College Admissions Doesn't Need to Be So Competitive: Super High Stat Kids are not "a dime a dozen."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Defining merit as scores high on a standardized test isn’t deciding based on merit. Deciding based on who has the most APs when many schools offer few or no APs is not deciding based on merit. Working hard to prep for or game a test is not the same as working hard in college or life. GPA is even a good indicator as schools vary widely, cheating can be rampant, and some parents ensure their kid knows the material for the entire class before they sit down on the first day.

NP. How would you define merit?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Defining merit as scores high on a standardized test isn’t deciding based on merit. Deciding based on who has the most APs when many schools offer few or no APs is not deciding based on merit. Working hard to prep for or game a test is not the same as working hard in college or life. GPA is even a good indicator as schools vary widely, cheating can be rampant, and some parents ensure their kid knows the material for the entire class before they sit down on the first day.

NP. How would you define merit?

Overcoming adversity
Building community where community was absent
Seeking out unique opportunities that represent passion and risk taking
Authentically helping others
Being self driven not parent driven

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Defining merit as scores high on a standardized test isn’t deciding based on merit. Deciding based on who has the most APs when many schools offer few or no APs is not deciding based on merit. Working hard to prep for or game a test is not the same as working hard in college or life. GPA is even a good indicator as schools vary widely, cheating can be rampant, and some parents ensure their kid knows the material for the entire class before they sit down on the first day.

NP. How would you define merit?

Overcoming adversity
Building community where community was absent
Seeking out unique opportunities that represent passion and risk taking
Authentically helping others
Being self driven not parent driven

Realistically, 99.9% genZ high schoolers don’t do that, parents happy if they are not addicted to games. If you use that standard, we will continue to see curing cancer type of snake oil. High schoolers should do what high schoolers supposed to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Defining merit as scores high on a standardized test isn’t deciding based on merit. Deciding based on who has the most APs when many schools offer few or no APs is not deciding based on merit. Working hard to prep for or game a test is not the same as working hard in college or life. GPA is even a good indicator as schools vary widely, cheating can be rampant, and some parents ensure their kid knows the material for the entire class before they sit down on the first day.

NP. How would you define merit?

Overcoming adversity
Building community where community was absent
Seeking out unique opportunities that represent passion and risk taking
Authentically helping others
Being self driven not parent driven

and this is why Harvard has remedial math classes

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1500 has been the marker for many, many years. I believe it still is. I doubt many, if any, admissions officers care about a 1550 vs a 1540. Or a 1530 vs a 1570. All within the same standard deviation to account for those test takers having a good day vs those having a bad day.

Anyone in the 1500+ bucket gets extra attention paid to their ECs and other achievements.

We have data on this and a 1590 has more than twice the admission rate at top 11 schools as a 1500. It might not be worth the extra effort to get the 1590 but AOs are not indifferent to SAT scores above 1500

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-024-55119-0

The journal Nature published an article about how college admissions is unfair to Asians ... in 2024? This was obvious in 1994

Oh BS. Asians prep like crazy. It’s the hook that favors their cultural approach. Their parents and grandparents were used to the cram schools and spending 6 hours a day after school cramming. Prepping and cheating for scores only matter admission is common in countries like Korea, India and China. Of course the author wants to get rid of athletic recruits, particularly for sports that aren’t dominated by Asians, legacy and donors as Asian alumni do not give or give far less than other demographics, first generation college and any other aspect that doesn’t favor them.

Getting over 1500 on the SAT is not challenging to a reasonably intelligent kid that has been forced to practice for years until they consistently nail a perfect score on practice tests. It’s not a sign of brilliance, it a sign of obedience to parents that demand a perfect score.

you would have said the same about Jews a century ago when they were the ones getting the short stick

+1. And there’s nothing stopping a non-Asian kid from prepping. In fact many of them do, despite the PP’s ignorant stereotype. Let the prizes go to the kids who work the hardest. Sorry you don’t believe in meritocracy-not everything is going to be given to your kid in life if they’re not performing.

Let’s just point out that these kids are not that work the hardest, it’s their parents that push the hardest and bully kids into having no childhood since preschool. Kids don’t have a free will in this.

what's the difference between that and kids who have been doing football (either kind) since preschool?

