4 ms·

It's the right direction of course but the concurrent release with Harvard sort of opens them up to antitrust probe tbh. Clearly the admission offices are all

It's the right direction of course but the concurrent release with Harvard sort of opens them up to antitrust probe tbh. Clearly the admission offices are all synchronizing policy in backchannels (or frontchannels).

NewJazz 2y ago
What's the antitrust angle? SAT and ACT are administered by different companies, right? Do Caltech or Harvard have some sort of stake in either of them?
- mimikatz 2y ago
  It is just those are objective measures and lead to minority groups being discriminated against (notably Asians) having data to prove it.
  - NewJazz 2y ago
    SCOTUS ruled that universities can't use race as a factor for admission. Like, at all. Asian demographics are usually scoring higher on these tests. None of this has anything to do with antitrust.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - sandspar 2y ago
      Colleges still use race in admissions. They just obfuscate it slightly. For example, they preferentially admit people by zipcode, i.e. by the degree to which the neighborhood is non-white, non-Jewish, and non-Asian. They encourage applicants to write about their experiences with discrimination in their applicant letters. They also accept people scoring in the top percentage of grades at a school (which preferentially admits students from worse schools with lower standards i.e. students from black and Hispanic schools). I assume they use a variety of other techniques as well.
      - NewJazz 2y ago
        None of this has anything to do with antitrust
        sandspar 2y ago
        Your post contained a possible misconception, that being legally barred from using race at all means they functionally don't use race at all.
- zugi 2y ago
  Top schools compete with each for students. Collaborating to keep prices high or keep admissions criteria consistent in a way that reduces competition between the schools would open them up to anti-trust complaints. But that would be hard to prove. If two gas stations collude to set prices, that violates anti-trust law. But if they just follow suit as they see the other raise or lower prices, that's generally legal, as long as there isn't a secret or understood agreement. I expect the latter is more what's going on here.
  - NewJazz 2y ago
    But for there to be an antitrust case, consumers or suppliers must have been harmed in some manner to the benefit of the trust. Standardized testing costs are pretty low (especially compared to tuition), and they don't reach the colleges/unis.

NewJazz 2y ago

What's the antitrust angle? SAT and ACT are administered by different companies, right? Do Caltech or Harvard have some sort of stake in either of them?

mimikatz 2y ago
It is just those are objective measures and lead to minority groups being discriminated against (notably Asians) having data to prove it.
- NewJazz 2y ago
  SCOTUS ruled that universities can't use race as a factor for admission. Like, at all. Asian demographics are usually scoring higher on these tests. None of this has anything to do with antitrust.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - sandspar 2y ago
    Colleges still use race in admissions. They just obfuscate it slightly. For example, they preferentially admit people by zipcode, i.e. by the degree to which the neighborhood is non-white, non-Jewish, and non-Asian. They encourage applicants to write about their experiences with discrimination in their applicant letters. They also accept people scoring in the top percentage of grades at a school (which preferentially admits students from worse schools with lower standards i.e. students from black and Hispanic schools). I assume they use a variety of other techniques as well.
    - NewJazz 2y ago
      None of this has anything to do with antitrust
      - sandspar 2y ago
        Your post contained a possible misconception, that being legally barred from using race at all means they functionally don't use race at all.
zugi 2y ago
Top schools compete with each for students. Collaborating to keep prices high or keep admissions criteria consistent in a way that reduces competition between the schools would open them up to anti-trust complaints. But that would be hard to prove. If two gas stations collude to set prices, that violates anti-trust law. But if they just follow suit as they see the other raise or lower prices, that's generally legal, as long as there isn't a secret or understood agreement. I expect the latter is more what's going on here.
- NewJazz 2y ago
  But for there to be an antitrust case, consumers or suppliers must have been harmed in some manner to the benefit of the trust. Standardized testing costs are pretty low (especially compared to tuition), and they don't reach the colleges/unis.