a combined score of 1380, and Asian American women, a combined score of 1350. So, an individual Asian student needs to score much higher to have a chance at Harvard, compared to students of other ethnicities. That's very blatantly racial discrimination. This amounts to, "sorry, we have enough people of your color, so we're gonna make it harder for you to get in." That's wrong. Period.

csa 5y ago
> So, an individual Asian student needs to score much higher to have a chance at Harvard, compared to students of other ethnicities. That's very blatantly racial discrimination. A little late to this, but… 1. Your quotes refer to recruiting, not admissions. 2. Even if your conjecture that Asians admitted to elite schools have higher scores on average than other minorities holds water (it probably does), I think this focus on SAT scores and grades sort of misses the point of the admissions processes in many elite schools (including, and perhaps especially, Harvard). Specifically, they are typically looking for people who have been at the top of something or had an impact on something at a regional, national, or international level. Lots of folks (Asians and otherwise) have great grades and SAT scores, but they don’t really stand out in other ways. > This amounts to, "sorry, we have enough people of your color, so we're gonna make it harder for you to get in." It’s more like “sorry, you were only above average (not outstanding) in one of the five criteria we evaluate, so we will take a hard pass”. Note that academics is only one of five factors used in Harvard admissions (iirc). Getting the top rating in academics might be something like winning a prestigious math or science competition, so having “great grades and high SAT scores” doesn’t even merit the top rating in one category. I think many people don’t realize this. You don’t need top ratings in any single category to get in, but if you don’t have a top rating for any of the evaluation criteria, you need to be above average in several of them.

fmajid 5y ago

This discrimination is not to protect Black or Hispanic students from being outcompeted by Asians, it is there to protect Whites, just like anti-Jewish discrimination before WW2 when Jews were not considered white. Bringing Blacks and Hispanics into the conversation is a red herring used by elite universities to defend the indefensible. If you want to see what a truly meritocratic admissions policy would look like, at least in STEM, just see Caltech, where Asians make up 44% of the student body, not the paltry 15% quota the Ivies have consented to grant them. https://www.registrar.caltech.edu/records/enrollment-statistics https://www.registrar.caltech.edu/records/enrollment-statist... The other thing to consider is that “diversity” somehow fails to consider class. Have you noticed how universities prattle on about racial statistics but getting stats on socio-economic background is like pulling teeth, if you can get data at all?

bzbarsky 5y ago
> it is there to protect Whites Is it? The estimate at https://cdn.substack.com/image/fetch/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fbucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F300c84b0-4407-4a7c-aa90-53a88c81b183_1220x784.png https://cdn.substack.com/image/fetch/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_p... disagrees, but if you have other data I would be interested. > at least in STEM This is an important caveat, by the way. The racial breakdown differs quite a bit by major at many of these schools. I doubt Harvard would be 44% Asian even without the discrimination they engage in (and so do the authors of the study linked above, who put it at 37% Asian admittees if all the racial/atheletic/legacy preferences went away). > not the paltry 15% quota the Ivies have consented to grant them. 15% when? The data I've seen has Harvard at 15% Asian about 10 years ago. Per the chart above the fraction of Asians in the set of people who get _admitted_ is 24%. Per the numbers at https://www.collegefactual.com/colleges/harvard-university/student-life/diversity/ https://www.collegefactual.com/colleges/harvard-university/s... Harvard's _enrolled_ undergrads are 21% Asian. Not sure whether the discrepancy has tso do with systematic differences in how often people accept the offer of admission or whether something else is going on. > The other thing to consider is that “diversity” somehow fails to consider class. Yes, fully agreed.
twic 5y ago
I think universities are judged to some extent on class. There are statistics about how many Pell grant recipients they admit, i believe. But one consequence of that is that if you are just slightly too well-off to get a Pell grant, you have no chance, because admitting you won't boost the university's score.

