4 ms·

1. The largest beneficiaries of admissions policies at elite institutions are legacy admissions of wealth alumni’s kids. If SCOTUS wants to interfere with the a

1. The largest beneficiaries of admissions policies at elite institutions are legacy admissions of wealth alumni’s kids. If SCOTUS wants to interfere with the admissions policies of private institutions based on the equal protections clause, maybe that’s a better place to start. 2. The vast majority of students attend colleges that accept almost everyone.

az226 3y ago
Patently incorrect. Minority preference is ~20x times larger than legacy preference at Harvard. A typical class at Harvard has 2,500 student admits. Of those, 700 are black or Hispanic. If Harvard did away with legacy admissions, 25 additional Hispanic or black applicants would be admitted, so 725. However, if they did away with affirmative action, 450 would not be admitted, so you would be down to 275. Most of these 425 spots would go to Asian applicants and a chunk would go to white applicants. http://public.econ.duke.edu/~psarcidi/legacyathlete.pdf http://public.econ.duke.edu/~psarcidi/legacyathlete.pdf
- TradingPlaces 3y ago
  That’s a strange reading of that study, and at odds with the abstract. >The lawsuit Students For Fair Admissions v. Harvard University provided an un- precedented look at how an elite school makes admissions decisions. Using publicly released reports, we examine the preferences Harvard gives for recruited athletes, lega- cies, those on the dean’s interest list, and children of faculty and staff (ALDCs). Among white admits, over 43% are ALDC. Among admits who are African American, Asian American, and Hispanic, the share is less than 16% each. Our model of admissions shows that roughly three-quarters of white ALDC admits would have been rejected if they had been treated as typical white applicants. Removing preferences for athletes and legacies would significantly alter the racial distribution of admitted students, with the share of white admits falling and all other groups rising or remaining unchanged.
  - cuteboy19 3y ago
    This is entirely compatible with their analysis
    - TradingPlaces 3y ago
      If you are using politically motivated reasoning, yes. Good luck with that!
      - az226 3y ago
        No motivation needed whatsoever. Just check out page 27, table 5. The data speaks for itself.
        TradingPlaces 3y ago
        No, you are speaking for the data.

az226 3y ago

Patently incorrect. Minority preference is ~20x times larger than legacy preference at Harvard. A typical class at Harvard has 2,500 student admits. Of those, 700 are black or Hispanic. If Harvard did away with legacy admissions, 25 additional Hispanic or black applicants would be admitted, so 725. However, if they did away with affirmative action, 450 would not be admitted, so you would be down to 275. Most of these 425 spots would go to Asian applicants and a chunk would go to white applicants. http://public.econ.duke.edu/~psarcidi/legacyathlete.pdf http://public.econ.duke.edu/~psarcidi/legacyathlete.pdf

TradingPlaces 3y ago
That’s a strange reading of that study, and at odds with the abstract. >The lawsuit Students For Fair Admissions v. Harvard University provided an un- precedented look at how an elite school makes admissions decisions. Using publicly released reports, we examine the preferences Harvard gives for recruited athletes, lega- cies, those on the dean’s interest list, and children of faculty and staff (ALDCs). Among white admits, over 43% are ALDC. Among admits who are African American, Asian American, and Hispanic, the share is less than 16% each. Our model of admissions shows that roughly three-quarters of white ALDC admits would have been rejected if they had been treated as typical white applicants. Removing preferences for athletes and legacies would significantly alter the racial distribution of admitted students, with the share of white admits falling and all other groups rising or remaining unchanged.
- cuteboy19 3y ago
  This is entirely compatible with their analysis
  - TradingPlaces 3y ago
    If you are using politically motivated reasoning, yes. Good luck with that!
    - az226 3y ago
      No motivation needed whatsoever. Just check out page 27, table 5. The data speaks for itself.
      - TradingPlaces 3y ago
        No, you are speaking for the data.