The football kids aren't asian. The name of the game is asian evasion.

Colleges have had football teams forever. Asians dominating and expecting to fill every spot is a relatively new thing in the past two decades. If the new demographics of top colleges is for every ten admits, 4-5 are Asians with no legacy or sports just test scores 2-3 are white possibly with sports or legacy, 2 are Hispanic with maybe a sport, no legacy, and 1 is AA with maybe sports then you are basically shutting out all white, Hispanic or AA students who are not top athletes or legacy donors or first generation college.

a hundred years ago you would have said that about jews

Not at all. Jewish students and alumni engaged and still engage in college. As alumni, they donated and often led efforts to support their school. They also did not push out or seek to push out every other single demographic and pine for changing the criteria to solely benefit their cultural practice of test prep Asians are constantly fighting against affirmative action, first generation, veteran or other criteria that really helps marginalized groups move up and adds vibrancy to the campus because they want those spots. It isn’t about learning or thinking or changing the world it’s about being a dutiful drone and gaming whatever possible to get ahead.

holistic admissions didn't exist 100 years ago. Before then ivies used test scores and grades exclusively. It was only when jews started push their way in that holistic admissions was introduced

Actually that is a cute myth that people like to spin. Admissions were holistic before they were test based. Only, the holistic part was "what is your family name
', what is you families club, what prep school did you got to. Grades were of secondary importance as long as the rest of the application reflected the traits desired which was "good Protestant families". Testing came about as an attempt to bring in a wider student body. It is unfortunate that holistic admissions were brought back to put curbs on the number of Jewish students.

Holistic admissions existed long before there were significant numbers of Asian applicants. You are asking schools to change practices to your preferences, not out of any remorse about the impact on Jewish applicants long ago but rather in a way that you believe will advantage Asian applicants because the present system doesn't reflect what you believe is important not out of any sense of actually improving the system. The schools involved do not see themselves as you wish that they did and that is something that you just need to come to grips with.

you can tell yourself whatever you want to rationalize an antisemitic practice

Who is rationalizing antisemitism? I'm pointing out that Harvard wasn't always test based as the PP implied. I pointed out why testing was actually put in place as well which was to attract students from outside of New England/NY. Even then the idea behind testing wasn't to attract the most intellectually capable students, it was to provide a baseline measurement when the educational quality of distant schools was unknowable at the time.

The antisemitic reasoning for the restoration of holistic admissions was appalling and wrong, no doubt about it. But the cry for a return to test based admissions by portions of the Asian community has nothing to do with discrimination. They cry discrimination today because the system doesn't reflect their cultural preferences and they desire a system that favors these preferences. They also want a system that reflects their perception of what should be important for admissions to elite schools. Their problem is that the schools themselves have a different perception of themselves and how they view their part in the world. They are old, private and could have moved to a system similar to Oxford and Cambridge long long ago if they wanted to. The fact that they didn't tells one everything that one needs to know.

Testing is the prevalent method of college admissions pretty much EVERYWHERE outside the USA. And before testing there was not holistic admissions. Before testing the barrier to entry was the tuition. Harvard was open admissions until about 1925, then it used an admissions test and adopted the SAT in 1933.

The whining from some asians is coming from the fact that holistic admissions is being used to keep out asians in the same way (but to a lesser extent) than it was used to keep out jews. Either asians really are less honest, less brave, have less integrity, etc. than white kids, a lot less than hispanic kids and almost an embarrassingly low amount of character compared to black kids OR the subjective elements of holistic admissions was being used toi discriminate against asian kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Defining merit as scores high on a standardized test isn’t deciding based on merit. Deciding based on who has the most APs when many schools offer few or no APs is not deciding based on merit. Working hard to prep for or game a test is not the same as working hard in college or life. GPA is even a good indicator as schools vary widely, cheating can be rampant, and some parents ensure their kid knows the material for the entire class before they sit down on the first day.

Standardized tests are the single most reliable and objective measure of academic merit. We have known this since before WWII. We decided tests were less important when we elevated the hierarchy of oppression over the hierarchy of competence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1500 has been the marker for many, many years. I believe it still is. I doubt many, if any, admissions officers care about a 1550 vs a 1540. Or a 1530 vs a 1570. All within the same standard deviation to account for those test takers having a good day vs those having a bad day.

