Race in college admissions is back in front of the Supreme Court Oral Argument on Oct. 31 (Monday)

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Higher education shoud be mainly for acedemic merit and must be color blind.

"Of 35,000 applicants competing for 1,600 spots in the class of 2019, 2,700 had perfect verbal SAT scores; 3,400 had perfect math SAT scores; more than 8,000 had perfect GPAs."

From the facts in the actual case. Now what?

But that are the scores of the applicants. What are the verbal SAT, math SAT, and GPA of the admitted students?

Why does that matter. Harvard would not be able to fill its seats based merely on a formula on "objective" scores like SAT scores or GPA. If they only considered perfect GPA or perfect SAT scores or whatever, they would still have to choose between applicants to fill their class. And they, as a private institution, should be able to decide that these scores are not what they are looking for in a student body. They have determined that their formula for selecting Harvard students tries to suss out potential to make an impact in some way or the other. They may be wrong. And if they are wrong, their brand value will go down. Let the market determine if their strategy is successful or not.

It matters because Harvard admitted students with very low scores in the name of R

Why can't Harvard admit students who have low test scores or no test scores at all?

They can as long as they don't discriminate against race

And the courts have found that they do not.

Sorry we have Supreme Court going on right now.
It's called 'Supreme' for a reason.

Yes, they are deciding whether or not to change decided precedent. That means these schools followed the law as it was, which is what the lower courts found. But now, this new Supreme Court may decided to change the established law (even though they aren't supposed to do that). I would not anticipate a retroactive application of it if they do change the law though.

Nope, they don't change the law.
Law makers change the law.

Yes, they do. When the overturn settled precedent, they are changing the law.

No, they can overturn precedent because it violates Constitution.
It's not making law.

And when that happens and there are no people of certain races admitted to elite colleges, then they sue, and win, (because that is absolute proof of systemic societal racism) what happens then?

No it's not absolute proof of systemic societal racism.

NBA has only 0.4% of Asians.
Is that absolute proof of systemic societal racism?

The NBA argument? Really? That's all you got?

Dumbest argument ever.

Try again.

I'm interested. Why NBA shouldn't be diverse to reflect population?

No, you are humping a strawman which is entirely irrelevant for reasons you absolutely know, and I won't engage to allow you to gish gallop past the relevant point. Stop being pathetic. Try yet again.

Nope, PP has a very relevant point. Why is there a severe lack of diversity in a billion dollar industry like the NBA? Hardly any Hispanics, Asians, etc. Why is the NBA exempt from diversity that reflects the country?


Oh that's right, because the NBA only wants the best players based on their merits regardless of their race. Funny how that works in a billion dollars sports industry, yet we don't apply the same logic at universities.

Sigh. Go ahead, join in on the stupid.

There have been many instances of racism in employment in professional sports throughout history. Maybe you've heard of Jackie Robinson?

Stupid, stupid argument. Please don't make this point where people know who you are. I tell you this for your own good.

Yes racism is bad.
Also it's not absolute proof of systemic societal racism just because a certain race is severely underrepresented.

Doubling down on the stupid.

If it is "not absolute proof of systemic societal racism just because a certain race is severely underrepresented", then you can't claim any race is discriminated against in college admissions, ever.

Now I don't think that your statement is true, and I bet you don't either.

It's all about using the proper definition of representation. Black and hispanic students are OVER-represented relative to the proportion of QUALIFIED applicants to any university.

Thanks for putting your tell in ALL CAPS - that you think that you get to decide what QUALIFIED is.

Do you get to tell Goldman Sachs who is qualified for who they hire? Or Apple? Or your local grocer? Why not?

Well I am a university professor and I can tell you 100% for certain, at three different top-100 institutions, URM students are definitely less qualified than their asian counterparts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prediction: Black SAT scores rise discontinuously in 2023.

Prediction: test optional becomes the norm in 2023 and SAT scores become even LESS relevant.

A lot of students won't take the SAT/ ACT.

Totally wrong.
Most students will take the test multiple times, and if scores are low, then hide it.

The SAT will become less relevant. Already headed in that direction ( posters citing MIT won't change that).

The UMC whites and Asians will spend on test prep and take the test multiple times. Most URMs and/or first gens will not. And they'll still get accepted because of their academic profile , ECs and essays AND for diversity.

