Anonymous wrote:Holistic admission = legalized discrimination

Holistic admission = Illegal discrimination

Holistic admission = legalized discrimination

Anonymous wrote:I knew it was going to be written by an asian or indian american.

low and behold, i scrolled down to the end and it's an indian american.

surprise surprise.

Squeeky wheel gets the grease!

I knew it was going to be written by an asian or indian american.

low and behold, i scrolled down to the end and it's an indian american.

surprise surprise.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Discrimination by any other name is still discrimination.

It isn't discrimination to look beyond test scores because it's been demonstrated time and again that test scores have more to do with family income and parents' education than anything else. Even there, the scores aren't all that accurate because if they were you wouldn't get a different score every time you took the test. This is why the College Board now reports SAT scores as ranges rather than exact numbers.

Are you implying Asian students bring NOTHING but test scores? They are so one dimensional they bring nothing else?

Holistic can ALSO mean looking beyond GPA perfection - if stellar scores, essays and recommendations and ECs suggest that a kid is really special and smart with lots of untapped potential, the school may take a risk here and there on a wild card applicant. All perfect scores and grades does not automatically make for an interesting applicant - that is my read at least on the "holistic" approach. A holistic approach makes no excuses for looking at the total package in each kid as it relates to the class as a whole.

Holistic also helps the URMs, as it should.

Anonymous wrote:Discrimination by any other name is still discrimination.

It isn't discrimination to look beyond test scores because it's been demonstrated time and again that test scores have more to do with family income and parents' education than anything else. Even there, the scores aren't all that accurate because if they were you wouldn't get a different score every time you took the test. This is why the College Board now reports SAT scores as ranges rather than exact numbers.

Discrimination by any other name is still discrimination.

Discrimination by any other name is still discrimination.

Ask any Asian and Jewish families... Old news.

Standardized tests do not measure creativity or propensity for innovation - the hallmarks of discovery across fields and disciplines. Colleges hoping to identify the game-changing, out of the box thinkers that will put them on the map must commit to practicing the sort of flexible criteria that will attract them in the first place.

It's an op-ed in a student newspaper. An op-ed is by definition opinion, not facts.

JFK was admitted to Harvard, what, 70 years ago? You'd think they'd come up with a more recent example. I hate Harvard as much as the next guy, but there's no denying its admissions process today is far different today than it was then.

http://www.stanforddaily.com/2014/07/19/holistic-admissions-undermine-a-meritocracy/

1) Holistic criteria also favor the powerful and well-connected, allowing them to bypass the same admission review that everyone else is subjected to. For instance, according to The Washington Post, President John F. Kennedy graduated from The Choate (High) School with an average score of 68 percent, when the school’s passing score was 65 percent, and yet he was admitted to Harvard.

2) Holistic admission criteria were invented by Harvard in the 1920s to limit the number of intellectually accomplished Jewish students that were admitted, which they immediately did. Can a device borne of such malicious intent have transformed itself into a wholly noble instrument?


Two very good points. As the country swings towards holistic admissions, expect more and more pissed off people. It's inherently unfair on many levels.