Harvard Class of 2020

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I wonder if it's because legacy and athletics are becoming less of a "guaranteed white" admittance. My DC has 2 close friends who are legacies at an Ivy, one child is white, the other is AA. She has another close friend who is a first generation american of asian descent, and that child's parents encourage significant participation in a sport hoping it will help give a boost to college options.

Assuming grades, test scores, etc are equivalent, I would expect a competitive school to give an AA legacy a slight edge over a white legacy, at least until they're getting a good number of AA legacy applicants (I would assume it's still a fairly small pool compared to white legacy applicants).

I would like to see us use SES instead of race. It would give a boost to the kids who truly need one. I think a lot of colleges are punting on real diversity by accepting wealthy kids over disadvantaged kids.

Just because you don't value racial diversity doesn't mean other people don't. I can say for certain that the experience of rich, black kids at my private school was different than the experience of rich white and Asian kids. And I'm glad to have known them to get that perspective (the neighborhood my parents lived in was pretty much just white and a little Asian, so I didn't meet rich black kids near my home). Ironically, all of the black students I was friends with at my HYPS school were from lower SES backgrounds except for one Kenyan one, so despite all the concern that rich black kids are taking diversity spots at elite schools my anecdotes don't bear it out.

You are not the only person in this debate, and your perspective isn't the only one that matters. If you got rid of racial diversity admissions, my college experience would have been worse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I wonder if it's because legacy and athletics are becoming less of a "guaranteed white" admittance. My DC has 2 close friends who are legacies at an Ivy, one child is white, the other is AA. She has another close friend who is a first generation american of asian descent, and that child's parents encourage significant participation in a sport hoping it will help give a boost to college options.

Assuming grades, test scores, etc are equivalent, I would expect a competitive school to give an AA legacy a slight edge over a white legacy, at least until they're getting a good number of AA legacy applicants (I would assume it's still a fairly small pool compared to white legacy applicants).

I would like to see us use SES instead of race. It would give a boost to the kids who truly need one. I think a lot of colleges are punting on real diversity by accepting wealthy kids over disadvantaged kids.

Just because you don't value racial diversity doesn't mean other people don't. I can say for certain that the experience of rich, black kids at my private school was different than the experience of rich white and Asian kids. And I'm glad to have known them to get that perspective (the neighborhood my parents lived in was pretty much just white and a little Asian, so I didn't meet rich black kids near my home). Ironically, all of the black students I was friends with at my HYPS school were from lower SES backgrounds except for one Kenyan one, so despite all the concern that rich black kids are taking diversity spots at elite schools my anecdotes don't bear it out.

You are not the only person in this debate, and your perspective isn't the only one that matters. If you got rid of racial diversity admissions, my college experience would have been worse.

Looking at the data, your friendship experience appears to be an anomaly -- unless by saying that your diverse friends were from "lower SES backgrounds" than you, you simply meant that your family was in the top 10% and theirs was in the top 20%.

There just aren't many diverse students who are disadvantaged at HYPS, because very few students at those schools of any color are from less-advantaged families. As mentioned above, only 4.5% of students at Harvard come from the bottom 20% socio-economically. 67% come from the top 20% of income! And the data from Princeton, Yale, and Stanford are the same or worse. Don't believe it? Look here https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/college-mobility/harvard-university. It has data for many top schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that it should be a totally merit based system. No one gets preference/a bump because they're a legacy, or they're black, or they're from North Dakota.

This has been studied and none of the students met certain markers later in life, like Nobel Peace Prize.

OK. Merit based (quantitative scores only) will result in nearly 100 percent Asian with a few Jews sprinkled in. Glad you're good with that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an asian parent I'm not advocating for looking at only grades and test scores but to remove the artificial quotas based on skin color. Commitments and talents to other activities and your critical thinking as conveyed on the essays should matter but comparison and selection ideally wouldn't be within buckets defined as children who are yellow, brown or peach. If you get down to it they're just different mixes of red, green and white. It's having people with a variety of experiences that make for an interesting cultural mix. I grew up yellow and very poor. I bet my scars and growth from those years is more similar to black and very poor than not.

I'm black and agree with this in theory, but how should a school measure diversity, if it is something they value? Also race is not just skin color, it is a social construct we live under in the US (like it or not). I'd love it if all advantages were thrown out for EVERYONE. I just don't understand why black students get attacked in these discussions when they make up such a small percentage at any of these top schools. It is truly tiny. Why isn't the focus on legacy and athletic advantage, that's what hurts Asian admits more.


The problem is at the tippy top schools no one really truly knows how they make their selections and honestly the private schools can do whatever they please. They are not reliant on government funding. And NIH for example is not going to stop giving research grants to Harvard.

