Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Go look at table 11 on page 49. I guess there is one admissions preference the authors don't want to talk about.

http://public.econ.duke.edu/~psarcidi/legacyathlete.pdf

I’m usually a supporter of affirmative action but if this analysis is true it’s pretty damning. Half of Hispanic Harvard students and 2/3 of Harvard African American students wouldn’t have been admitted without racial preferences? Those numbers are high. People definitely find it offensive to be told “you wouldn’t be here without affirmative action, but these numbers say that is true much of the time.

Does it bother you that plenty of whites wouldn’t get in if they weren’t legacies or athletes?

Not at all. If you disallow all of the preferences, the number for whites don't change much. It might be different white kids, but there's nothing wrong with that.

Anonymous wrote:More evidence that athletic, legacy, donor and children of faculty and staff (ALDC) are by far the most strongly advantaged in the admissions process. http://public.econ.duke.edu/~psarcidi/legacyathlete.pdf

Using the data disclosed in the lawsuit, the researchers modeled it and came to several conclusions. From the abstract: published a bunch of findings including:

Holistic admissions favors students in these categories, not minorities or first gen students (unless they are also in one of these groups).

43% of Harvard white admits fall into the above categories. Three-quarters of those admitted ALDCs would be rejected without those hooks based on their academic records.

Only by removing prefs for legacy and athletes will you change the admission rates of non-white racial and ethnic groups.

Anonymous wrote:Location, location, location too. From a 2015 article:

“According to The Crimson, one out of every 20 Harvard freshman attended one of only seven high schools: Boston Latin, Phillips Academy's Andover and Phillips Exeter, Stuyvesant High School in New York, Noble and Greenough School in Massachusetts, Trinity School in New York and Lexington High School in Massachusetts.“

Anonymous wrote:

So because the numbers wouldn’t change you’re ok with it. So it’s not the meritocracy or lack thereof that bothers you it’s anything that lowers the number of white people.

The US college age population is roughly 51% white, 14% black, 25% Hispanic, 5% Asian.

Harvard said that in the class of 2022, "46 percent said they are white, 18.1 percent of surveyed students identified as Asian, 14.3 percent as multiracial, 10.7 percent as Black or African American, 6.5 percent as Hispanic or Latino, 3.8 percent as South Asian"

On grounds of fairness and to make Harvard representative of the overall population, there is no case for reducing white numbers. If they wanted to raise black and Hispanic numbers that would have to come at the expense of Asians and "multiracials".

So because the numbers wouldn’t change you’re ok with it. So it’s not the meritocracy or lack thereof that bothers you it’s anything that lowers the number of white people.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does the table take into account preference for affluent white families?

Court documents show that Harvard maintains a list of candidates of special interest to the admissions dean, and accepted 42.2 percent of them. The dean’s interest list includes “all applicants who the Dean of Admissions wishes to keep track of during the admissions process, whether they be children of donors, or an applicant the Dean met at some point in their high school career and wished to keep an eye on,” said Harvard spokeswoman Rachael Dane.

For example, Harvard accepted Jared Kushner despite an undistinguished high school record after his father, who was not an alumnus, pledged a $2.5 million gift.

Anonymous wrote:Does the table take into account preference for affluent white families?

Court documents show that Harvard maintains a list of candidates of special interest to the admissions dean, and accepted 42.2 percent of them. The dean’s interest list includes “all applicants who the Dean of Admissions wishes to keep track of during the admissions process, whether they be children of donors, or an applicant the Dean met at some point in their high school career and wished to keep an eye on,” said Harvard spokeswoman Rachael Dane.

For example, Harvard accepted Jared Kushner despite an undistinguished high school record after his father, who was not an alumnus, pledged a $2.5 million gift.

Anonymous wrote:Does the table take into account preference for affluent white families?

Court documents show that Harvard maintains a list of candidates of special interest to the admissions dean, and accepted 42.2 percent of them. The dean’s interest list includes “all applicants who the Dean of Admissions wishes to keep track of during the admissions process, whether they be children of donors, or an applicant the Dean met at some point in their high school career and wished to keep an eye on,” said Harvard spokeswoman Rachael Dane.

For example, Harvard accepted Jared Kushner despite an undistinguished high school record after his father, who was not an alumnus, pledged a $2.5 million gift.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Go look at table 11 on page 49. I guess there is one admissions preference the authors don't want to talk about.

http://public.econ.duke.edu/~psarcidi/legacyathlete.pdf

I’m usually a supporter of affirmative action but if this analysis is true it’s pretty damning. Half of Hispanic Harvard students and 2/3 of Harvard African American students wouldn’t have been admitted without racial preferences? Those numbers are high. People definitely find it offensive to be told “you wouldn’t be here without affirmative action, but these numbers say that is true much of the time.

Yup.

Which is why so many prefer to hide those numbers.

You people have no idea if this is true.

The full statement is "Half of Hispanic Harvard students and 2/3 of Harvard African American students wouldn’t have been admitted without racial preferences if only stats mattered".

Which is not the case.

Colleges feel racial diversity that reflects the overall population better helps them solve their mission. Why is that so hard to understand? And it benefits all races at different colleges. That fact gets ignored, always.

So, you're saying that all HBCUs should be abolished, as by design they fail to offer a critical, racially diverse education.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Go look at table 11 on page 49. I guess there is one admissions preference the authors don't want to talk about.

http://public.econ.duke.edu/~psarcidi/legacyathlete.pdf

I’m usually a supporter of affirmative action but if this analysis is true it’s pretty damning. Half of Hispanic Harvard students and 2/3 of Harvard African American students wouldn’t have been admitted without racial preferences? Those numbers are high. People definitely find it offensive to be told “you wouldn’t be here without affirmative action, but these numbers say that is true much of the time.

Yup.

Which is why so many prefer to hide those numbers.

You people have no idea if this is true.

The full statement is "Half of Hispanic Harvard students and 2/3 of Harvard African American students wouldn’t have been admitted without racial preferences if only stats mattered".

Which is not the case.

Colleges feel racial diversity that reflects the overall population better helps them solve their mission. Why is that so hard to understand? And it benefits all races at different colleges. That fact gets ignored, always.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Go look at table 11 on page 49. I guess there is one admissions preference the authors don't want to talk about.

http://public.econ.duke.edu/~psarcidi/legacyathlete.pdf

I’m usually a supporter of affirmative action but if this analysis is true it’s pretty damning. Half of Hispanic Harvard students and 2/3 of Harvard African American students wouldn’t have been admitted without racial preferences? Those numbers are high. People definitely find it offensive to be told “you wouldn’t be here without affirmative action, but these numbers say that is true much of the time.

Does it bother you that plenty of whites wouldn’t get in if they weren’t legacies or athletes?

Not at all. If you disallow all of the preferences, the number for whites don't change much. It might be different white kids, but there's nothing wrong with that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Go look at table 11 on page 49. I guess there is one admissions preference the authors don't want to talk about.

http://public.econ.duke.edu/~psarcidi/legacyathlete.pdf

I’m usually a supporter of affirmative action but if this analysis is true it’s pretty damning. Half of Hispanic Harvard students and 2/3 of Harvard African American students wouldn’t have been admitted without racial preferences? Those numbers are high. People definitely find it offensive to be told “you wouldn’t be here without affirmative action, but these numbers say that is true much of the time.

Does it bother you that plenty of whites wouldn’t get in if they weren’t legacies or athletes?