This assumes that current admissions are purely meritocratic, when, as the article points out, they're not: > Black students are 66% less likely to be identifi

This assumes that current admissions are purely meritocratic, when, as the article points out, they're not: > Black students are 66% less likely to be identified as gifted compared to white students with similar test scores But even if we supposed that the top 10% of Black students were slightly less qualified than the top 10% of White students (say, due to socioeconomic factors), the program would simply adjust towards the mean student. So maybe the program slows down a bit, but it's still an accelerated program, and now it's helping to correct those socioeconomic disparities. The only case where this argument would break down is if the top 10% of Black students were _severely_ less qualified than the top 10% of White students, in which case the program would likely fail. But it seems pretty clear that this isn't the case.