[b]If you could show legacy/athlete admits had SAT scores, GPAs, AP test score averages several deviations below the mean for the entering class then the justification is plausible. Studies show this is true for black applicants and that is why there is such outrage.[/b]

Yes indeed. Let's see some data from a reputable source. There are lots of stereotypes and other misinformation being banded about on this thread by those wanting to support their narrow-minded views (or perhaps justify why they or their offspring did not get into Harvard or the like). I would love to see some data backing these statements. I would also love to see data that shows that UMC and rich black students are intellectually deficient when compared with their peers who are white or asian.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an asian parent I'm not advocating for looking at only grades and test scores but to remove the artificial quotas based on skin color. Commitments and talents to other activities and your critical thinking as conveyed on the essays should matter but comparison and selection ideally wouldn't be within buckets defined as children who are yellow, brown or peach. If you get down to it they're just different mixes of red, green and white. It's having people with a variety of experiences that make for an interesting cultural mix. I grew up yellow and very poor. I bet my scars and growth from those years is more similar to black and very poor than not.

I'm black and agree with this in theory, but how should a school measure diversity, if it is something they value? Also race is not just skin color, it is a social construct we live under in the US (like it or not). I'd love it if all advantages were thrown out for EVERYONE. I just don't understand why black students get attacked in these discussions when they make up such a small percentage at any of these top schools. It is truly tiny. Why isn't the focus on legacy and athletic advantage, that's what hurts Asian admits more.


The problem is at the tippy top schools no one really truly knows how they make their selections and honestly the private schools can do whatever they please. They are not reliant on government funding. And NIH for example is not going to stop giving research grants to Harvard.

[b]If you could show legacy/athlete admits had SAT scores, GPAs, AP test score averages several deviations below the mean for the entering class then the justification is plausible. Studies show this is true for black applicants and that is why there is such outrage.[/b]

Yes indeed. Let's see some data from a reputable source. There are lots of stereotypes and other misinformation being banded about on this thread by those wanting to support their narrow-minded views (or perhaps justify why they or their offspring did not get into Harvard or the like). I would love to see some data backing these statements. I would also love to see data that shows that UMC and rich black students are intellectually deficient when compared with their peers who are white or asian.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/2999198 Even when controlled for socioeconomic status, blacks still score lower than whites and Asians.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Yes indeed. Let's see some data from a reputable source. There are lots of stereotypes and other misinformation being banded about on this thread by those wanting to support their narrow-minded views (or perhaps justify why they or their offspring did not get into Harvard or the like). I would love to see some data backing these statements. I would also love to see data that shows that UMC and rich black students are intellectually deficient when compared with their peers who are white or asian.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/2999198 Even when controlled for socioeconomic status, blacks still score lower than whites and Asians.

And one interpretation for that is there is racial bias in those tests independent of SES.

This backs up the point, though, that rich black kids are different than rich white kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I wonder if it's because legacy and athletics are becoming less of a "guaranteed white" admittance. My DC has 2 close friends who are legacies at an Ivy, one child is white, the other is AA. She has another close friend who is a first generation american of asian descent, and that child's parents encourage significant participation in a sport hoping it will help give a boost to college options.

Assuming grades, test scores, etc are equivalent, I would expect a competitive school to give an AA legacy a slight edge over a white legacy, at least until they're getting a good number of AA legacy applicants (I would assume it's still a fairly small pool compared to white legacy applicants).

I would like to see us use SES instead of race. It would give a boost to the kids who truly need one. I think a lot of colleges are punting on real diversity by accepting wealthy kids over disadvantaged kids.

Just because you don't value racial diversity doesn't mean other people don't. I can say for certain that the experience of rich, black kids at my private school was different than the experience of rich white and Asian kids. And I'm glad to have known them to get that perspective (the neighborhood my parents lived in was pretty much just white and a little Asian, so I didn't meet rich black kids near my home). Ironically, all of the black students I was friends with at my HYPS school were from lower SES backgrounds except for one Kenyan one, so despite all the concern that rich black kids are taking diversity spots at elite schools my anecdotes don't bear it out.

You are not the only person in this debate, and your perspective isn't the only one that matters. If you got rid of racial diversity admissions, my college experience would have been worse.

Looking at the data, your friendship experience appears to be an anomaly -- unless by saying that your diverse friends were from "lower SES backgrounds" than you, you simply meant that your family was in the top 10% and theirs was in the top 20%.

