There’s no mask. These schools have a variety of different goals ($, diversity, access to power, advancing knowledge, their own prestige, alumni loyalty, high retention rates) and choose kids whom they expect to further some combination of those objectives. Different kids get in for different reasons. There’s no formula — each kid comes as a package/bundle of attributes and the decisive factor in one case won’t prove decisive in another. That’s why/the sense in which the process is holistic. It’s also subjective and time-pressured. That doesn’t mean anything goes, but it does mean that, in the absence of clear evidence of intent, it’s hard to prove racial discrimination, especially against a group whose representation in the undergraduate population meets or exceeds that of its representation in the country’s population. Which doesn't mean the system is unbiased, but nor does it mean that the system is designed to hide some nefarious intent. I take your point that, in the absence of such intent, an institution acting in good faith should take steps to ensure that its approach is unbiased. What, in this context, do you think Harvard should do? |
I think that’s inherently definitional and, in this case, would depend on the assumption that the students most deserving of an elite college education are those who will be most capable of producing (and/or most likely to produce) consistently excellent work of the type required by the college. This assumption could certainly be persuasively challenged. But, for those who start from that assumption, it’s ludicrous to insist that SATs are an effective way of identifying such students (even though SATs are probably a relatively efficient way of disqualifying the weakest applicants). |
Why speculate when you can look at actual entrance exams used in the real world? In what way are they "truly meritocratic"? |
Why don’t you make the case that they aren’t, defining your terms and citing examples? I might end up agreeing with you, but I don’t have to take that extreme a position to make the claim that if what you wanted to figure out was who would excel at elite colleges, then the SAT is not the kind of test you’d construct for that purpose. |
Some students feel obligated to take AP classes over more interesting classes because they think colleges will notice a lack of APs on their transcript. No APs = No problem. |
Some people value learning for the sake of learning. |
Your kids are really competing against the kids within their school. Therefore, if a school eliminates APs, it can be beneficial simply because admissions will base their decision on whether your child’s took the highest level courses offered. Even within public school, your greatest competition are your peers, not any other students in any other school. For example, they would never penalize a child for not taking AP in a lower ranked public school when there wasn’t an opportunity to take one.
It will however make admissions even more subjective amongst the kids within the same school. So, truthfully maybe colleges need to cut the crap they do for admissions. They should have a minimum bar and then do a plain simple lottery. |
Re Harvard: their own internal study concluded racial bias against Asians. It doesn’t get more damning than that. |
This is absolutely true. That is why I am so annoyed when public school parents think they have such advantage because their kid takes so many APs. My private school kid only took two APs so far as a rising senior, and he is going to be just fine. There wasn't even an opportunity to take APs in freshman and sophomore year. I have public school friends I saw this weekend talking about their rising freshman kid taking AP bio and more in freshman year. Sad. |
“As a public school parent, this strikes me as privileges parents ...”. Is this a parody? |
Aka let public school kids faint in the hamster wheel and private school kids ponder the world. Great expansion of philosophy. We left after 5 years pondering. If your child doesn't have a trust fund waiting this is not a good choice of school, so we left. No complains yet to report. Good luck to everyone. |
Why would it be? That's exactly what came to my mind. Our very expensive and top tier private school told parents after a terrible ERB year that it means nothing as the school doesn't teach to the test. |
ITA. Private school for trust fund babies. |
I believe PP was referring to the fact that a "public school parent" was referring to parents that send their kids to private schools as "privileged", as opposed to "hard working", "dedicated" or "people who made careful and responsible choices their entire lives". Hard work is not a privilege, not are the benefits derived therefrom. If you chose to go to Florida for every spring break as opposed to staying back and studying, that's your problem. |
They are doing what their kid needs to do to be competitive in their school. Why would you think it was about you and be annoyed? If their kids don't take those classes, they are screwed. So they do get an advantage within their peer group by going this route. Why would they care what classes your kid is taking in a different school system? Not sad. |