Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Harvard Rated Asian-American Applicants Lower on Personality Traits: Lawsuit

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 166 posts

Re: Harvard Rated Asian-American Applicants Lower on Personality Traits: Lawsuit

#91

Post by throwaway37585 »

Alex3917 wrote: post #87
throwaway37585 wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Research suggests that the SAT, widely used in college admissions, is primarily a measure of g. A correlation of .82 has been found between g scores computed from an IQ test battery and SAT scores. In a study of 165,000 students at 41 U.S. colleges, SAT scores were found to be correlated at .47 with first-year college grade-point average after correcting for range restriction in SAT scores (the correlation rises to…

> widely used in college admissions You need to correct for the fact that it's used in college admissions though, otherwise this isn't telling you anything. E.g. if tree identification were used as the basis for college admissions, within a couple years you'd find that the people who did the best in college were the ones who were the best at identifying trees.

My quote said SAT scores correlate with the g-factor and with GPA, not with admissions. If tree identification also correlated with these in your hypothetical world, why wouldn’t it be a legitimate criterion?

Re: Harvard Rated Asian-American Applicants Lower on Personality Traits: Lawsuit

#92

Post by ksk »

dnomad wrote: post #42
ardent_uno wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except being a URM (under represented minority) individual is one of the most beneficial factors for admission at elite colleges. The statistics clearly show this.

The "statistics" don't show any such thing. You do have to admire the intense racial resentment at work here. There's no evidence at all that these Asian Americans aren't boring cookie-cutter kids when compared to the broader pool of applicants. The headline literally reads 'Harvard admissions have a broader perspective than Alumni interviewers' ... duh. But this non-story is enough to summon up all sorts of wild acc…

Then only problem with saying "everybody is the same" is that its not true, but when you say everybody is not the same, people use it to discriminate against them.

Re: Harvard Rated Asian-American Applicants Lower on Personality Traits: Lawsuit

#93

Post by learc83 »

throwaway37585 wrote: post #81
dnomad wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Look up average SAT scores of different ethnic groups admitted to elite colleges as well. The disparity is glaring. Yes, everybody appeals to SAT scores. SAT scores are easily gamed. That's why more and more colleges are deprioritizing or abandoning them completely. What American colleges are increasingly uninterested in are excellent test-takers. Nobody is persuaded that students who are able to grind out excellen…

“Research suggests that the SAT, widely used in college admissions, is primarily a measure of g. A correlation of .82 has been found between g scores computed from an IQ test battery and SAT scores. In a study of 165,000 students at 41 U.S. colleges, SAT scores were found to be correlated at .47 with first-year college grade-point average after correcting for range restriction in SAT scores (the correlation rises to…

>g scores computed from an IQ test battery and SAT scores.

That's the problem IQ tests can be gamed as well. There's ample research showing you can study to improve your score on IQ tests.

Re: Harvard Rated Asian-American Applicants Lower on Personality Traits: Lawsuit

#94

Post by cascom »

ed_balls wrote: post #16
_jal wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because they want something that provides a subjective element for making decisions. Admissions is high-stakes for everyone, including Harvard. Having some opaque, non-mechanical criteria lets them pick and choose without giving as much of a lever to lawyers.

But why they need it?

Theoretically - so they can decide between two students that both had 4.0 GPAs, perfect SAT scores, and were class presidents, etc.

Cynically - it gives them cover to manage to "other goals" and chalking it up to a subjective measure that can't be proved/disproved

Re: Harvard Rated Asian-American Applicants Lower on Personality Traits: Lawsuit

#95

Post by throwaway37585 »

learc83 wrote: post #93
throwaway37585 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Research suggests that the SAT, widely used in college admissions, is primarily a measure of g. A correlation of .82 has been found between g scores computed from an IQ test battery and SAT scores. In a study of 165,000 students at 41 U.S. colleges, SAT scores were found to be correlated at .47 with first-year college grade-point average after correcting for range restriction in SAT scores (the correlation rises to…

>g scores computed from an IQ test battery and SAT scores. That's the problem IQ tests can be gamed as well. There's ample research showing you can study to improve your score on IQ tests.