Gareth321 5y ago

>Ultimately, I can't justify the idea of rejecting students based on race, but when I look at those demographics I just don't see much to get worked up about. Really? I find it very easy. Racial discrimination is wrong. Period. You're pointing to a social discrepancy and saying "eh, maybe racial discrimination is okay because it might make the demographics more equal." I urge you to fully consider what this entails. If we want to live in a multicultural society, we must accept that different groups have different values, preferences, and practises. We choose to allow groups to be different, so we must accept that this means groups end up in different places. Asian parents in the U.S. exhibit high propensity to encourage that their children study more than all other ethnic groups(https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/05/110505103345.htm https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/05/110505103345.h...) (data here: https://www.bls.gov/tus/ https://www.bls.gov/tus/). Unsurprisingly, Asian children grow up to earn more than all other ethnic groups, and display lower levels of crime. In other words, this cultural difference results in an income and wealth disparity. I am not of Asian descent, and I believe that a child should not be studying their childhood away. Who is right? Should I be making my children study 13 hours every week? Or should the Asian parents have their children study less? After all, if the existence of a disparity alone is morally wrong, one group must bend. Or can we accept that different groups are different. This is indeed the premise behind multiculturalism. This will result in disparities between groups as a necessary and healthy outcome. Not something to be feared, but something to be celebrated as an expression of free will and cultural autonomy.

DocTomoe 5y ago
> I am not of Asian descent, and I believe that a child should not be studying their childhood away. Most likely, by raising the bar for college entry in desirable schools, you only make them study more.
- Gareth321 5y ago
  I would if I valued my children going to Harvard as highly as Asian parents. But I don't think that I do.
criddell 5y ago

cafard 5y ago

Is a quality education really what is at stake here? Are the faculty teaching undergraduate courses that much superior to those who teach elsewhere? I suspect that if the quality of education is better, it is because of the college-readiness of the students admitted. (So kids, you are the customer, but you are also the product.)

mbg721 5y ago

A much cheaper state school in a cornfield can get you a quality education. Harvard and Yale are more about getting invited to the right dinner-parties.

DocTomoe 5y ago
If you wanted to rephrase that: The cornfield-state-school teaches you how to be a better serf. Ivy League teaches you how to become a master. It's no coincidence that most founders come from ivy-league schools.
- paulcole 5y ago
  I’m assuming you mean startup founders (be sure to genuflect when you say that) but I can all but guarantee that the overwhelming majority of business founders in the US did not attend Ivy League schools.
  - cyber_kinetist 5y ago
    Though these startup founders are both directly and indirectly funded by the power structures (investment firms, think tanks, the government) maintained by these Ivy League school graduates. Think how all these startups are getting loads of "trickled-down" money from the Fed's money printer. Look at the list of chairs of the Federal Reserve and most of them are from prestigious Ivy League schools, you get what I mean.
    - paulcole 5y ago
      The take that the economic elite are mostly from Ivy League schools feels markedly different than the take that most people who found startups are from Ivy League schools.
      - mbg721 5y ago
        Startup founders are more likely to be here than old-money elites are.

rayiner 5y ago

Black representation is one thing, but it’s almost a red herring. You can make Harvard 10-12% Black without changing the demographics too much.[1] The bigger question for Asians I think is competition with elite whites. A “proportional representation” type system handicaps Asians against whites, for no comprehensible reason. Harvard is 13% Asian, but Caltech is 40%. Why should white students be insulated from that competition? [1] In my opinion there is no similar justification for preferences in favor of Hispanics. Studies show that Hispanics are similarly situated to previous generations of white immigrants: https://academic.oup.com/qje/article/135/2/711/5687353 https://academic.oup.com/qje/article/135/2/711/5687353. Their income disparity is explained by recency and character of immigration, and disappears over time. You see the same phenomenon about Asian groups that comprise primarily refugees. Vietnamese people were as poor as Black people in the 1970s. Today their household income is slightly higher than white people. By contrast, Black and indigenous people face persistent disparities that are not disappearing over time.

everforward 5y ago

> Despite the increased chances of admission, black students make up a modest 5% of the (e.g.) Harvard student body compared to Asian students and white students at 13% and 40% respectively. The numbers are a little misleading because 25% of the students have their race listed as "non-resident alien", aka no race assigned. Removing that group and adjusting the other percentages accordingly gives: * 55% White (61.5% of US population) * 20.4% Asian (5.4% of US population) * 12.2% Hispanic (17.6% of US population) * 7% Black (12.3 % of US population) * 4.7% Biracial (3.1% of US population) I was just curious about the numbers and how they stacked up to the national average, and thought others might be as well.