Harvard says it... considers “tips,” or admissions advantages, for some applicants. The plaintiffs say the college gives tips to five groups: racial and ethnic minorities; legacies, or the children of Harvard or Radcliffe alumni; relatives of a Harvard donor; the children of staff or faculty members; and recruited athletes....So "busy" is code for... Asian? Or is it a fair negative assessment of students who use the strategy of working very hard to achieve great paper credentials? If it's true that 1. Harvard thinks students like that don't enhance the college experience for other students, and 2. Asian applicants are more likely to adopt this strategy for doing well on tests, then lopping "busy" students might be defended as not intentionally but only accidentally hurting many more Asian applicants. But doesn't it still seem likely that a stereotype about Asians would cause more Asian applicants to get dinged as "busy"?
It also helps to secure a spot on the “dean’s interest list” or the “director’s interest list”... [and the] little-known Z-list....
Harvard says it tries each year to build a diverse class of “citizens and citizen-leaders” who will help shape the future of society.... [T]he court papers describe a continuing process called “a lop,” which the plaintiffs say is used to shape the demographic profile of the class.
As the admissions process winds down, the dean and the director of admissions review the pool of tentatively admitted students and decide how many need to be “lopped,” by having their status changed from “admit” to “waitlist” or “deny,” the court papers say....
In the recently unredacted court filings, several Asian-American applicants were described in conspicuously similar terms. One was described as “busy and bright,” but the “case will look like many others without late info.” Another was “very busy” but “doesn’t go extra mile, thus she looks like many w/ this profile.” Yet another was “bright & busy” but it was “a bit difficult to see what would hold him in during a lop.”
৩০ জুলাই, ২০১৮
"‘Lopping,’ ‘Tips’ and the ‘Z-List’: Bias Lawsuit Explores Harvard’s Admissions Secrets."
The NYT continues to follow the lawsuit accusing Harvard of anti-Asian discrimination:
এতে সদস্যতা:
মন্তব্যগুলি পোস্ট করুন (Atom)
পোস্টগুলি
৭৬টি মন্তব্য:
So it's not much different from Canadian Immigration.
Harvard is a private institution and can do whatever it wants to, though it is good that their shenanigans get exposed for what they are.
Public colleges and universities should accept all comers with the means to pay tuition and use the freshman year to weed out those who should not be there based strictly on grades.
Harvard will lose this one and I can only hope it costs them a substantial share of their endowment.
Harvard's secret definition of what it considers "diversity: "they all look different, but they all think the way we do."
Hagar said...
Harvard is a private institution and can do whatever it wants to, though it is good that their shenanigans get exposed for what they are.
*****************
Sure. Tell that to the wedding cake designers, the Chik-Fil-A chain, the all-male golf clubs.....
If Harvard were committed to building a "community", then it might decide to exclude applicants who tend to hang only with those who are "like" them, because they wouldn't contribute to the broader community. When I was there (Class of '65) that would have described the "preppies" (graduates of the prestigious boarding schools), a lot of the "brains", many of the "jocks", and others. From my observation, at that time there were plenty of such groups; Harvard was not excluding them. I recall someone saying, It's not as important that you went to Harvard as it is which Harvard you went to. I doubt that this has changed.
If Harvard would like my (free) advice, they would (a) settle this case and admit Asians on a color-blind basis, and (b) abandon the practices and policies that have earned them a rating by FIRE (Foundation for Individual Rights in Education) as one of the 10 worst in US hugher education.
Like a middle-class Catholic kid, Asians need to be athletes to get a leg up at Harvard. Jeremy Lin is a good example.
Whites at Harvard are mostly Jewish. About 20-25 percent of the class is Jewish. They are way over-represented. You also get a lot of legacy WASPs as well. It’s an insular place of mostly douchebags. The athletes are pretty normal but the rest of the class is Jared Kushner type guys. Who wants to go to school with a bunch of Kushners. Wannabe WASPS.
Asians don’t need the Ivy League. They excel at good schools like UCLA.
Shorter version: It's rigged 6 ways from Sunday, there being a rule against every applicant, but that is waived for money and influence, except when it is not waived for a few because we want to appear fair.