Anyone in the 1500+ bucket gets extra attention paid to their ECs and other achievements.

We have data on this and a 1590 has more than twice the admission rate at top 11 schools as a 1500. It might not be worth the extra effort to get the 1590 but AOs are not indifferent to SAT scores above 1500

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-024-55119-0

The journal Nature published an article about how college admissions is unfair to Asians ... in 2024? This was obvious in 1994

Oh BS. Asians prep like crazy. It’s the hook that favors their cultural approach. Their parents and grandparents were used to the cram schools and spending 6 hours a day after school cramming. Prepping and cheating for scores only matter admission is common in countries like Korea, India and China. Of course the author wants to get rid of athletic recruits, particularly for sports that aren’t dominated by Asians, legacy and donors as Asian alumni do not give or give far less than other demographics, first generation college and any other aspect that doesn’t favor them.

Getting over 1500 on the SAT is not challenging to a reasonably intelligent kid that has been forced to practice for years until they consistently nail a perfect score on practice tests. It’s not a sign of brilliance, it a sign of obedience to parents that demand a perfect score.

you would have said the same about Jews a century ago when they were the ones getting the short stick

+1. And there’s nothing stopping a non-Asian kid from prepping. In fact many of them do, despite the PP’s ignorant stereotype. Let the prizes go to the kids who work the hardest. Sorry you don’t believe in meritocracy-not everything is going to be given to your kid in life if they’re not performing.

Let’s just point out that these kids are not that work the hardest, it’s their parents that push the hardest and bully kids into having no childhood since preschool. Kids don’t have a free will in this.

what's the difference between that and kids who have been doing football (either kind) since preschool?

The football kids aren't asian. The name of the game is asian evasion.

Colleges have had football teams forever. Asians dominating and expecting to fill every spot is a relatively new thing in the past two decades. If the new demographics of top colleges is for every ten admits, 4-5 are Asians with no legacy or sports just test scores 2-3 are white possibly with sports or legacy, 2 are Hispanic with maybe a sport, no legacy, and 1 is AA with maybe sports then you are basically shutting out all white, Hispanic or AA students who are not top athletes or legacy donors or first generation college.

a hundred years ago you would have said that about jews

Not at all. Jewish students and alumni engaged and still engage in college. As alumni, they donated and often led efforts to support their school. They also did not push out or seek to push out every other single demographic and pine for changing the criteria to solely benefit their cultural practice of test prep Asians are constantly fighting against affirmative action, first generation, veteran or other criteria that really helps marginalized groups move up and adds vibrancy to the campus because they want those spots. It isn’t about learning or thinking or changing the world it’s about being a dutiful drone and gaming whatever possible to get ahead.

holistic admissions didn't exist 100 years ago. Before then ivies used test scores and grades exclusively. It was only when jews started push their way in that holistic admissions was introduced

Actually that is a cute myth that people like to spin. Admissions were holistic before they were test based. Only, the holistic part was "what is your family name
', what is you families club, what prep school did you got to. Grades were of secondary importance as long as the rest of the application reflected the traits desired which was "good Protestant families". Testing came about as an attempt to bring in a wider student body. It is unfortunate that holistic admissions were brought back to put curbs on the number of Jewish students.

Holistic admissions existed long before there were significant numbers of Asian applicants. You are asking schools to change practices to your preferences, not out of any remorse about the impact on Jewish applicants long ago but rather in a way that you believe will advantage Asian applicants because the present
system doesn't reflect what you believe is important not out of any sense of actually improving the system. The schools involved do not see themselves as you wish that they did and that is something that you just need to come to grips with.

you can tell yourself whatever you want to rationalize an antisemitic practice

+1. Offspring of Asian immigrants here and WASP grad. Not fair to label Asians as test-prep, non-contributing drones. Everyone has the potential to contribute to the college classroom and college community, regardless of their background. We value expanding educational opportunities, diversity of experience, and engagement with the wider community. I have volunteered and participated in non-academic things both in college and beyond. I want my third generation Asian-American kid to be an active participant in diverse college community where they can learn from and be enriched by interacting with people from a variety of backgrounds.

