Asian groups allege Harvard discriminates against them in admissions

Diversity is a worthy goal, but people aren't just representatives of their group; they are individuals. The individual who doesn't get into Harvard on the basis of his/her ethnicity is harmed for life.

If you are admitting 5000 people and 80% of the top 5000 on paper are Asian what do you do? They have to discriminate legally in this area in order to give a representative number of blacks, Hispanics, and whites a chance at getting in.

And i don't think they should, either.

Why not just merit?

12% black, 20% Hispanic, etc, etc.

It's been proven that black and Hispanic students are at a disadvantage when it comes to tests like te SAT measuring their capabilities. The tests are biased to whites and Asians.

Everyone who applies anywhere believes that he/she is qualified to be admitted. Just because you don't get accepted by your first choice doesn't equate to being harmed for life. Something like 30,000 applicants don't get into Harvard every year. That'd be a lot of 'harmed for life' people in the U.S. over the last several decades. 'Harmed for life' = epic fail.

Do they want a school that is just Asain and White people?

Are biased against black and Hispanic people.

If only looking at someone's GPA and test scores leads to a non-diverse environment, maybe that's a good indication that those factors should be used as much?

What if a college cut off African-American admissions when they reached 13% because "we don't want to be too black."

But somehow discrimination against Asians is more acceptable.

That would be the MLK solution.

that is a RW argument!!

He was a proponent of affirmative action.

http://fair.org/extra-online-articles/the-right-has-a-dream/

King was well aware of the arguments used against affirmative action policies. As far back as 1964, he was writing in Why We Can’t Wait: “Whenever the issue of compensatory treatment for the Negro is raised, some of our friends recoil in horror. The Negro should be granted equality, they agree; but he should ask nothing more. On the surface, this appears reasonable, but it is not realistic.”

King supported affirmative action-type programs because he never confused the dream with American reality. As he put it, “A society that has done something special against the Negro for hundreds of years must now do something special for the Negro” to compete on a just and equal basis (quoted in Let the Trumpet Sound, by Stephen Oates).

In a 1965 Playboy interview, King compared affirmative action-style policies to the GI Bill: “Within common law we have ample precedents for special compensatory programs…. And you will remember that America adopted a policy of special treatment for her millions of veterans after the war.”

In King’s teachings, affirmative action approaches were not “reverse discrimination” or “racial preference.” King promoted affirmative action not as preference for race over race (or gender over gender), but as a preference for inclusion, for equal oportunity, for real democracy. Nor was King’s integration punitive: For him, integration benefited all Americans, male and female, white and non-white alike. And contrary to Gingrich, King insisted that, along with individual efforts, collective problems require collective solutions.

Being a military brat, born and raised in Germany/United Kingdom, to a German mum and black father, I have done quit well for myself without special assistance because of my race. I would find it insulting to be offered a position, over others, because of the colour of my flesh.

From Why We Can't Wait (1964):



From Where Do We Go From Here? (1967):

but my understanding has been that Harvard, like all major American universities, takes the diversity of American (and International) high school experiences into account and attempts to look at the "whole person" in admissions. They are also attempting to craft a diverse incoming class as a whole.

Besides, as a private institution Harvard can do what it wants.

However, if this group wants to go after the Ivy League's routine admission of super rich "legacy" students, who take up seats that a more deserving student should have had, God bless 'em. Every time it's mentioned that Bush got to go to Yale, it contributes to my future ulcer.

Asians get shafted in college admissions. It's clear race-based discrimination.

I hope Harvard gets nailed big time for this.

2010 Census--14.1% of California population is Asian

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06000.html


Undergraduate Student Ethnicity at UCLA for 2014: Asian/Pacific Islander 33.5%

https://www.admissions.ucla.edu/campusprofile.htm


http://opa.berkeley.edu/uc-berkeley-fall-enrollment-data


I'm a UCLA grad and I heard a lot of my friends who still live in California complain that it's almost
impossible for their children to get into UCLA anymore (for whites).


Harvard's Class of 2018 ethnicity: 20% Asian-American
https://college.harvard.edu/admissions/admissions-statistics

Seems a lot of people who oppose discrimination against blacks are fine with discrimination against Asians.

Maybe a little leeway should be in place besides grades and tests scores for other minorities?

I don't know what the answer is but the article suggests elite universities wouldn't be full of Asians and white but would be full of Asians and a few whites.

The numbers even in heavily Asian California top out at 40%.

For a school like Harvard, it would be much less.

Like I said, even in the most heavily Asain state, it's tops out at 40%. Asians can only fill so many slots.

Plenty of kids of other races get high test scores.

Just using the data in the article.

Sure individuals of all races get high scores, but the overall numbers cited in the article would lead to primarily Asian/White college populations.

discrimination, and hopefully move colleges away from credentialism and back towards education (and probably lowering costs significantly, since I imagine community colleges would get a lot of the windfall).

They want some life and flair in there.

Not just a bunch of people that will bore the ass off you at a party.

I know you didn't mean it but this sentiment:





feeds into certain stereotypes ...

You will have the potted plant in the far corner poking you in the back all night.

Nothing at all to do with race in my mind.

Just people communicating from a place in the brain I can barely fathom.

That is called being a racist.

A college roster should be filled by many means and not grades and numbers alone.

Schools and grades before college favors a narrow sliver of thought process.

That sliver of thought bores me.

Whatever race they might happen to be.

the interests of Asian Americans, rather than just those of whites.

This is a really difficult subject . I suspect an Asian or Pacific Islander would argue that they too are discriminated against and while if they shouldn't be beneficiaries of affirmative action as a consequence of being discriminated against they certainly shouldn't be penalized as a result of it.

But they are protecting their brand.

Second, the administrators and faculty of Harvard, first and foremost, protect their own interests. If they go by test scores, class rank and AP course they would become almost exclusively a pre med and STEM school. Not so good for the sociology department or the various studies programs. And they have to protect those jobs.

opportunity to blacks and Hispanic students would require a lot of money and would target early education. People are not willing to do that, and so we try to bandage things up at the level of college admissions. Granted, grades and SAT scores are not the only relevant measures of ability, but the bottom line is that universities are not only interested in ability when it comes to admissions. They have diversity goals that mean that students who are more capable are sometimes not admitted to make room for students who are less capable but help the university achieve its diversity goals.

Is college about academic performance, or is it a sociological experiment? You can go 50/50, but then obviously you won't get all of either one, which isn't fair to everyone. Not fair to everyone if you go 100% one way or the other either.

From a fan in the stands viewpoint, there's really nothing more entertaining than people getting crazy about fairness. We all do it at some point too. What's fair for one won't be for another. They say life isn't fair, and by trying to make life more fair, we still end up proving the original assertion correct.