• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

NYT: Harvard Rated Asian-American Applicants Lower on Personality Traits, Suit Says

Lupingosei

Banned
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/15/...column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

Harvard consistently rated Asian-American applicants lower than others on traits like “positive personality,” likability, courage, kindness and being “widely respected,” according to an analysis of more than 160,000 student records filed Friday by a group representing Asian-American students in a lawsuit against the university.

“It turns out that the suspicions of Asian-American alumni, students and applicants were right all along,” the group, Students for Fair Admissions, said in a court document laying out the analysis. “Harvard today engages in the same kind of discrimination and stereotyping that it used to justify quotas on Jewish applicants in the 1920s and 1930s.”

Harvard vigorously disagreed on Friday, saying that its own expert analysis showed no discrimination and that seeking diversity is a valuable part of student selection. The university lashed out at the founder of Students for Fair Admissions, Edward Blum, accusing him of using Harvard to replay a previous challenge to affirmative action in college admissions, Fisher v. the University of Texas at Austin. In its 2016 decision in that case, the Supreme Court ruled that race could be used as one of many factors in admissions.

How can one group score worse on personality than all the other groups? Isn't that racist? According to the suit, they have not even met a lot of the people they rated worse than others and denied their application.
 
Come on everyone knows racism is prejudice plus power, and no group is more powerful than Asians. /s

Per Tariq Nasheed (e.g. Mr. "black penises are weapons of mass destruction") a lot of the far-left racial identitarians consider most Asian ethnicities to be honorary white peoplenn because reasons.

Sort of like George Zimmerman becoming an honorary white person. I call it expedient whiteness.
 
far-left racial identitarians consider most Asian ethnicities to be honorary white people because reasons.
Maybe because far right people like to throw asians around as the model minority that everyone else should aspire to.
Sort of like George Zimmerman becoming an honorary white person.
You do know the government considers hispanics white, right?
I call it expedient whiteness.
The concept of who is white changes over time in America. Whats white now was "swarthy" in 1776. Gotta keep those numbers up.
 
Maybe because far right people like to throw asians around as the model minority that everyone else should aspire to.

You mean the same ones who hate any kind of miscegenation? Yeah, they don't like Asians either, and the main thing they like about them are that many Asian nations are ethnostates.

Of course, the alt-right ethnostaters make up a mercifully tiny proportion of the US population, less proportionally than certain other extremist groups in other demographics.

You do know the government considers hispanics white, right?

So? The media and left treat:

1. Hispanics who are illegal immigrants as a "brown person" Donald Trump hates because evil racism.
2. A Hispanic who shoots a black guy as "white person"

"Whiteness" seems to be defined when it meets narrative expedience. It's a boogyman reminiscent of Red Scare tactics.

The concept of who is white changes over time in America. Whats white now was "swarthy" in 1776. Gotta keep those numbers up.

I'll make sure to file your complaint at the next White People Convention.
 

oagboghi2

Member
Not a surprise. They needed an excuse to discriminate, so make up a bullshit factor to judge people on, that is vague enough for Harvard to justify anything.
 
D

Deleted member 713885

Unconfirmed Member
Any time you do a study on races the findings will be seen as racist.
 
Asains are super well represented. Wholistic examining benefits the poor, since score testing benefits the well off. I'd question anyone who just wants test scores to be the only factor, as that would leave out poor asains.

Admissions are based on a lot of things such as legacies, geographic distribution, specials skills, life experiences (like military, first generation higher ed) and more. Blaming AA when legacies and sports take up such a large portion is pretty lame.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

oagboghi2

Member
Asains are super well represented. Wholistic examining benefits the poor, since score testing benefits the well off. I'd question anyone who just wants test scores to be the only factor, as that would leave out poor asains.

Admissions are based on a lot of things such as legacies, geographic distribution, specials skills, life experiences (like military, first generation higher ed) and more. Blaming AA when legacies and sports take up such a large portion is pretty lame.
That has nothing to do with Harvard failing Asians on "personality"
 
That has nothing to do with Harvard failing Asians on "personality"

These topics were touched on in the article, and Edward Blum wants to get rid of AA, so there's the desired outcome.

Not to downplay or toss out the stereotype which IS a common one, but the article does say that alumni interviewers rate candidates fairly equitably, and that admissions does what they want thereafter.

I'm more interested in that old study that Harvard did that found some discrimination against Asian candidates.
 

oagboghi2

Member
These topics were touched on in the article, and Edward Blum wants to get rid of AA, so there's the desired outcome.