[Anonymous]

^^ above poster. Was trying to respond to a different post

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Defining merit as scores high on a standardized test isn’t deciding based on merit. Deciding based on who has the most APs when many schools offer few or no APs is not deciding based on merit. Working hard to prep for or game a test is not the same as working hard in college or life. GPA is even a good indicator as schools vary widely, cheating can be rampant, and some parents ensure their kid knows the material for the entire class before they sit down on the first day.

Standardized tests are the single most reliable and objective measure of academic merit. We have known this since before WWII. We decided tests were less important when we elevated the hierarchy of oppression over the hierarchy of competence.

Nobody disputes there are crappy schools in poor areas. The answer to that is to fix the schools. Maybe HYPSM can start by requiring it's graduates to work for 4-6 years in a poor school before getting their diplomas

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Defining merit as scores high on a standardized test isn’t deciding based on merit. Deciding based on who has the most APs when many schools offer few or no APs is not deciding based on merit. Working hard to prep for or game a test is not the same as working hard in college or life. GPA is even a good indicator as schools vary widely, cheating can be rampant, and some parents ensure their kid knows the material for the entire class before they sit down on the first day.

Standardized tests are the single most reliable and objective measure of academic merit. We have known this since before WWII. We decided tests were less important when we elevated the hierarchy of oppression over the hierarchy of competence.

Standardized tests USED to be reliable before the Internet and test prep sector explosion. Americans are not above cheating, look at the Aunt Becky scandals but other countries especially China take cheating and gaming tests to a whole other level and at scale. India and Korea are not far behind.

At our elementary school, I was the volunteer coordinator for a year. Asian parents were always vying for the copy position. This is where you make copies of the worksheets and tests for the teachers. This prechromebook times. It was a boring tedious job. I found out it’s because they wanted access to the material a year or two ahead so their kids could practice and have an edge to get into the CES. Geez I thought that was crazy but the stuff that goes on now makes that pretty tame.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Defining merit as scores high on a standardized test isn’t deciding based on merit. Deciding based on who has the most APs when many schools offer few or no APs is not deciding based on merit. Working hard to prep for or game a test is not the same as working hard in college or life. GPA is even a good indicator as schools vary widely, cheating can be rampant, and some parents ensure their kid knows the material for the entire class before they sit down on the first day.

Standardized tests are the single most reliable and objective measure of academic merit. We have known this since before WWII. We decided tests were less important when we elevated the hierarchy of oppression over the hierarchy of competence.

Standardized tests USED to be reliable before the Internet and test prep sector explosion. Americans are not above cheating, look at the Aunt Becky scandals but other countries especially China take cheating and gaming tests to a whole other level and at scale. India and Korea are not far behind.

At our elementary school, I was the volunteer coordinator for a year. Asian parents were always vying for the copy position. This is where you make copies of the worksheets and tests for the teachers. This prechromebook times. It was a boring tedious job. I found out it’s because they wanted access to the material a year or two ahead so their kids could practice and have an edge to get into the CES. Geez I thought that was crazy but the stuff that goes on now makes that pretty tame.

Some Asian parents have their kids take classes in the summer ( the same ones for next year), just to make sure kids know everything before the semester starts and get As. Haha. Kids learn the same classes twice.

[Anonymous]

What about the parents (all races) who are too busy working multiple jobs, supporting members of their extended families, navigating a new language and culture and just wanting better for their kids? They’re too busy to volunteer at schools or even really know what’s going on with their kids’ schooling. And if their kids can overcome their odds, that’s a great thing!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Defining merit as scores high on a standardized test isn’t deciding based on merit. Deciding based on who has the most APs when many schools offer few or no APs is not deciding based on merit. Working hard to prep for or game a test is not the same as working hard in college or life. GPA is even a good indicator as schools vary widely, cheating can be rampant, and some parents ensure their kid knows the material for the entire class before they sit down on the first day.

Standardized tests are the single most reliable and objective measure of academic merit. We have known this since before WWII. We decided tests were less important when we elevated the hierarchy of oppression over the hierarchy of competence.

Standardized tests USED to be reliable before the Internet and test prep sector explosion. Americans are not above cheating, look at the Aunt Becky scandals but other countries especially China take cheating and gaming tests to a whole other level and at scale. India and Korea are not far behind.

