3 ms·
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- preceden
by 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 agoThis is entirely compatible with their analysis
- TradingPlaces 3y agoIf you are using politically motivated reasoning, yes. Good luck with that!
- az226 3y agoNo motivation needed whatsoever. Just check out page 27, table 5. The data speaks for itself.
- TradingPlaces 3y agoNo, you are speaking for the data.