There just aren't many diverse students who are disadvantaged at HYPS, because very few students at those schools of any color are from less-advantaged families. As mentioned above, only 4.5% of students at Harvard come from the bottom 20% socio-economically. 67% come from the top 20% of income! And the data from Princeton, Yale, and Stanford are the same or worse. Don't believe it? Look here https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/college-mobility/harvard-university. It has data for many top schools.

Nothing in the data you posted suggests that the black students at those schools don't come from lower SES. That might be true, but your data don't back it up. Black students are a small minority, as are poor students. It's possible, though maybe unlikely, that most of the poor students are also black...but it's definitely likely that a larger fraction of the black students are poor.

And I never said my experience was representative of anything other than my experience. You aren't addressing my point, though, that racial diversity among rich students is also valuable. At least to some of us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that it should be a totally merit based system. No one gets preference/a bump because they're a legacy, or they're black, or they're from North Dakota.

This has been studied and none of the students met certain markers later in life, like Nobel Peace Prize.

OK. Merit based (quantitative scores only) will result in nearly 100 percent Asian with a few Jews sprinkled in. Glad you're good with that.

That is what they used a quantitative score and it failed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Yes indeed. Let's see some data from a reputable source. There are lots of stereotypes and other misinformation being banded about on this thread by those wanting to support their narrow-minded views (or perhaps justify why they or their offspring did not get into Harvard or the like). I would love to see some data backing these statements. I would also love to see data that shows that UMC and rich black students are intellectually deficient when compared with their peers who are white or asian.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/2999198 Even when controlled for socioeconomic status, blacks still score lower than whites and Asians.

And one interpretation for that is there is racial bias in those tests independent of SES.

This backs up the point, though, that rich black kids are different than rich white kids.

Right, because there is no other possible explanation other than racial bias in the testing instrument. Uh huh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an asian parent I'm not advocating for looking at only grades and test scores but to remove the artificial quotas based on skin color. Commitments and talents to other activities and your critical thinking as conveyed on the essays should matter but comparison and selection ideally wouldn't be within buckets defined as children who are yellow, brown or peach. If you get down to it they're just different mixes of red, green and white. It's having people with a variety of experiences that make for an interesting cultural mix. I grew up yellow and very poor. I bet my scars and growth from those years is more similar to black and very poor than not.

I'm black and agree with this in theory, but how should a school measure diversity, if it is something they value? Also race is not just skin color, it is a social construct we live under in the US (like it or not). I'd love it if all advantages were thrown out for EVERYONE. I just don't understand why black students get attacked in these discussions when they make up such a small percentage at any of these top schools. It is truly tiny. Why isn't the focus on legacy and athletic advantage, that's what hurts Asian admits more.


The problem is at the tippy top schools no one really truly knows how they make their selections and honestly the private schools can do whatever they please. They are not reliant on government funding. And NIH for example is not going to stop giving research grants to Harvard.

[b]If you could show legacy/athlete admits had SAT scores, GPAs, AP test score averages several deviations below the mean for the entering class then the justification is plausible. Studies show this is true for black applicants and that is why there is such outrage.[/b]

Yes indeed. Let's see some data from a reputable source. There are lots of stereotypes and other misinformation being banded about on this thread by those wanting to support their narrow-minded views (or perhaps justify why they or their offspring did not get into Harvard or the like). I would love to see some data backing these statements. I would also love to see data that shows that UMC and rich black students are intellectually deficient when compared with their peers who are white or asian.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/2999198 Even when controlled for socioeconomic status, blacks still score lower than whites and Asians.

Did you read the article? The conclusion for the difference is still SES. According to the article, a black family with $100K vs a white family with $100 had different educational experiences (i.e., segregated, poorly funded schools vs good school districts) and generational wealth (e.g., home ownership) leading up to the time they took the SAT. Even different types of jobs, e.g., well-paid contractor vs a non-profit lawyer. Equal incomes does not mean equal experiences.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an asian parent I'm not advocating for looking at only grades and test scores but to remove the artificial quotas based on skin color. Commitments and talents to other activities and your critical thinking as conveyed on the essays should matter but comparison and selection ideally wouldn't be within buckets defined as children who are yellow, brown or peach. If you get down to it they're just different mixes of red, green and white. It's having people with a variety of experiences that make for an interesting cultural mix. I grew up yellow and very poor. I bet my scars and growth from those years is more similar to black and very poor than not.

I'm black and agree with this in theory, but how should a school measure diversity, if it is something they value? Also race is not just skin color, it is a social construct we live under in the US (like it or not). I'd love it if all advantages were thrown out for EVERYONE. I just don't understand why black students get attacked in these discussions when they make up such a small percentage at any of these top schools. It is truly tiny. Why isn't the focus on legacy and athletic advantage, that's what hurts Asian admits more.