At our elementary school, I was the volunteer coordinator for a year. Asian parents were always vying for the copy position. This is where you make copies of the worksheets and tests for the teachers. This prechromebook times. It was a boring tedious job. I found out it’s because they wanted access to the material a year or two ahead so their kids could practice and have an edge to get into the CES. Geez I thought that was crazy but the stuff that goes on now makes that pretty tame.

Some Asian parents have their kids take classes in the summer ( the same ones for next year), just to make sure kids know everything before the semester starts and get As. Haha. Kids learn the same classes twice.

I have heard this about the San Diego High school cohort as well since the competition is nuts as the UCs only look at certain classes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Defining merit as scores high on a standardized test isn’t deciding based on merit. Deciding based on who has the most APs when many schools offer few or no APs is not deciding based on merit. Working hard to prep for or game a test is not the same as working hard in college or life. GPA is even a good indicator as schools vary widely, cheating can be rampant, and some parents ensure their kid knows the material for the entire class before they sit down on the first day.

Standardized tests are the single most reliable and objective measure of academic merit. We have known this since before WWII. We decided tests were less important when we elevated the hierarchy of oppression over the hierarchy of competence.

Standardized tests USED to be reliable before the Internet and test prep sector explosion. Americans are not above cheating, look at the Aunt Becky scandals but other countries especially China take cheating and gaming tests to a whole other level and at scale. India and Korea are not far behind.

At our elementary school, I was the volunteer coordinator for a year. Asian parents were always vying for the copy position. This is where you make copies of the worksheets and tests for the teachers. This prechromebook times. It was a boring tedious job. I found out it’s because they wanted access to the material a year or two ahead so their kids could practice and have an edge to get into the CES. Geez I thought that was crazy but the stuff that goes on now makes that pretty tame.

Some Asian parents have their kids take classes in the summer ( the same ones for next year), just to make sure kids know everything before the semester starts and get As. Haha. Kids learn the same classes twice.

good idea thx

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1500 has been the marker for many, many years. I believe it still is. I doubt many, if any, admissions officers care about a 1550 vs a 1540. Or a 1530 vs a 1570. All within the same standard deviation to account for those test takers having a good day vs those having a bad day.

Anyone in the 1500+ bucket gets extra attention paid to their ECs and other achievements.

We have data on this and a 1590 has more than twice the admission rate at top 11 schools as a 1500. It might not be worth the extra effort to get the 1590 but AOs are not indifferent to SAT scores above 1500

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-024-55119-0

The journal Nature published an article about how college admissions is unfair to Asians ... in 2024? This was obvious in 1994

Oh BS. Asians prep like crazy. It’s the hook that favors their cultural approach. Their parents and grandparents were used to the cram schools and spending 6 hours a day after school cramming. Prepping and cheating for scores only matter admission is common in countries like Korea, India and China. Of course the author wants to get rid of athletic recruits, particularly for sports that aren’t dominated by Asians, legacy and donors as Asian alumni do not give or give far less than other demographics, first generation college and any other aspect that doesn’t favor them.

Getting over 1500 on the SAT is not challenging to a reasonably intelligent kid that has been forced to practice for years until they consistently nail a perfect score on practice tests. It’s not a sign of brilliance, it a sign of obedience to parents that demand a perfect score.

you would have said the same about Jews a century ago when they were the ones getting the short stick

+1. And there’s nothing stopping a non-Asian kid from prepping. In fact many of them do, despite the PP’s ignorant stereotype. Let the prizes go to the kids who work the hardest. Sorry you don’t believe in meritocracy-not everything is going to be given to your kid in life if they’re not performing.

Let’s just point out that these kids are not that work the hardest, it’s their parents that push the hardest and bully kids into having no childhood since preschool. Kids don’t have a free will in this.

what's the difference between that and kids who have been doing football (either kind) since preschool?

The football kids aren't asian. The name of the game is asian evasion.