Not much will change. The elite colleges will still fill their classes the way they want.

Why would most URMs pass the good chance to see if they also get high score and use it??????????????

use it to beat other competing URMs
URM + high score would be money in the bank
Why pass that opportunity???????????????????????????????????

Because it takes time and money to prep.

[Anonymous]

To the short-sighted Asian parents, enjoy your short-lived victory. The only real repercussion for the dismantling of AA is that mediocre white men will get an extra leg up on everyone else. This is just cementing white supremacy. Why would conservative white men advocate on behalf of Asian students unless they think they have something to gain from doing away from the current system?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Liberal/Leftist

Disparity equals discrimination. To prove discrimination you just have to show disparity between POC outcomes and white outcomes. That provides prima facie evidence of discrimination (Voting rights, criminal justice and many other categories)

Me:

Hmm, so what about the consistent disparity in personality scores given by Harvard to Asians compared to other races? (The district court found quote, ‘a statistically significant and negative relationship between Asian American identity and the personal rating assigned by Harvard admissions officers.’)

Liberal: (Read Waxman, Harvard lawyer) "the record will not allow a full explanation for that." .... "But we don't discriminate"

Such duplicity. Such Hypocrisy.

This one is hard because it's an opinion. They may have truly thought the applicant wasn't a good fit or they may have used it to reduce the numbers. Hard to say with the data presented. If there was a more concrete measure it would be easier to link to discrimination.

Honestly, this is not a popular opinion but for some applicants it may be cultural presentation (not saying that is right or fair). I was recently interviewing and hiring for a role in Hong Kong. It was a struggle to get colleagues to fairly consider people of a Chinese or HK ethnicity. They gravitated toward the expat candidates. The constant feedback about the HK or Chinese candidates was that they were not “dynamic.” I think it was cultural bias and I had to call it out.

I get it that many of the applicants to college would not fall in this category because they are culturally American but I wonder if there are some that present culturally as the job applicants I interviewed. The bias was so clear in our interview feedback, although folks were not understanding why they did not find the candidates dynamic and relatable.

[Anonymous]

Asians were deemed subhuman and unassimilable in the nineteenth century, but have become America’s exceptionally competent minority in the 21st century. This does not fit neatly within the progressive narrative. It is much easier to lower the bar for certain groups than to do the heavy lifting of improving the educational system for all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To the short-sighted Asian parents, enjoy your short-lived victory. The only real repercussion for the dismantling of AA is that mediocre white men will get an extra leg up on everyone else. This is just cementing white supremacy. Why would conservative white men advocate on behalf of Asian students unless they think they have something to gain from doing away from the current system?

not seeing this. Explain.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Asians were deemed subhuman and unassimilable in the nineteenth century, but have become America’s exceptionally competent minority in the 21st century. This does not fit neatly within the progressive narrative. It is much easier to lower the bar for certain groups than to do the heavy lifting of improving the educational system for all.

You have foolishly bought into the conservative narrative that progressives are the problem. URMs are not the problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Asians were deemed subhuman and unassimilable in the nineteenth century, but have become America’s exceptionally competent minority in the 21st century. This does not fit neatly within the progressive narrative. It is much easier to lower the bar for certain groups than to do the heavy lifting of improving the educational system for all.

You have foolishly bought into the conservative narrative that progressives are the problem. URMs are not the problem.

Can you explain why it is that Asian applicants need higher scores in order to get into top colleges? The right has a plausible explanation that was born out by the Harvard case, what is your alternative explanation?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prediction: Black SAT scores rise discontinuously in 2023.

Prediction: test optional becomes the norm in 2023 and SAT scores become even LESS relevant.

A lot of students won't take the SAT/ ACT.

Totally wrong.
Most students will take the test multiple times, and if scores are low, then hide it.

The SAT will become less relevant. Already headed in that direction ( posters citing MIT won't change that).

The UMC whites and Asians will spend on test prep and take the test multiple times. Most URMs and/or first gens will not. And they'll still get accepted because of their academic profile , ECs and essays AND for diversity.

Not much will change. The elite colleges will still fill their classes the way they want.

Why would most URMs pass the good chance to see if they also get high score and use it??????????????

Some will. Most won't. It's already borne out in the Common App stats.

