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

101–110 of 166 posts

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

#101

Post by [deleted] »

ksk wrote: post #89
Alex3917 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why do you assume that Asians are only good at posting test scores and grades? Not something I said or implied. I was purely talking about the responses to the NYC admissions thing on Facebook, the NYC subreddit, etc. > Those scores are being talked about because of all the criteria they are the measurable ones They're not measurable, they just have numbers attached to them. You can attach numbers to a personality…

Two people solving a maths problem draw upon a system of acquired knowledge that is uncorrelated with their gender, age, ethnicity and sexual orientation. If they get identical answers, they are graded identically. >You can attach numbers to a personality test just as easily. Please, do propose this novel test. Shouldn't take you too long..

[deleted]

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

#102

Post by Alex3917 »

throwaway37585 wrote: post #91
Alex3917 wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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?

> My quote said SAT scores correlate with the g-factor and with GPA, not with admissions.

My point was that the fact that it's used in admissions changes the correlation with g-factor and GPA. If you want to argue that SAT correlates with these things, then you should only be using SAT scores from countries where the SAT isn't used in college admissions.

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

#103

Post by thomzi12 »

dnautics wrote: post #32

These sorts of subjective judgements can drive you crazy. My father (who was asian-american) had a civilian job with the United States government and a part time job with the United States navy. His civilian job, which was in the most corrupt branch of the executive branch, rated him as a poor performer personality wise and as having "no leadership potential". Nobody got the message, really since after this he took a…

Why didn’t he leave to the private sector?

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

#104

Post by thomzi12 »

noetic_techy wrote: post #35

Funny how the activist at these universities cry "institutional racism" when in reality the only concrete verifiable evidence of it is their own institution. It makes no sense to cry about white privilege when you're actively holding down a race that is on pace and even outperforming whites in higher education and median income, and yet this very contradiction and others alludes people due to their own confirmation b…

Activists at an institution are very different people from the admissions personnel at an institution

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

#105

Post by dtawfik1 »

The entire tech industry would not exist if we judged people based on this:

In its admissions process, Harvard scores applicants in five categories — “academic,” “extracurricular,” “athletic,” “personal” and “overall.” They are ranked from 1 to 6, with 1 being the best.

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

#106

Post by xapata »

ganzuul wrote: post #69
xapata wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many organizations create processes that are essentially random number generators. It allows bureaucrats to insert their personal preferences under a veneer of technocracy. Hang out at a corporate budget allocation meeting sometime.

I wonder if the processes are created for that purpose, or if that is just how they end up getting used.

Usually an accident, or unconscious. In this case, I suspect intentional.

It's pretty common for someone with good intentions to institute a policy for deciding what they thought was previously disorganized and substandard. Instead, all they've done is create a way for powerful people to hide their choices behind the "objective" policy. The trick is that the folks in power control the inputs, even if they don't control the algorithm. As a management consultant, the client boss didn't tell me what to say, but they decided who I could talk to. Note the current trend in machine learning.

Imagine if Harvard had fed its past admissions into an artificial neural network! Maybe they could have hid behind that back box.

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

#107

Post by thucydidesofusa »

rb808 wrote: post #33

I read an article a while back that compared admissions process to a bouncer in a nightclub. Was the best description of why things are done as they are. As a hazy summary - the prestigious institutions try to have a mix of different types of people - rich people bring resources, well connected families bring influence & contacts, people with high test scores bring hard work and intelligence, achievers in arts/sports…

>Harvard has no obligation to do this.

It's not clear what obligations a non-profit, private institution like Harvard might have, but that doesn't mean they have unlimited freedom to act how they want.

Businesses (and to be clear, Harvard is chartered as a business) are expected to conduct their business in a non-discriminatory way. This is why restaurants aren't allowed to say "No Irish" or "No Blacks" anymore.

Now, Harvard's actions aren't rising to the level of a Jim Crow diner, but they're certainly racially motivated to some degree and the issue is whether or not the degree of racial discrimination is permissible.

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

#108

Post by thucydidesofusa »

jsilvers wrote: post #19

RadioLab ran an interesting episode about the person behind this lawsuit and other lawsuits against affirmative action in schools. His activism a double edged sword. https://www.wnycstudios.org/story/more-perfect-plaintiffs/

What's the other edge to reducing racial discrimination?

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

#109

Post by learc83 »

throwaway37585 wrote: post #95
learc83 wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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 re…

None of what you cited has anything to do with sustained practice.

IQ tests are generally accurate across a large population because very few people are practicing them, not because practice doesn't improve scores.

If you provided widespread incentive for people to practice IQ tests like colleges do for the SAT, they would cease to be an accurate measure of intelligence.

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

#110

Post by fapjacks »

rb808 wrote: post #33

I read an article a while back that compared admissions process to a bouncer in a nightclub. Was the best description of why things are done as they are. As a hazy summary - the prestigious institutions try to have a mix of different types of people - rich people bring resources, well connected families bring influence & contacts, people with high test scores bring hard work and intelligence, achievers in arts/sports…

Yes, yes. But what brings in the research dollars?
Post reply on HN