Colleges have had football teams forever. Asians dominating and expecting to fill every spot is a relatively new thing in the past two decades. If the new demographics of top colleges is for every ten admits, 4-5 are Asians with no legacy or sports just test scores 2-3 are white possibly with sports or legacy, 2 are Hispanic with maybe a sport, no legacy, and 1 is AA with maybe sports then you are basically shutting out all white, Hispanic or AA students who are not top athletes or legacy donors or first generation college.

a hundred years ago you would have said that about jews

Not at all. Jewish students and alumni engaged and still engage in college. As alumni, they donated and often led efforts to support their school. They also did not push out or seek to push out every other single demographic and pine for changing the criteria to solely benefit their cultural practice of test prep Asians are constantly fighting against affirmative action, first generation, veteran or other criteria that really helps marginalized groups move up and adds vibrancy to the campus because they want those spots. It isn’t about learning or thinking or changing the world it’s about being a dutiful drone and gaming whatever possible to get ahead.

holistic admissions didn't exist 100 years ago. Before then ivies used test scores and grades exclusively. It was only when jews started push their way in that holistic admissions was introduced

Actually that is a cute myth that people like to spin. Admissions were holistic before they were test based. Only, the holistic part was "what is your family name
', what is you families club, what prep school did you got to. Grades were of secondary importance as long as the rest of the application reflected the traits desired which was "good Protestant families". Testing came about as an attempt to bring in a wider student body. It is unfortunate that holistic admissions were brought back to put curbs on the number of Jewish students.

Holistic admissions existed long before there were significant numbers of Asian applicants. You are asking schools to change practices to your preferences, not out of any remorse about the impact on Jewish applicants long ago but rather in a way that you believe will advantage Asian applicants because the present system doesn't reflect what you believe is important not out of any sense of actually improving the system. The schools involved do not see themselves as you wish that they did and that is something that you just need to come to grips with.

you can tell yourself whatever you want to rationalize an antisemitic practice

Who is rationalizing antisemitism? I'm pointing out that Harvard wasn't always test based as the PP implied. I pointed out why testing was actually put in place as well which was to attract students from outside of New England/NY. Even then the idea behind testing wasn't to attract the most intellectually capable students, it was to provide a baseline measurement when the educational quality of distant schools was unknowable at the time.

The antisemitic reasoning for the restoration of holistic admissions was appalling and wrong, no doubt about it. But the cry for a return to test based admissions by portions of the Asian community has nothing to do with discrimination. They cry discrimination today because the system doesn't reflect their cultural preferences and they desire a system that favors these preferences. They also want a system that reflects their perception of what should be important for admissions to elite schools. Their problem is that the schools themselves have a different perception of themselves and how they view their part in the world. They are old, private and could have moved to a system similar to Oxford and Cambridge long long ago if they wanted to. The fact that they didn't tells one everything that one needs to know.

Testing is the prevalent method of college admissions pretty much EVERYWHERE outside the USA. And before testing there was not holistic admissions. Before testing the barrier to entry was the tuition. Harvard was open admissions until about 1925, then it used an admissions test and adopted the SAT in 1933.

The whining from some Asians is coming from the fact that holistic admissions is being used to keep out Asians in the same way (but to a lesser extent) than it was used to keep out jews. Either Asians really are less honest, less brave, have less integrity, etc. than white kids, a lot less than Hispanic kids and almost an embarrassingly low amount of character compared to black kids OR the subjective elements of holistic admissions was being used to discriminate against Asian kids.

Colleges are public institutions pretty much everywhere outside of the United States as well. As private institutions with their own sense of mission they have every right to their missions as they see it and given that Harvard is over 300 years old they have had plenty of time to switch to test based admissions. They do not do it because it is not what they feel is best for them. What is done "everywhere else in the world" is meaningless. If that is what you want then push public schools in that direction and go to a state school

Harvard has never been open admissions, NEVER. We just went through this above, prior to the SAT Harvard was completely holistic and the holistic factors were class, religion, and the ability to pay. Saying that Harvard was "open admissions" prior to testing is flat out false.

Holistic admissions is not being used to keep Asians out. That is your assertion because the evaluation rubric doesn't match your preferred model.

"OR the subjective elements of holistic admissions was being used to discriminate against Asian kids."

or

The metrics and rubric as defined by Harvard play to cultural strengths that aren't as common in Asian cultures as the cultures that you are perceived as the favored ones. The fact that they built a model that doesn't play to a cultures strengths isn't racist. The model existed before large numbers of Asian applicants were common. That they will not change it to your preferred model isn't racist. They are a private institution admit whomever they wish as long as they aren't discriminating. And they aren't despite your best efforts to say that they are.