If harvard can fill their class up 2x-3x due to the strength of the applicant pool....

[Anonymous]

why are blacks capped at 15% of the student body year in year out -- you could boost it to 30-45% without a drop in quality, yes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:why are blacks capped at 15% of the student body year in year out -- you could boost it to 30-45% without a drop in quality, yes?

A 45% black student body is not diverse, nor is a 45% white student body.

[Anonymous]

Seems that perhaps your math skills aren't the best. If they proportionally increase all races by the same amount (which is the case in a percentage-based allocation), then all groups suffer the same decline in quality. If they increase black admissions by proportionally more, which you are suggesting, then the quality of black applicants drops by more. Is it really hard to see?

[Anonymous]

One argument is the fairest thing is to make the class mirror the country. That would mean 13% black. That would preference blacks over groups that are over represented at Harvard, like Asians, which make up 6% of the country, but 21% of Harvard’s freshman class.

[Anonymous]

Of note, whites are underrepresented at Harvard, versus the US population. They make up 46% of Harvard’s freshman class, but 73% of the US population.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:One argument is the fairest thing is to make the class mirror the country. That would mean 13% black. That would preference blacks over groups that are over represented at Harvard, like Asians, which make up 6% of the country, but 21% of Harvard’s freshman class.

You are confusing the words fairness and equitable, or proportionate.

That would be proportionate. But what is proportionate is not always what’s fair. Fair doesn’t always mean equal, either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Of note, whites are underrepresented at Harvard, versus the US population. They make up 46% of Harvard’s freshman class, but 73% of the US population.

Non-Hispanic whites are 60% of the country.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:One argument is the fairest thing is to make the class mirror the country. That would mean 13% black. That would preference blacks over groups that are over represented at Harvard, like Asians, which make up 6% of the country, but 21% of Harvard’s freshman class.

How about admit applicants who are qualified and are interesting and qualified, and put aside the race card?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of note, whites are underrepresented at Harvard, versus the US population. They make up 46% of Harvard’s freshman class, but 73% of the US population.

Non-Hispanic whites are 60% of the country.

Sorry you’re right — 73% includes Hispanic whites. Point still stands.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One argument is the fairest thing is to make the class mirror the country. That would mean 13% black. That would preference blacks over groups that are over represented at Harvard, like Asians, which make up 6% of the country, but 21% of Harvard’s freshman class.

You are confusing the words fairness and equitable, or proportionate.

That would be proportionate. But what is proportionate is not always what’s fair. Fair doesn’t always mean equal, either.

Well then you’re simply talking about giving preference to oppressed groups. Fine, but how much preference is fair? Should blacks be twice as prevalent at Harvard? Three times?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Seems that perhaps your math skills aren't the best. If they proportionally increase all races by the same amount (which is the case in a percentage-based allocation), then all groups suffer the same decline in quality. If they increase black admissions by proportionally more, which you are suggesting, then the quality of black applicants drops by more. Is it really hard to see?

I believe you are ignoring OP’s premise, which is that Harvard has enough highly qualified applicants to fill a class 3x the actual size with no drop in quality and with the same demographics. Whether you believe that probably depends on how much you rely on factors like SAT scores to measure quality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:One argument is the fairest thing is to make the class mirror the country. That would mean 13% black. That would preference blacks over groups that are over represented at Harvard, like Asians, which make up 6% of the country, but 21% of Harvard’s freshman class.

Exactly. Blacks are 13% of the US population.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One argument is the fairest thing is to make the class mirror the country. That would mean 13% black. That would preference blacks over groups that are over represented at Harvard, like Asians, which make up 6% of the country, but 21% of Harvard’s freshman class.

How about admit applicants who are qualified and are interesting and qualified, and put aside the race card?

What would that look like? Mostly Asians at top schools and very low numbers of blacks and Hispanics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One argument is the fairest thing is to make the class mirror the country. That would mean 13% black. That would preference blacks over groups that are over represented at Harvard, like Asians, which make up 6% of the country, but 21% of Harvard’s freshman class.

You are confusing the words fairness and equitable, or proportionate.

That would be proportionate. But what is proportionate is not always what’s fair. Fair doesn’t always mean equal, either.

Well then you’re simply talking about giving preference to oppressed groups. Fine, but how much preference is fair? Should blacks be twice as prevalent at Harvard? Three times?

I should have said I was a NP. I have not formulated an opinion yet. I was just correcting your misuse of the word “fair.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One argument is the fairest thing is to make the class mirror the country. That would mean 13% black. That would preference blacks over groups that are over represented at Harvard, like Asians, which make up 6% of the country, but 21% of Harvard’s freshman class.

You are confusing the words fairness and equitable, or proportionate.

That would be proportionate. But what is proportionate is not always what’s fair. Fair doesn’t always mean equal, either.

Well then you’re simply talking about giving preference to oppressed groups. Fine, but how much preference is fair? Should blacks be twice as prevalent at Harvard? Three times?

I should have said I was a NP. I have not formulated an opinion yet. I was just correcting your misuse of the word “fair.”

No I get that. I guess I just wonder where the cutoff is.