The problem is at the tippy top schools no one really truly knows how they make their selections and honestly the private schools can do whatever they please. They are not reliant on government funding. And NIH for example is not going to stop giving research grants to Harvard.

If you could show legacy/athlete admits had SAT scores, GPAs, AP test score averages several deviations below the mean for the entering class then the justification is plausible. Studies show this is true for black applicants and that is why there is such outrage.[/b]

Yes indeed. Let's see some data from a reputable source. There are lots of stereotypes and other misinformation being banded about on this thread by those wanting to support their narrow-minded views (or perhaps justify why they or their offspring did not get into Harvard or the like). I would love to see some data backing these statements. I would also love to see data that shows that UMC and rich black students are intellectually deficient when compared with their peers who are white or asian.

[b]https://www.jstor.org/stable/2999198 Even when controlled for socioeconomic status, blacks still score lower than whites and Asians.

Is there any data that substantiates these findings? I am somewhat skeptical about a paper (and a journal) when the author is listed as "anonymous" as is the case for the article you provided. Although I will note that the article appears to undermine your conclusion when it points to research by Claude M. Steele, a Stanford social psychologist who found that: "black students from middle- and upper-class families perform poorly on standardized tests because they experience an anxiety that if they do poorly on the SAT they will confirm the racial stereotype of the inferior intellectual ability of black people. This anxiety, according to Steele, causes the students to test poorly and to score at levels far below their capability. Steele says his research shows that test scoring gaps between blacks and whites with similar backgrounds tend to disappear when test takers are informed before the exam that the results will not be used to evaluate their ability or qualifications." See, page 12 (https://lesacreduprintemps19.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/why-ses-does-not-explain.pdf).

[Anonymous]

^^But the article posted #1 is from 1998. Also it does not state that black kids with 200-400 points lower than white kids are getting into Ivy League schools. That's the evidence I want to see.

I think it has been proven that black kids even of higher SES score lower but I will maintain that there are enough black students within a reasonable range who are admitted to top schools.

I'm reposting an op-ed piece that discusses the recent study about race and test scores where it did indeed show a gap for black students. However, the investigators for the study acknowledge that they did not take into account any other measures for admission (grades, essays, ECs, character). The author is Asian and an alum of Yale.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/30/opinion/white-students-unfair-advantage-in-admissions.html

"I’ve often heard Asian-Americans express resentment toward blacks and Latinos for benefiting from affirmative action. As a Yale senior, I remember feeling disillusioned myself when an upper-middle-class black classmate with significantly less academic achievement than I was admitted to a top medical school that had rejected me.

But if Asians are being held back, it’s not so much because of affirmative action but because of preference for whites. The 450-point advantage that the Princeton study demonstrated blacks have over Asians draws the most attention. But the number that is most revealing is the 140-point advantage for whites over Asians."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^^But the article posted #1 is from 1998. Also it does not state that black kids with 200-400 points lower than white kids are getting into Ivy League schools. That's the evidence I want to see.

I think it has been proven that black kids even of higher SES score lower but I will maintain that there are enough black students within a reasonable range who are admitted to top schools.

I'm reposting an op-ed piece that discusses the recent study about race and test scores where it did indeed show a gap for black students. However, the investigators for the study acknowledge that they did not take into account any other measures for admission (grades, essays, ECs, character). The author is Asian and an alum of Yale.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/30/opinion/white-students-unfair-advantage-in-admissions.html

"I’ve often heard Asian-Americans express resentment toward blacks and Latinos for benefiting from affirmative action. As a Yale senior, I remember feeling disillusioned myself when an upper-middle-class black classmate with significantly less academic achievement than I was admitted to a top medical school that had rejected me.

But if Asians are being held back, it’s not so much because of affirmative action but because of preference for whites. The 450-point advantage that the Princeton study demonstrated blacks have over Asians draws the most attention. But the number that is most revealing is the 140-point advantage for whites over Asians."

PP, that's a great article! Here's another fascinating quote from the author: "The study isolated race as a factor by controlling for variables like academic performance, legacy status, social class, type of high school (public or private) and participation in athletics. So that 140-point gap is between a white student and an Asian student who differ by little more than race."

Giving that big a preference to whites over Asians is wrong. I'll just note that the study also indicates that the 450-point advantage blacks have over Asians is between a black student and an Asian student who differ by little more than race. That's a heck of an advantage for an upper-middle-class black student to have over an upper-middle-class Asian student. I support some advantage being accorded to the well-to-do African American student (not to the well-to-do Nigerian boarding school student), but I don't know why it needs to be 450 points.