75% of kids at Harvard come from families whose annual income exceeds $250,000 a year. Diversity is a marketing term. It’s mostly a school of spoiled rich kids. The Asians are too good for that place. They really are. They don’t need it st all. It’s a school for wealthy insecure WASPS and Jews.
mccullough said...
Asians don’t need the Ivy League. They excel at good schools like UCLA.
***************************************************************************
That's "mighty white of you", sir, to define for Asians what they "need."
I'm sure the judge in this case will find that line of thinking to be a slam-dunk.
"Dismissed, with prejudice!"
"So "busy" is code for... Asian? Or is it a fair negative assessment of students who use the strategy of working very hard to achieve great paper credentials? If it's true that 1. Harvard thinks students like that don't enhance the college experience for other students, and 2. Asian applicants are more likely to adopt this strategy for doing well on tests, then lopping "busy" students might be defended as not intentionally but only accidentally hurting many more Asian applicants."
Asians "adopted" a "strategy" in response to the stated criteria Harvard applies, boosting their extracurriculars to overcome the academics-only stereotype. But that meant Harvard could and can no longer discriminate against them by just using the "neutral" nonacademic criterion. Gotta invent something else. Hey, let's hold busy-ness against them! Besides other "personality" downgrades.
One result of the supposedly fair negative Anti-Asian assessment is that each recent class ended up with just about the same percentage of blacks. What are the odds?
Of course, it's all political BS. No one tests whether the enrolled students, particularly the desired minorities, enhance the college experience for other students, and do so more than non-admitted students elsewhere.
The entire concept of "diversity" is bogus. It means "ethnic diversity." It is diametrically opposed to "achievement on the merits."
It is, in essence, groupthink for mostly white liberals who want to purge their own guilt of not knowing any blacks and having cushy middle-management jobs.
To be clear, I am sympathetic to blacks, since the country did oppress them for many years (slavery, Civil War, Jim Crow, racial covenants).
But, carving out an exception for blacks is one thing. Expanding the exception to mean "anybody who is not a white male" is just stupid.
They cultivate their garden of humanity, choosing cuttings and seed for their flower beds, to suit their aesthetic purposes, or so they say.
This would be an innocent if rather eccentric exercise, were it not that their social role as a step in the cursus honorum, the selection of those who, through their place in that garden, will hold power over the rest. They play a large, unofficial role in selecting future leaders.
This makes the process critical, to American and global society. The assertion that it is an innocent exercise in human aesthetics is therefore disingenuous.
To be clear, I am sympathetic to blacks, since the country did oppress them for many years (slavery, Civil War, Jim Crow, racial covenants).
Indentured and exploited (by Americans) peoples include many more than just africans. Frankly, I'd put native Americans at the top of the list. I mean, plagues, stealing their land, forcing them into death marches, and just be bad guests.
Wait a second. College is designed to be an experience? I thought it was for learning, challenges, skill development, and exposure to ideas and information. Going to Disneyland, a nightclub, ski resort is an experience.
No wonder someone like Ocasio-Cortez with degrees in economics and international relations seems to know almost nothing about either, but she did have an experience. That should be on her diploma.
UCLA ain't all that.
Just saying.
hey! as Al Smith would say; let's take a look at the record!
A) Harvard Grades on a Curve
B) those Wiley Orient Gentlemen are WAY smarter than us richie rich kids
C) the actual number of blacks is NOT enough to skew the curve down far enough to party
D) ERGO: There needs to be STRICT LIMITS on how many of those Busy Wogs get to mess up MY CURVE. What the HELL! My Daddy didn't contribute all that money for me to flunk out!
DUH!!!
some clueless old guy said: Wait a second. College is designed to be an experience? I thought it was for learning, challenges, skill development, and exposure to ideas and information. Going to Disneyland, a nightclub, ski resort is an experience.
Have you Been to college? Disneyland, a nightclub, ski resort doesn't BEGIN to describe to Full College Experience.
Frankly, I'd put native Americans at the top of the list. I mean, plagues, stealing their land, forcing them into death marches, and just be bad guests.
We compensated them by allowing them to form there own private countries and make millions off of casinos.
Indentured and exploited (by Americans) peoples include many more than just africans. Frankly, I'd put native Americans at the top of the list. I mean, plagues, stealing their land, forcing them into death marches, and just be bad guests.
