Harvard records show discrimination against Asian-Americans

[nosuchreality]

Here's a rather simple question which shows greater merit?  The kid that did several years of SAT prep camps to prepare and achieve a 2400 after multiple test attempts or the kid that achieved a 2200 or even 2000 taking the SAT once? Without attending multiple prep camps?

It is a stupid question.  No one will know how many times someone tried to take the test.  Some could also argue that someone who cared enough to take it multiple times to get a better score is a hard worker whose efforts should be rewarded.

The UC system requires ALL test scores to be sent, our UC system, uses only the best score but requires all be sent..  Yale, Georgetown, U of Penn, etc. require all scores to be sent. 
https://blog.prepscholar.com/colleges-requiring-all-sat-scores-complete-list

 

[bones]

As for your unremarkable Asian kid in Irvine being remarkable elsewhere, it depends. JIMHO, If they're Whitey in an Irvinesque suburb of Whiteville, no they look pretty unremarkable. If they're Whitey coming out of Podunk USA, then yes, they are.  But then again, as Asian in Podunk, they'll be even more remarkable, IMHO.

But are they?  There are over 30,000 secondary schools in the US.  Harvard admitted less than 2,000 kids last year.  Assuming Harvard is only allowed to take one kid per school (not true), then only 6.5% of US schools even had a Harvard admit and this isn't even counting international kids and their international schools.  There are a lot of Podunk schools (and schools everywhere) with zero admits.  It's just a hard school to get into.  I'm sure there is some merit to all this but the numbers are the numbers.  22% of the 2,000 were Asian (or at least checked the Asian box), which means I'm sure there a few percentage points more that are part Asian but chose not to check the Asian box.  What's the end goal here?  For Harvard to look like Portola High? 

 

[Perspective]

I suggest that all parents who own a house in Irvine for the sake of their kids' schooling should immediately sell and move to Montana, or Compton, or the Central Valley. Or move abroad and educate your kids in the expat/international school system. If you want to game the system for college admissions that is.

Also, preferably have your kid do an obscure sport and get really good at it.
Male synchronized swimming anybody?
Alpine yodeling and goat herding?
Anything to stand out...

I get that this comment is made in frustration, but it goes to the broader issue. Kids from Compton and the Central Valley are at a distinct disadvantage to Irvine kids, simply because they chose the wrong parents. There's a lot of entitled privilege in this comment.

Your Irvine child from a college-educated two-parent (both likely hold undergrad degrees and probably hold grad degrees), extremely safe neighborhood, a culture that values learning (in the family, the community, and the school system), whose parents spend many hours and dollars every week for two decades helping with schoolwork and other enrichment activities, is extremely privileged/fortunate/advantaged.

I don't support using race as a factor in college admissions, but I highly favor using socio-economic factors.

 

[Kings]

As for your unremarkable Asian kid in Irvine being remarkable elsewhere, it depends. JIMHO, If they're Whitey in an Irvinesque suburb of Whiteville, no they look pretty unremarkable. If they're Whitey coming out of Podunk USA, then yes, they are.  But then again, as Asian in Podunk, they'll be even more remarkable, IMHO.

But are they?  There are over 30,000 secondary schools in the US.  Harvard admitted less than 2,000 kids last year.  Assuming Harvard is only allowed to take one kid per school (not true), then only 6.5% of US schools even had a Harvard admit and this isn't even counting international kids and their international schools.  There are a lot of Podunk schools (and schools everywhere) with zero admits.  It's just a hard school to get into.  I'm sure there is some merit to all this but the numbers are the numbers.  22% of the 2,000 were Asian (or at least checked the Asian box), which means I'm sure there a few percentage points more that are part Asian but chose not to check the Asian box.  What's the end goal here?  For Harvard to look like Portola High?

the boxes clearly aren't working, as evident by harvard's very own 1/1024 native american 

 

[misme]

I suggest that all parents who own a house in Irvine for the sake of their kids' schooling should immediately sell and move to Montana, or Compton, or the Central Valley. Or move abroad and educate your kids in the expat/international school system. If you want to game the system for college admissions that is.

Also, preferably have your kid do an obscure sport and get really good at it.
Male synchronized swimming anybody?
Alpine yodeling and goat herding?
Anything to stand out...

I get that this comment is made in frustration, but it goes to the broader issue. Kids from Compton and the Central Valley are at a distinct disadvantage to Irvine kids, simply because they chose the wrong parents. There's a lot of entitled privilege in this comment.