I support affirmative action, but when the advantage is this large (actually, massive) REGARDLESS of socio-economic status, then I question the application of that kind of preference in the name of affirmative action.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^But the article posted #1 is from 1998. Also it does not state that black kids with 200-400 points lower than white kids are getting into Ivy League schools. That's the evidence I want to see.

I think it has been proven that black kids even of higher SES score lower but I will maintain that there are enough black students within a reasonable range who are admitted to top schools.

I'm reposting an op-ed piece that discusses the recent study about race and test scores where it did indeed show a gap for black students. However, the investigators for the study acknowledge that they did not take into account any other measures for admission (grades, essays, ECs, character). The author is Asian and an alum of Yale.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/30/opinion/white-students-unfair-advantage-in-admissions.html

"I’ve often heard Asian-Americans express resentment toward blacks and Latinos for benefiting from affirmative action. As a Yale senior, I remember feeling disillusioned myself when an upper-middle-class black classmate with significantly less academic achievement than I was admitted to a top medical school that had rejected me.

But if Asians are being held back, it’s not so much because of affirmative action but because of preference for whites. The 450-point advantage that the Princeton study demonstrated blacks have over Asians draws the most attention. But the number that is most revealing is the 140-point advantage for whites over Asians."

PP, that's a great article! Here's another fascinating quote from the author: "The study isolated race as a factor by controlling for variables like academic performance, legacy status, social class, type of high school (public or private) and participation in athletics. So that 140-point gap is between a white student and an Asian student who differ by little more than race."

Giving that big a preference to whites over Asians is wrong. I'll just note that the study also indicates that the 450-point advantage blacks have over Asians is between a black student and an Asian student who differ by little more than race. That's a heck of an advantage for an upper-middle-class black student to have over an upper-middle-class Asian student. I support some advantage being accorded to the well-to-do African American student (not to the well-to-do Nigerian boarding school student), but I don't know why it needs to be 450 points.

I support affirmative action, but when the advantage is this large (actually, massive) REGARDLESS of socio-economic status, then I question the application of that kind of preference in the name of affirmative action.

I'm the PP, and just to clarify: I support giving a big preference to students of lower socio-economic status, and I support giving diverse-and-low-SES applicants a bigger preference than white-and-low-SES applicants. But I definitely think that race-based preferences should shrink (but not go away!) as SES rises.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^But the article posted #1 is from 1998. Also it does not state that black kids with 200-400 points lower than white kids are getting into Ivy League schools. That's the evidence I want to see.

I think it has been proven that black kids even of higher SES score lower but I will maintain that there are enough black students within a reasonable range who are admitted to top schools.

I'm reposting an op-ed piece that discusses the recent study about race and test scores where it did indeed show a gap for black students. However, the investigators for the study acknowledge that they did not take into account any other measures for admission (grades, essays, ECs, character). The author is Asian and an alum of Yale.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/30/opinion/white-students-unfair-advantage-in-admissions.html

"I’ve often heard Asian-Americans express resentment toward blacks and Latinos for benefiting from affirmative action. As a Yale senior, I remember feeling disillusioned myself when an upper-middle-class black classmate with significantly less academic achievement than I was admitted to a top medical school that had rejected me.

But if Asians are being held back, it’s not so much because of affirmative action but because of preference for whites. The 450-point advantage that the Princeton study demonstrated blacks have over Asians draws the most attention. But the number that is most revealing is the 140-point advantage for whites over Asians."

PP, that's a great article! Here's another fascinating quote from the author: "The study isolated race as a factor by controlling for variables like academic performance, legacy status, social class, type of high school (public or private) and participation in athletics. So that 140-point gap is between a white student and an Asian student who differ by little more than race."

Giving that big a preference to whites over Asians is wrong. I'll just note that the study also indicates that the 450-point advantage blacks have over Asians is between a black student and an Asian student who differ by little more than race. That's a heck of an advantage for an upper-middle-class black student to have over an upper-middle-class Asian student. I support some advantage being accorded to the well-to-do African American student (not to the well-to-do Nigerian boarding school student), but I don't know why it needs to be 450 points.

I support affirmative action, but when the advantage is this large (actually, massive) REGARDLESS of socio-economic status, then I question the application of that kind of preference in the name of affirmative action.

I'm the PP, and just to clarify: I support giving a big preference to students of lower socio-economic status, and I support giving diverse-and-low-SES applicants a bigger preference than white-and-low-SES applicants. But I definitely think that race-based preferences should shrink (but not go away!) as SES rises.

Time to close up the thread happy weekend everyone