Not to downplay or toss out the stereotype which IS a common one, but the article does say that alumni interviewers rate candidates fairly equitably, and that admissions does what they want thereafter.

I'm more interested in that old study that Harvard did that found some discrimination against Asian candidates.
It doesnt matter if they claim to "measure" fairly. If Harvard wants a certain number of Asians, they will find any excuse to block those they don't want. If admissions wants a certain number of another group, they will make up any excuse to let then in.

We know they will do this, becuase this is what they and other ivy leagues have done in the past
 
It doesnt matter if they claim to "measure" fairly. If Harvard wants a certain number of Asians, they will find any excuse to block those they don't want. If admissions wants a certain number of another group, they will make up any excuse to let then in.

We know they will do this, becuase this is what they and other ivy leagues have done in the past

It does matter what they measure for Blum's suit, the data has to support it.

And of course they will find any excuse to admit certain student according to their strategy. Gotta make sure those legacies and sports are taken care of first.
 

oagboghi2

Member
It does matter what they measure for Blum's suit, the data has to support it.

And of course they will find any excuse to admit certain student according to their strategy. Gotta make sure those legacies and sports are taken care of first.
I don't think the sports dept has much influence over harvard's admissions offices.
 

Mohonky

Member
Asains are super well represented. Wholistic examining benefits the poor, since score testing benefits the well off. I'd question anyone who just wants test scores to be the only factor, as that would leave out poor asains.

Admissions are based on a lot of things such as legacies, geographic distribution, specials skills, life experiences (like military, first generation higher ed) and more. Blaming AA when legacies and sports take up such a large portion is pretty lame.
They'll just have to go deeper on the current handicap Asians receive with regard to application on academics.
 
I think we can all agree that Asians have a fairly different upbringing for the most part. Probably a huge factor. More study and stricter household, less time socializing. And these Harvard Assholes get paid for what exactly?
 

DiscoJer

Member
I remember a year or two ago, Mindy Kaling's brother made the news by announcing that he only got into medical school because he pretended to be black, not Indian

The reality is that colleges prejudiced against some races and towards others. They want to set things right but you can't fix history by discriminating in the other direction
 

Cato

Banned
I remember a year or two ago, Mindy Kaling's brother made the news by announcing that he only got into medical school because he pretended to be black, not Indian

The reality is that colleges prejudiced against some races and towards others. They want to set things right but you can't fix history by discriminating in the other direction


Shawn King says: Mindy's brother did nothing wrong.
 

Panda1

Banned
I remember a year or two ago, Mindy Kaling's brother made the news by announcing that he only got into medical school because he pretended to be black, not Indian

The reality is that colleges prejudiced against some races and towards others. They want to set things right but you can't fix history by discriminating in the other direction
So what's your alternative or what else has been found to work better
 

llien

Member
How can one group score worse on personality than all the other groups? Isn't that racist?
Before asking I went to check whether Harvard was indeed slapping "personality" during admission and to my shock, it did: "...admission policy is “holistic,” based on personal characteristics that go beyond high school grades or SAT scores..."

...it has come out that Harvard consistently scored Asian applicants lower on the subjective "personal rating." These traits included “positive personality,” likability, courage, kindness and being “widely respected,” according to an analysis of six years of admission data filed Friday in federal court in Boston by Students for Fair Admissions, a group representing Asian-American students in a lawsuit against the university.

The group said its expert found that Asian-American applicants are "significantly stronger than all other racial groups in academic performance.They also perform very well in non-academic categories and have higher extracurricular scores than any other racial group." Their personal ratings were relatively low, especially among admissions officers who hadn't met them. Alumni interviewers who had met these prospective students gave them top personal ratings.

The memo filed with the court said Harvard's own internal investigation in 2013 concluded that its admissions system was biased against Asian Americans. But instead of addressing the problem, "Harvard killed the investigation and buried the reports."

usa today

Maybe because far right people like to throw asians around as the model minority that everyone else should aspire to.
Maybe because they score 80 points more, than whites?
Asians are, in fact, overrepresented all around (35% at google), which undermines "the situation we have is due to racism" argument.

Asian overperforming is, in fact, the reason why Harvard tried to reduce their ranks.
 

TheMikado

Banned
Man I would love to see how they rated personality. It sounds like the administration didn't want a bunch of highly intelligent non-partying students on campus because then college and Harvard would be too "boring"... I would say if that's their attitude instead of getting the best and brightest then they shouldn't get public funding but considering they are a private school there isn't much I can say if they don't want all 100% straight A students.
 