Your Irvine child from a college-educated two-parent (both likely hold undergrad degrees and probably hold grad degrees), extremely safe neighborhood, a culture that values learning (in the family, the community, and the school system), whose parents spend many hours and dollars every week for two decades helping with schoolwork and other enrichment activities, is extremely privileged/fortunate/advantaged.

I don't support using race as a factor in college admissions, but I highly favor using socio-economic factors.

I agree with you on using socio-economic factors as a basis for affirmative action, not race.

There is some overlap between race and socio-economic factors such that using economic class as proxy would secondarily help improve racial diversity within an admitted class cohort.  But without outright racial quotas.

It speaks to a deeply ingrained stereotype in the United States that certain races=poverty and other races are rich and privileged, which is a vast oversimplification.

Fresh Prince of Bel Air family versus Appalachian coal miner family versus Hmong refugee family in the Central Valley.
OK, now let's look at African American from single parent household in inner city Chicago, versus Connecticut hedge fund scion WASP versus rich Chinese foreign national buying a 2 million dollar house in Irvine so their kids can attend public schools.  Who has privilege? Which kid deserves to have affirmative action work for them in these case? Should it be on the basis of race?

 

[bones]

Harvard already has initiatives in place that speak to this. 1 in 5 undergrads pay $0 bc their family income is <$65k.  The major sticking point for these Ivy?s with low admit rates and small freshman classes is the legacy piece. Legacies plus athletes eat into a big piece of the admissions pie. UC schools did away with legacies but I can?t see Ivys following suit. 

 

[Perspective]

Those are all legitimately fair questions we should be asking, or at least, folks who create college admission standards should be asking. Any resulting standards we create, will be unfair, but hopefully fairer. The unfairness is inherent in the luck of birth. No college admissions standards are going to fix this.

 

[Irvine Dream]

I don't support using race as a factor in college admissions, but I highly favor using socio-economic factors.

So your solution is to penalize the hard working students who chose the wrong, advantaged parents eventhough they don't anything for granted and works hard.  In my experience most of the social engineering advocates are hypocrytes who will never hire or utilize services of anyone less than the best when they really need something

 

[Perspective]

I don't support using race as a factor in college admissions, but I highly favor using socio-economic factors.

So your solution is to penalize the hard working students who chose the wrong, advantaged parents eventhough they don't anything for granted and works hard.  In my experience most of the social engineering advocates are hypocrytes who will never hire or utilize services of anyone less than the best when they really need something

There are only so many Harvard frosh seats available every year. Thousands of hard-working extremely qualified applicants will be denied admission (and have to settle for another great academic institution). There is no perfectly fair way to determine who's admitted.

Share your perfect admissions program.

 

[Irvine Dream]

Share your perfect admissions program.

Be transparent, say X % based on standardized test scores, y% based on race, Z% based on socio-economic status.  Don't BS and say holistic evalaution

 

[WTTCHMN]

Share your perfect admissions program.

A lottery.

 

[Kings]

Share your perfect admissions program.

Be transparent, say X % based on standardized test scores, y% based on race, Z% based on socio-economic status.  Don't BS and say holistic evalaution

see, i wouldn't mind if companies, colleges, whatever were transparent in their hiring or admittance practices.  nobody wants to hear the truth though because the truth is racist, sexist, homophobic, etc. (cue hillary)

 

[Happiness]

The schools who want to discriminate can just stop taking public money. Then they can discriminate all they want.

 

[fortune11]

Harvard already has initiatives in place that speak to this. 1 in 5 undergrads pay $0 bc their family income is <$65k.  The major sticking point for these Ivy?s with low admit rates and small freshman classes is the legacy piece. Legacies plus athletes eat into a big piece of the admissions pie. UC schools did away with legacies but I can?t see Ivys following suit.

+1

This is the Crux of the problem.

I interviewed 9 kids for my school (will remain unnamed but suffice to say right up there) last year , recommended 3 of them , all I felt were extremely qualified but none got in .

One guy had so much on his resume (original stuff like creative arts , part of it got commercialized) that I was left scratching my head as to how did I myself ever manage to get in .