And yet...

“Psychometricians generally regard IQ tests as having high statistical reliability.[9][56] A high reliability implies that – although test-takers may have varying scores when taking the same test on differing occasions, and although they may have varying scores when taking different IQ tests at the same age – the scores generally agree with one another and across time.”

“Clinical psychologists generally regard IQ scores as having sufficient statistical validity for many clinical purposes.[22][57][58] In a survey of 661 randomly sampled psychologists and educational researchers, published in 1988, Mark Snyderman and Stanley Rothman reported a general consensus supporting the validity of IQ testing. "On the whole, scholars with any expertise in the area of intelligence and intelligence testing (defined very broadly) share a common view of the most important components of intelligence, and are convinced that it can be measured with some degree of accuracy."”

Re: Harvard Rated Asian-American Applicants Lower on Personality Traits: Lawsuit

#96

Post by CompanionCuuube »

throwaway37585 wrote: post #76
rb808 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because future leaders aren't the ones with the best academic test scores.

And who are?

Someone with personality: "the guy you'd want to have a beer with"

Re: Harvard Rated Asian-American Applicants Lower on Personality Traits: Lawsuit

#97

Post by threatofrain »

leemailll wrote: post #18

Meanwhile uchicago decides to ditch sat http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-univers...

That doesn't mean they are doing anything in a less evidence-based manner. They may have simply devised a superior empirical instrument; of course, if they have done so, then it ought be demonstrable.

Re: Harvard Rated Asian-American Applicants Lower on Personality Traits: Lawsuit

#99

Post by mlthoughts2018 »

JackFr wrote: post #49
mlthoughts2018 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Make your children interesting,” Faust said, while rubbing her thumb against her index and middle fingers and winking at the audience.

The thing is Harvard doesn't need your money. If your non-legacy family has the resources to make a big enough donation to move to move the needle, your likely to either: 1) get in anyway just based on who you are, or 2) not really care whether you go to Harvard or not because you're the scion of generational wealth.

I think this is incorrect. It reminds me of The Simpsons' joke about Bill Gates, ("buy him out boys ... what, did you think I got rich by writing a bunch of checks?").

Harvard doesn't need anybody's money, but they sure aren't going to use endowment money to make things free. They want your money, regardless of whether or not they need it, whether it's a huge status-signaling donation or a drop in the ocean semester's worth of tuition. They absolutely are trying to optimize how to get that money, now and in the future.

I also think you underestimate how much big scions of generational wealth compete for status symbols like Harvard degrees. Once things become decoupled from money, that type of status signaling only increases in importance, lending legitimacy to the children of foreign rulers and diplomats, acting as a currency to normalize political relations with western countries or between corporations with vastly different political party affiliations.

Harvard sells status, and absolutely is looking at how to monetize that. If offering a pittance of tuition relief to underrepresented groups helps maintain their entrenched brand status, they'll do it because of the long term effect on their ability to monetize reputation, not in spite of.

It also reminds me of how Harvard absolutely hounds graduates for donations, despite utterly not needing them by comparison to what Harvard Management Corporation does. Mike Reiss (Simpsons writer and Harvard alum) skewered this in [0], saying among other things,

> "Harvard is like a bum who starts bugging you for spare change on the bus. And then follows you around for the rest of your life. Oh, and that bum already has $40 billion in the bank."

[0]: https://features.thecrimson.com/2014/fm-comedy-issue/article... >

Re: Harvard Rated Asian-American Applicants Lower on Personality Traits: Lawsuit

#100

Post by smsm42 »

The "character and fitness" criteria has been instituted by Harvard in 1920s for a very simple purpose - to solve the "Jewish problem", i.e. too many Jews getting into Harvard. After Harvard's President A. Lawrence Lowell's proposal of outright Jewish quota met significant resistance, they had to find some way to keep the Jews out while not having outright ban. So they had "geographic diversity" and "character" criteria. And it did wonders - Jewish admission percentage fell to the coveted 15% that was the original quota target. Now the same old weapon is being deployed against the new "too many people of your kind here" target.

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-ivy-leagues-history-of-di...

Post reply on HN