Yeah, well, you can worry about any "groups" you want. The history of pioneers and battles with Indian tribes is messy, but I don't lose too much sleep over it, and don't think it factors too much into what Harvard is doing.
Ann said "But doesn't it still seem likely that that a stereotype about Asians would cause more Asian applicant to get dinged as "busy"?"
Answer - of course. But. . ., I think it is an admitted characteristic of a certain culture of Chinese immigrants (the type that get into Stuyvesant) -one described by Amy Chua -- that rigorously trains and pushes kids from a very early age to excel and be ready to test well. This culture exists. And... I'm going to risk saying it, that kind of culture produces some really brilliant people but it might also produce a lot of what we used to call "tools."
But, but... if Harvard were really trying to weed out the "tools" (which I think is defensible), then the alumni interviews of the rejected students should below average personality scores, and they did not. Those down arrows were added by the admissions office, and I believe Harvard is guilty as charged.
I don't feel sorry for any Asian-Americans who suffer this discrimination but vote Democrat.
Busy, smart, accomplished Asians are out. Meanwhile, if you are a lily-white, in-bred ne'er-do-well of privilege, you are in and in for free.
@Mccullogh I'd like to know where you get your numbers for Jewish students and especially for douchebags. I can find nothing that cites the religious affiliation of Harvard students you must know more about my alma mater than I do. BTW you forgot Ryan Fitzpatrick, Matt Birk, Cameron Brate and many others. Harvard has its quota of idiots, but also has some of the best people in the world. Personally I think the Asians have a strong case, at the same time I know that the admissions committee has historically done a wonderful job of putting together classes of outstanding individuals.
Asians dominate undergraduate classes at UC Berkeley (42%) and UCLA (40%).
Maybe, the ones wrongly rejected at Harvard should instead go to the California schools.
Or maybe Leftist administrators at Harvard should not engage in racial bigotry and discrimination.
The internal Harvard study detailed by the lawsuit should be sufficient on its own. Whites are admitted at about 100% of the rate they would be admitted if Harvard rated people purely on academics. The rest of the admissions process exists to take away slots from Asian-Amercians to give to African-Americans and Hispanic-Americans.
This cannot be justified by diversity, because Asian-Americans come from a wider diversity of cultural backgrounds than African-Americans. This cannot be justified by historical injustices, because East Asians faced both legal discrimination and social discrimination (like mob violence) more severe than was ever faced by Hispanic-Americans.
It is instead absolute, 100% pure, racial discrimination against Asians in favor of peoples who average about half European ancestry.
Now, if Harvard feels it wishes to be a bastion of discrimination in favor of people descended from Europeans, as a private institution I fell it should be permitted to do so. Under the same restrictions as any other college or university that chooses to engage in racial discrimination. Which means, not only total ineligibility for federal funding, and ineligibility of students for federal grants and loans, but also ineligibility for tax-exempt status per the IRS ruling in the Bob Jones University case.
Universities are entering an era when they are going to be bled white (sorry) by lawsuits over "Diversity" driven discrimination.
Seriously, just because some asian kid
is smarter than i am
has better grades than i do
works harder than i do
has more activities than i do
writes a better essay than i do
You think he should be able to Steal MY spot? AND mess up the curve?
That's NOT what harvard is about dude!
The liberal concept of "diversity" is a color judgment that denies individual dignity, includes a progressive, normalized form of discrimination based on race, sex, etc.
Steven said "The rest of the admissions process exists to take away slots from Asian-Amercians to give to African-Americans and Hispanic-Americans."
Actually, I think the plaintiffs have made a pretty solid argument that if you ignore the other minority populations, Asian Americans are straight up discriminated against in favor of whites, and I believe that is after you throw out the legacies and athletes (both skew white).
If plaintiffs can make the strong statistical case that Harvard favors non-legacy/non-athlete whites over Asians, then you put Harvard in the awkward position of having to show that something is, on average, wrong with their Asian applicant pool that justifies the discrimination or tell the truth and say that you just decided to impose a cap.
the college gives tips to . . . legacies, or the children of Harvard or Radcliffe alumni; relatives of a Harvard donor; the children of staff or faculty members
Ninety percent of Harvard's problems would go away if they simply checked their privilege. The perpetuation of unmerited elitism is no virtue.
Khesanh 0802 said...
