Has this always been Harvard’s goal? Asians have long been over represented, which is what makes the lawsuit so stupid |
My guess is it won’t change anything. None of this sounds like affirmative action policies. |
Asian was around 18% in 2014 when the lawsuit began. It increased gradually over the years and now 30%. I think it had an effect. Sure they'll have some room to wiggle around, but need to be very careful now. Huge costly law suits can come in any time. |
Having a larger proportion of more qualified applicants is not overrepresentation |
They picked one worst example from the high profile privates and also one from the state flagship. The Supreme court decision will apply to every college. There's no perfect system, but the goal is to have a more clear, fair, transparent, non-discriminatory system which is good for the health of the society and the nation. Again nobody said only admit 1600 SAT scores and 4.0 unweighted Gpa. Why do you still say this? Look at the data again, Asians are better in ECs, Leadership, interview, etc. all around. Use holistic, use TO, just make the game of the rule more clear and fair. If colleges want to do whatever they want to do, give up all the tax benefits, local, state, federal assistance. CalTech has well over 40% Asian? its brand is top notch. I'm not sure what you are trying to say from the last sentence, but yes using race is so outdated. |
Asian Americans are over represented compared to the national population, but NOT to the number of applicants. Isn't that an important factor to consider? Maybe Harvard needs to get more AAs and Latino/a students to apply first, and then worry about the discriminatory stats. The question people should be asking is not why do Asian American families care so much about educational success, but rather why do other racial/ethnic groups seem not to want it as badly? Harvard is intentionally upholding the negative stereotype of AsAms having no personality in order to keep the number of AsAm students down because there is no other objective way to do so. The anti-Asian sentiment on this thread is subtle but present--the ambition and academic success of Asian Americans makes people uncomfortable because they full advantage of democratic ideal of meritocracy and outshine racial/ethnic groups in the process by any objective measure. We can debate about whether SATs are "objective" but when you have immigrant children whose parents don't speak a lick of English living in Chinatowns scoring 1500+ of their SATs, you can't say that subtle cultural biases in the test prevent other racial/ethnic groups from scoring well. |
I don't think they are race-blind. If they were race blind they would have 0 Latino or Black students just like TJ. |
So even CalTech will have even more Asian |
What was the % of AA and in 2014? |
do you understand proportionality? The classmates are mostly white/Asian because they are the largest group that applies. |
|
Nothing's wrong if Harvard becomes 70% Asians just like Howard is 80% Blacks.
|
Dont even. |
|
These are admitted students, right? Not enrolled. Maybe Harvard just shifted URM admits to SCEA (thus increasing yield for that group, and thus decreasing the number of admits needed to hit its targets), while shifting white and Asian admits to RD (thus decreasing yield for that group, increasing the numbers it could admit without exceeding its targets).
That is a plan they could have developed after the oral argument. It seems consistent with anecdotal reports from local private schools. And it would be calibrated to produce this well-timed press release, while having zero net effect on the on-campus enrollment numbers. |
GTF@ of here with that cr@p you race baiter. Why don't you identify yourself rather than hiding behind "anonymous", bet you wouldn't write that then. |
|
We have popular college sports(basketball, football) dominated/overrepresented by Blacks.
Nothing's wrong if an academical area is dominated/overrepresented by Asians. |