Lupingosei

Banned
Asian overperforming is, in fact, the reason why Harvard tried to reduce their ranks.

Reducing the ranks is a stupid idea, if you have the qualifications you have as much the right to enter Havard as everyone else. Making up arbitrary reasons to not let them in is bullshit.

If Asian Americans are so much better, that is a good thing. Everybody has to step up their game to keep up. Ivy League should attract the best and the brightest.
 

BANGS

Banned
Reducing the ranks is a stupid idea, if you have the qualifications you have as much the right to enter Havard as everyone else. Making up arbitrary reasons to not let them in is bullshit.

If Asian Americans are so much better, that is a good thing. Everybody has to step up their game to keep up. Ivy League should attract the best and the brightest.
See now THAT is racist...
 

TheMikado

Banned
Reducing the ranks is a stupid idea, if you have the qualifications you have as much the right to enter Havard as everyone else. Making up arbitrary reasons to not let them in is bullshit.

If Asian Americans are so much better, that is a good thing. Everybody has to step up their game to keep up. Ivy League should attract the best and the brightest.

I'm not disagreeing with this, but they are a private school and have a reputation to keep...

They have to make sure they have enough room to keep letting in American Nobility family members, while making sure they balance their numbers to claim non-bias.

Going to Harvard isn't about academics, its about status. They need to admit enough smart people to keep their Ivy League elitism going, enough diversity to avoid claims of bias, and again still make room for the people with money who are paying and funding their bills so the rich can continue to by status and labels of intelligence.
 
Man I would love to see how they rated personality. It sounds like the administration didn't want a bunch of highly intelligent non-partying students on campus because then college and Harvard would be too "boring"... I would say if that's their attitude instead of getting the best and brightest then they shouldn't get public funding but considering they are a private school there isn't much I can say if they don't want all 100% straight A students.
I think your second post is probably more to the point
I'm not disagreeing with this, but they are a private school and have a reputation to keep...

They have to make sure they have enough room to keep letting in American Nobility family members, while making sure they balance their numbers to claim non-bias.

Going to Harvard isn't about academics, its about status. They need to admit enough smart people to keep their Ivy League elitism going, enough diversity to avoid claims of bias, and again still make room for the people with money who are paying and funding their bills so the rich can continue to by status and labels of intelligence.

They have to keep out many overperformers to leave space to those with status and money to more easily get in(Probably with outstanding personality scores to boost them.).
 

TheMikado

Banned
I think your second post is probably more to the point

They have to keep out many overperformers to leave space to those with status and money to more easily get in(Probably with outstanding personality scores to boost them.).

You know what, I would like to see some famous individuals Ivy League admission scores. I'm sure they all got amazing personality and other nuanced high scores.
 
I think your second post is probably more to the point


They have to keep out many overperformers to leave space to those with status and money to more easily get in(Probably with outstanding personality scores to boost them.).

And recruited sports.
 

TheMikado

Banned
And recruited sports.

Your're right I forgot about that:

http://www.slate.com/articles/sport..._academic_institution_became_part_of_the.html

And despite the best efforts of NCAA hall-monitor-in-chief Pete Thamel, who in 2008 wrote a report for the New York Times on “new questions of standards” at Harvard under Amaker, there’s no compelling evidence to suggest that the school is doing anything worth fretting about. Everything Thamel described—a soon-to-be Harvard assistant playing a pick-up game with two recruits, Amaker talking to a potential player’s parent at a grocery store, allegedly lowered academic requirements—wouldn’t crack the top 100 list of the least-ethical decisions most programs made this week. (And for what it’s worth, the basketball program was cleared of all these charges by the Ivy League, though it did later admit to an “unintentional secondary violation” on account of the pick-up game.)
Even so, it’s undeniable that Harvard is now recruiting a different kind of athlete. Though the school has continually refuted the allegation that—as Yale coach James Jones told Thamel—there was a “drastic shift in restrictions and regulations with the Harvard admissions office,” there has clearly been a drastic shift in the pedigree of the players coming into the program. The most-talented player in Harvard history, Jeremy Lin (who was recruited by Amaker’s predecessor Frank Sullivan), was in fact a fairly typical Crimson recruit: an academic standout who didn’t receive any Division I scholarship offers. Now, Harvard competes for guys that basketball schools actually want. Wesley Saunders, the team’s leading scorer against New Mexico, was also recruited by USC and Stanford. Zena Edosomwan, a top-100 recruit who committed to Harvard last year, could’ve gone to UCLA, Texas, or Washington.
 
Top Bottom