"I can find nothing that cites the religious affiliation of Harvard students you must know more about my alma mater than I do."
http://www.unz.com/runz/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/
"In fact, Harvard reported that 45.0 percent of its undergraduates in 2011 were white Americans, but since Jews were 25 percent of the student body, the enrollment of non-Jewish whites might have been as low as 20 percent, though the true figure was probably somewhat higher."
Harvard is used to competing only with Yale for producing those President citizen-leaders. Wouldn’t want to do anything to fuck up their odds by graduating a bunch of unelectable Asians.
Harvard is a private institution and can do whatever it wants to...
Nope. There are only two truly private institutions in the US of which I'm aware. Harvard isn't one of them. They take the proverbial king's coin; they follow the king's rules.
The lawsuit illuminates how the admissions sausage is made. It is not pretty. Competitive applicants look academically similar. The rest is social engineering and whimsy.
It is just as interesting how Harvard admissions has erected a wall of antiseptic language to protect their own consciences from what they are really doing. On what planet is it appropriate to use code words to identify an ethnic group, i.e. busy means Asian, so you do not have to admit to yourself what you are doing? How do you casually "lop" a high school senior because they are the wrong color, ethnicity, come from a stable home, etc.? One "lops" shrubbery, not people. The use of this language suggests they know what they are doing is wrong but coding it in their own language helps them sleep at night.
I can see why Harvard fought this tooth and nail.
"only two truly private institutions in the US"
Here's the list i found on the interwebs -- of US colleges that don't take federal money:
Bethlehem College & Seminary (Minnesota)
Boyce College (Kentucky)
Christendom College (Virginia)
Faith Bible College (Maine)
Grace Baptist College (Michigan)
Grove City College (Pennsylvania)
Gutenberg College (Oregon)
Hillsdale College (Michigan)
Mid-America Baptist Theological Seminary (Tennessee)
New College Franklin (Tennessee)
New Saint Andrews College (Idaho)
Patrick Henry College (Virginia)
Pensacola Christian College (Florida)
Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary (Texas)
Wyoming Catholic College (Wyoming)
(deanclancy.com/a-list-of-colleges-that-dont-take-federal-money/)
Unz makes a very strong case that Harvard discriminates in favor of Jews, against equally- or better-qualified Asians and whites. At one time, the proportion of Jews in the Harvard student body was more than justified by their academic performance, but that is no longer the case. The same might be said for the proportion of Jews in the administration.
At long last Genetics is coming up with some very uncomfortable truths.
After a long and difficult pregnancy, Nature Genetics finally gave birth to a big paper about genetic influences on educational achievement. Now we know more of the genes that result in high heritability of phenotypes like educational attainment – including something about the metabolic paths involved. These results don’t explain all the heritability we see – in particular the part due to rare deleterious variants – but they explain some. Now, from a gene sample, knowing nothing else, we can say something about some kid’s likelihood of completing college. People in the bottom quintile of the polygenic score had a 10% chance of graduating, those in the top quintile had a 55% chance. Obviously if we knew his grades, test scores, permanent record and genotype, we could make an even better prediction: still, this is interesting.
As usual we have public intellectuals fulfilling their duties: trying to stuff falsehoods into the heads of the general public.
I expect complete hysteria toward these authors.
It is getting harder and harder to lie about intelligence.
There are some interesting about the math abilities of the Igbo tribe in Nigeria.
I talked to an Igbo immigrant with two engineering degrees last month. He was joining the US military.
He was pleased when I asked him if he was Ibo (now called Igbo). They are known for math facility. There are many Igbos in New York working as "quants" in financial services.
The future is coming like a freight train and the left is not prepared.
At one time, the proportion of Jews in the Harvard student body was more than justified by their academic performance, but that is no longer the case.
Why?
Gahrie said...
"Why?"
Do you want me to cut-and-paste the whole article here?
http://www.unz.com/runz/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/
The dean and the director of admissions "have been busy lopping Asians."
Don't overthink this. Harvard is, and always has been, an institution that selected students from groups of applicants they liked, and denied admission to members of groups they disliked. They just got caught doing so again, is all.