The more important point is that the SAT/ ACT isn't being treated as high stakes anymore and is becoming less relevant each admissions cycle. This dynamic will be accelerated after June / July 2023.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Asians were deemed subhuman and unassimilable in the nineteenth century, but have become America’s exceptionally competent minority in the 21st century. This does not fit neatly within the progressive narrative. It is much easier to lower the bar for certain groups than to do the heavy lifting of improving the educational system for all.

You have foolishly bought into the conservative narrative that progressives are the problem. URMs are not the problem.

Can you explain why it is that Asian applicants need higher scores in order to get into top colleges? The right has a plausible explanation that was born out by the Harvard case, what is your alternative explanation?

Where is the evidence that they need higher test scores in order to get into top colleges?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Asians were deemed subhuman and unassimilable in the nineteenth century, but have become America’s exceptionally competent minority in the 21st century. This does not fit neatly within the progressive narrative. It is much easier to lower the bar for certain groups than to do the heavy lifting of improving the educational system for all.

You have foolishly bought into the conservative narrative that progressives are the problem. URMs are not the problem.

"Foolishly" to progressives only. Never said that URMs were the problem

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Asians were deemed subhuman and unassimilable in the nineteenth century, but have become America’s exceptionally competent minority in the 21st century. This does not fit neatly within the progressive narrative. It is much easier to lower the bar for certain groups than to do the heavy lifting of improving the educational system for all.

You have foolishly bought into the conservative narrative that progressives are the problem. URMs are not the problem.

Can you explain why it is that Asian applicants need higher scores in order to get into top colleges? The right has a plausible explanation that was born out by the Harvard case, what is your alternative explanation?

Where is the evidence that they need higher test scores in order to get into top colleges?

It’s because people don’t understand statistics. It is true that on average Asians admitted to a selective college have higher SAT scores than their white or URM peers. That does not make it true that an Asian American “need higher test scores” to be admitted. My own niece has an SAT score in the 25th percentile of a T20 school and is Asian American. Her score clearly wasn’t disqualifying. I read her essay and while I know I am biased as her aunt, I thought it was outstanding. I believe it got her in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Asians were deemed subhuman and unassimilable in the nineteenth century, but have become America’s exceptionally competent minority in the 21st century. This does not fit neatly within the progressive narrative. It is much easier to lower the bar for certain groups than to do the heavy lifting of improving the educational system for all.

You have foolishly bought into the conservative narrative that progressives are the problem. URMs are not the problem.

Can you explain why it is that Asian applicants need higher scores in order to get into top colleges? The right has a plausible explanation that was born out by the Harvard case, what is your alternative explanation?

Where is the evidence that they need higher test scores in order to get into top colleges?

https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2018/10/22/asian-american-admit-sat-scores/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Asians were deemed subhuman and unassimilable in the nineteenth century, but have become America’s exceptionally competent minority in the 21st century. This does not fit neatly within the progressive narrative. It is much easier to lower the bar for certain groups than to do the heavy lifting of improving the educational system for all.

You have foolishly bought into the conservative narrative that progressives are the problem. URMs are not the problem.

Can you explain why it is that Asian applicants need higher scores in order to get into top colleges? The right has a plausible explanation that was born out by the Harvard case, what is your alternative explanation?

Where is the evidence that they need higher test scores in order to get into top colleges?

https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2018/10/22/asian-american-admit-sat-scores/

I see your stats but you still did not answer my question. You assume they need higher test scores because they have higher test scores.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Asians were deemed subhuman and unassimilable in the nineteenth century, but have become America’s exceptionally competent minority in the 21st century. This does not fit neatly within the progressive narrative. It is much easier to lower the bar for certain groups than to do the heavy lifting of improving the educational system for all.

You have foolishly bought into the conservative narrative that progressives are the problem. URMs are not the problem.

Can you explain why it is that Asian applicants need higher scores in order to get into top colleges? The right has a plausible explanation that was born out by the Harvard case, what is your alternative explanation?

Where is the evidence that they need higher test scores in order to get into top colleges?

https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2018/10/22/asian-american-admit-sat-scores/

I see your stats but you still did not answer my question. You assume they need higher test scores because they have higher test scores.

Don't be stupid. No college is going to come right out and say that Asians NEED a higher score to get in.
https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2018/6/15/admissions-internal-report/