Think about it ? over the decades , wealth levels have gone up, likes marrying likes has gone up, and the desire to attend these institutions has skyrocketed. But they have monopoly on supply . Bmw and Mercedes had scarcity value at one point in the 80s now they have a model for every budget

The ?market ? solution is for these universities to launch other , satellite campuses . But they won?t ? as the current setup incentivizes prestige and snobbery over really trying to meet consumer demand.  Just witness their endowments which now rival many sovereign wealth funds .

 

[WTTCHMN]

The ?market ? solution is for these universities to launch other , satellite campuses . But they won?t ? as the current setup incentivizes prestige and snobbery over really trying to meet consumer demand.

Satellite campuses have been around for a while.  You haven't heard about Cornell-Tech?  Wharton Beijing?  NYU Abu Dhabi?

LinkedIn is littered with resumes featuring the HBS logo boasting some bogus Executive Education certificate from Harvard.

Closer to home, how about USC Orange County?  Hell, even Cal State Fullerton has an Irvine campus.

 

[bones]

The ?market ? solution is for these universities to launch other , satellite campuses . But they won?t ? as the current setup incentivizes prestige and snobbery over really trying to meet consumer demand.

Satellite campuses have been around for a while.  You haven't heard about Cornell-Tech?  Wharton Beijing?  NYU Abu Dhabi?

LinkedIn is littered with resumes featuring the HBS logo boasting some bogus Executive Education certificate from Harvard.

Closer to home, how about USC Orange County?  Hell, even Cal State Fullerton has an Irvine campus.

Most of the IVY satellite stuff is at the graduate level or professional certificate level. The undergrad stuff remains pretty pure.

Wharton Beijing is MBA. Cornell Tech is masters. NYU is undergraduate but that ain?t no ivy.

 

[misme]

Harvard already has initiatives in place that speak to this. 1 in 5 undergrads pay $0 bc their family income is <$65k.  The major sticking point for these Ivy?s with low admit rates and small freshman classes is the legacy piece. Legacies plus athletes eat into a big piece of the admissions pie. UC schools did away with legacies but I can?t see Ivys following suit.

the alumni donors are the ones who are helping make these generous financial aid packages possible.

alumni donations tend to go up right as their own children start getting to middle and high school. Coincidence?

 

[misme]

The schools who want to discriminate can just stop taking public money. Then they can discriminate all they want.

even the private schools are subsidized by government  with respect to taxes through their nonprofit status.

 

[WTTCHMN]

The ?market ? solution is for these universities to launch other , satellite campuses . But they won?t ? as the current setup incentivizes prestige and snobbery over really trying to meet consumer demand.

Satellite campuses have been around for a while.  You haven't heard about Cornell-Tech?  Wharton Beijing?  NYU Abu Dhabi?

LinkedIn is littered with resumes featuring the HBS logo boasting some bogus Executive Education certificate from Harvard.

Closer to home, how about USC Orange County?  Hell, even Cal State Fullerton has an Irvine campus.

Most of the IVY satellite stuff is at the graduate level or professional certificate level. The undergrad stuff remains pretty pure.

Wharton Beijing is MBA. Cornell Tech is masters. NYU is undergraduate but that ain?t no ivy.

Yale Singapore is undergraduate.  So is Duke Kunshan.  Qatar is home to satellite undergraduate campuses of Northwestern, Carnegie Mellon, and Georgetown.

The point being, many elite schools have already capitalized on selling off their name for a price.

 

[bones]

The ?market ? solution is for these universities to launch other , satellite campuses . But they won?t ? as the current setup incentivizes prestige and snobbery over really trying to meet consumer demand.

Satellite campuses have been around for a while.  You haven't heard about Cornell-Tech?  Wharton Beijing?  NYU Abu Dhabi?

LinkedIn is littered with resumes featuring the HBS logo boasting some bogus Executive Education certificate from Harvard.

Closer to home, how about USC Orange County?  Hell, even Cal State Fullerton has an Irvine campus.

Most of the IVY satellite stuff is at the graduate level or professional certificate level. The undergrad stuff remains pretty pure.

Wharton Beijing is MBA. Cornell Tech is masters. NYU is undergraduate but that ain?t no ivy.

Yale Singapore is undergraduate.  So is Duke Kunshan.  Qatar is home to satellite undergraduate campuses of Northwestern, Carnegie Mellon, and Georgetown.

The point being, many elite schools have already capitalized on selling off their name for a price.

Ahh yes. Forgot about Yale Singapore. That place also has a 5% admit rate. Is there a lawsuit there too?