The entity caught in the crosshairs is TSCOTUS, not Harvard. Under their interstate commerce rulings, Harvard is from one perspective doing the right thing. From another they are not. I expect TSCOTUS to square the circle by saying that Harvard, like UT is doing the right thing. And AA will be gone “in 10 years or so”. They will find a way to kick the can down the road because their rulings about buyers v sellers since the redlining days has been skewed and illogical. Harvard would be smart to simply say that educational merit has no merit in their scheme. Yes, some Asians get screwed but so what? There are too many applicants for too few spots. Harvard HAS to have a scheme to lop applicants and one method is just as valid as another. I expect TSCOTUS would buy that defense. After all, it IS their milieu.
They take the proverbial king's coin; they follow the king's rules.
You are right. I forgot about that SCOTUS decision.
And actually, it gets worse than that. The Gov't argued that it did not matter what the colleges did. Even if they refused all government money of any kind, it was enough that some student might be receiving a government subsidy without the college even knowing about it, and that would be enough to hold the college to all the Federal affirmative action, etc. etc. rules.
Jay Elink - so what is your solution?
Or do you just like to nag?
Harvard would be worth going to if they'd get the women out.
In the novel "The Sand Pebbles" the boss of the coolies aboard the USS San Pablo was a wicked old man called "Lop-Eye Ching, in reference to his mutilated eye. Maybe that's what Harvard was alluding to?
I concede the 25% Jewish figure for undergrads at Harvard. I am surprised it is that high only because it never seemed important to me one way or the other. I will repeat John Roberts with a little modification: The best way to stop discriminating is to stop discriminating. As I told my son earlier today a pure test based admissions policy in the Ivies will be great for the next tier of schools who will benefit from all the great white, black and Hispanic kids who don't make the Ivy cut.
Lopping Tips and no Mohel jokes?
I don't even know you people.
" because East Asians faced both legal discrimination and social discrimination (like mob violence) more severe than was ever faced by Hispanic-Americans."
This is not correct. There were very few Asians in the US at the time any were ever mistreated. And the vast majority came long after that, post 1945. There are extremely few Asians of any sort in the US with an ancestral experience of mistreatment, other than by discrimination by educational institutions, Affirmative Action in other words, of the same nature as Harvards. This includes, say, busing schemes in various cities, in which Asians were probably even more abused than whites.
This is not really about Harvard alone. All the Ivies are going to be affected if the Asians win. Apparently the Association of Black Admission and Financial Aid Officers of the Ivy League and Sister Schools gets together to help coordinate entry of Black/minority students throughout the Ivies.
The reality is that unless a school uses only some kind of universal test score system as the sole entry determinant it will be guilty of discrimination.
@Jack Wayne Maybe the new SCOTUS will get their courage up and decide that no discrimination is appropriate, It would be a great moment in sport.
This is not correct. There were very few Asians in the US at the time any were ever mistreated
please go to Rock Springs wyoming, and tell that to the graves
This is not correct. There were very few Asians in the US at the time any were ever mistreated.
Why do "Chinatown"s exist?
"Busy" does not seem like a negative prognostic of college success.
"There were very few Asians in the US at the time any were ever mistreated."
While this is true to the extent that you intend, it doesn't affect the question. Because a) Asians are not asking for special dispensation or assistance, in recompense for past maltreatment. they're merely asking for fairness right now. So it's kind of irrelevant.
And b) I'm sure you're aware the extent to which black enrollment at elite schools is inflated by African students (as in, from Africa, not African-American). They're pumping up the numbers without having descended from American victims either.
"Why do "Chinatown"s exist?"
For the same reason ethnic enclaves existed. People group together.
In San Francisco North Beach was famously Italian. It still is to a degree.
And Daly City was extremely Filipino in spite of almost everyone there coming post-1965.
And there is still a Chinatown, almost 100% Chinese even today, in spite of Chinese living all over the place.
I’m sure everyone one of the successful diversity applicants is articulate and bright and clean and nice-looking.
"please go to Rock Springs wyoming, and tell that to the graves"
How many Chinese in the US, today, are descendants of survivors of such?
The truth is that test scores, grades and piano recitals are not necessarily indicative of success in the real world. Children of Paper Tiger Moms
One reason to congregate - mutual aid, of various sorts.
Such as "Benevolent Associations", or Tongs.
Tong
Other ethnicities had similar, of various derivations and characters.
Some of these Mario Puzo wrote about, others turned into things like The Bank of Italy though of course the name changed a bit later.
"The truth is that test scores, grades and piano recitals are not necessarily indicative of success in the real world. "
No, but they are very good indicators of probabilities.
"Children of Paper Tiger Moms"
Only one of no experience will discount the formidable abilities of a Chinese mama.
Probabilistically of course.
You have not seen the world, or enough of it I think.
Blogger Howard said...
The truth is that test scores, grades and piano recitals are not necessarily indicative of success in the real world.
No, but that is the way to bet. I guess you prefer rap music and baby mamas.
"The truth is that test scores, grades and piano recitals are not necessarily indicative of success in the real world."
Perhaps not, but the absence of such is definitely not proof of superior aptitude, which seems to be the working hypothesis of so-called diversity offices.
I understand that there are a good number of Nobel Prize winners (in STEM fields) who graduated from Stuyvesant and Bronx HS of Science. Admission to these schools used to be based solely on competitive exam. So this model works.....,I had a friend who graduated from Yale. He was a bit of a slacker, but he did reasonably well in life. He claimed that a lot of his success came from having the cachet of a Yale diploma. So that model works too.......Maybe they should do an experiment: Have one Ivy school select students strictly on merit and another Ivy choose the well rounded and the well connected with an eye to what liberals currently define as diverse. Give it a century or two and see what happens.
@Jupiter: I checked the Unz article you linked (6:43 PM) and it didn't contain the information about the percentage of Jewish students at Harvard for which you cited it. Could you mean a different Unz article?
There is a very large pool of similarly qualified applicants for a very small number of spots.There is no fair way to distinguish between most of them. They clearly do not do what they advertise just as many other private schools. One such had the audacity to wait list my daughter about 14 years ago. They swore up and down that they did not consider SATs. Academically, she never got a B in any class during her entire scholastic career. She took many AP classes which allowed her to finish third in her high school class in a magnet program in one of the best public high schools in the country. She was a girl scout gold award earner. She was leader of her church youth group and captain of the cheerleading team. Her recommendations were glowing. But, she got mid 1300s on her SATs. Very good but less than a lot of other of their applicants. Hence she became plan B. The school wasn't a top choice for her, but the process was instructive of the games they play. Ultimately, people who follow their dreams and work hard will succeed anyway as she has,an MD now finishing her neonatology fellowship.
Howard: The truth is that test scores, grades and piano recitals are not necessarily indicative of success in the real world.
Standardized test scores are pretty good predictors of "success in the real world", everybody's favorite anecdotes about the genius who performed miserably and the super-scorer who ended up as a homeless wino notwithstanding. (Those people exist, but, as Michael K suggests, that ain't the way to bet.)
Elliot A: She was leader of her church youth group and captain of the cheerleading team.
I've read that admissions committees at Ivies will hold "flyover" extracurriculars like that against a candidate.
Harvard is a private organization.
BUT!!!!
Harvard has promised that they will act according to the law that governs public universities.
Harvard has created a contractual obligation for itself to act as they have promised.
These promises are enforceable by those to whom they have made the promises: students, former students, and alumni.
Come on, Hagar.
Know the facts.
The Godfather said...
"@Jupiter: I checked the Unz article you linked (6:43 PM) and it didn't contain the information about the percentage of Jewish students at Harvard for which you cited it."
It's a long article, but it's in there; "In fact, Harvard reported that 45.0 percent of its undergraduates in 2011 were white Americans, but since Jews were 25 percent of the student body,"
This is your friendly reminder that CalTech does not have racial or ethnic preferences, legacy preferences or athletic preferences, and somehow they are able to recruit the most elite students. Huh.
When voters barred the University of California from using racial/ethnic preferences in admissions, UC did a study on preferences based on economic disadvantage. It concluded that favoring students from lower-income, non-English-speaking families would help Asian-Americans, who disproportionately come from immigrant families. The idea was dropped. Lots of Asian kids have overcome disadvantages. They do it by being "busy."
These days, Asian-American achievers are told not to play musical instruments (piano, violin) or sports (table tennis, tennis, golf) considered "too Asian."
Blacks, who make up about 12% of the population, are 16% of Harvard admits.
একটি মন্তব্য পোস্ট করুন