Harvard Rated Asian-American Applicants Lower on Personality Traits: Lawsuit • Hacker News Board

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

#121

Post by mlthoughts2018 » Sat, Jun 16, 2018, 12:41 AM UTC

perl4ever wrote: post #119

mlthoughts2018 wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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'…

"Harvard doesn't need anybody's money, but they sure aren't going to use endowment money to make things free." I thought Harvard did make it essentially free to attend if your parents have a middle class income.

Around 20% don’t pay tuition I believe. But keep in mind that Harvard tilts heavy toward grad student population, and selects heavily for students that win fellowships and this brings in outside money (that is how I got to attend) and master’s students who typically pay full tuition. Among my PhD cohort, it was a common joke to say that 1 graduate student was funding X free undergrads in the department (given that we were all supported fully, including insurance, by outside funding).

20% of undergrads going tuition-free is just part of Harvard’s marketing budget. It’s not philanthropy, just the cost of doing business if your business is elite status signaling.

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

#122

Post by perl4ever » Sat, Jun 16, 2018, 12:43 AM UTC

azhu wrote: post #65

Karishma1234 wrote: post #41

This is newspeak for "Asians do not score well on parameters that don't matter in real life". Asian student community is remarkably focused on real results instead of pointless activism and social justice wars. Partly the reason they are high achievers in real life where as most kids who "do well on personality traits" turn out to be losers.

> "parameters that don't matter in real life" Asian Americans are the least likely group in the US to be promoted to management. https://hbr.org/2018/05/asian-americans-are-the-least-likely...

If that's so, it's interesting how many prominent CEOs there are. Just off the top of my head, Sundar Pichai and Satya Nadella come to mind.

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

#123

Post by baybal2 » Sat, Jun 16, 2018, 12:50 AM UTC

ardent_uno wrote: post #26

wozniacki wrote: post #6

From the horse's mouth: “We could fill our class twice over with valedictorians,” Harvard President Drew Gilpin Faust told an audience at the Aspen Ideas Festival, sponsored by the Aspen Institute and The Atlantic, on Monday. That means admissions officers rely on intangibles like interesting essays or particularly unusual recommendations to decide who comprises the 5.9 percent of applicants who get in. Faust's top t…

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.

On the other side of "social invisibility" lies life of being "trophy" talent/socialite acquaintance/romantic partner, and, the most dreaded one, the life of diversity hire.

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

#124

Post by jfnixon » Sat, Jun 16, 2018, 3:52 AM UTC

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, just look at the world today, built by Harvard graduates. It is the best of all possible worlds, isn't it?

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

#125

Post by jogjayr » Sat, Jun 16, 2018, 5:16 AM UTC

crooked-v wrote: post #117

dhruvarora013 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the Indian system seems fairer on the outset and more merit-based but there are definitely conditions attached to the entrance examinations. For instance, - It’s more than just a Boolean to get into the right school. Your score dictates what major you’ll study for the next 3-4 years. This idea single-handedly ruins it for most students as they try and game the system because they want to study what they’re in…

> Your score dictates what major you’ll study for the next 3-4 years. Do you have more info available on that? That sounds really bizarre to me.

Unlike in American colleges, students in India apply to both a college and a major at that college. So competition for desirable majors in the top schools is cutthroat. If you don't get enough marks you don't get to study that major at that college - either go to a different college or (in the case of really high reputation institutes like the IITs) study something else at that college.

Generally you can't change your major without changing your college and starting over (or at least from year 2) so it's almost never done. I saw a thread on Reddit the other day where someone explained the Russian system and it sounds similar to what we have in India:

"Majors/minors. It's such a big deal in a lot of fiction, for example. But even though I read about it a lot of times, I still don't quite get it, along with class selection. In Russia, you choose a specialization when you enroll (e.g. Applied Math), and from the day one to the end, all students in your group will attend the same classes and take the same tests and exams. American system seems like a computer game's research tree to me - "you must unlock A, B and C before studying D", and somehow, it's your burden to keep track of what classes you attended and got grades in. WTF. Here, you just get a ready-made complete curriculum, no need to do anything but study. If you feel you chose a wrong specialization in the beginning, you might change it, and then things become a bit complicated, but it only happens rarely, and usually only right after the first semester." [1]

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/8qrh78/nonameric...

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

#126

Post by jogjayr » Sat, Jun 16, 2018, 5:33 AM UTC

RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #120

jogjayr wrote: post #11

I can't help but think that college admissions based solely on test scores (as done in India, Russia, maybe China?), and nothing else, might be the least unfair way to judge applicants. Every admission system is unfair in some way but tests are a yardstick everyone understands and can optimize for. In India they publicly post the list of admitted students and their marks. Richer students may benefit from higher-quali…

>I thought the American system sounded better when I was a high-schooler in India with not good but not great marks You would probably have been lumped in and compared to the other Asian high-performers and would not have even gotten an interview.

I wasn't a "high-performer" though. My high school marks were top 20%, my entrance exam scores were maybe 70th percentile if I'm generous with myself (I honestly don't remember). I was academically good, but not a standout performer.

Like teenagers everywhere else I rationalized my laziness and underachievement by saying to myself "Oh but I have other hobbies, and I write well, and I'm not like those swotty scholars with their noses in schoolbooks all the time. An enlightened education system like America's with their personal essays would take all those other intangibles into account and therefore value me just as much!".

Now that I'm older I'm starting to see the dark side of an admissions system with squishier, more malleable standards. I think it's possible that the current system, even with all its evils, is the most corruption- and bias-proof system possible in India. The only way to "hack" it is by outright fraud or other crimes - fake documents, leaking exam papers or otherwise tampering with the examination process. Otherwise everyone has to write the same exams, and study whatever their marks earn them (let's leave the additional complication of reservations out of this for now).

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

#127

Post by jogjayr » Sat, Jun 16, 2018, 5:35 AM UTC

tlholaday wrote: post #34

jogjayr wrote: post #11

I can't help but think that college admissions based solely on test scores (as done in India, Russia, maybe China?), and nothing else, might be the least unfair way to judge applicants. Every admission system is unfair in some way but tests are a yardstick everyone understands and can optimize for. In India they publicly post the list of admitted students and their marks. Richer students may benefit from higher-quali…

Single-gate protocols reward investment in gate-deception.

Multi-gate protocols increase amount of gate-deception investment required, making it harder only for economically- or socially-disadvantaged students to subvert them.

With a single-gate protocol gate-deception investments have diminishing returns, which could (I'm not an expert) put participants on a more level playing field.

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

#128

Post by intended » Sat, Jun 16, 2018, 5:46 AM UTC

throw1471 wrote: post #118

vinceguidry wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The best way I've been able to find to think about this is the fundamental axiom of geopolitics, which is basically tribalism defined mathematically. People want to work with and help others who are closer to them, who they feel are neighbors, brothers. This gets more and more true the more money and resources you have. While you and I are more tribally identified with Asian Americans, America's upper crust considers…

If Harvard admission criteria leave out the best applicants to other colleges, and they go on to create powerful companies like Google in large number, will Harvard’s prestige decrease despite continued support from the elites? Doing well in tech entrepreneurship needs brilliance more than great personality and political connections (they should be above a level but you don’t need a very high level of them). Politics…

People forget that Harvard may be their first choice, but their safety schools will be Stanford and so on.

These candidates who don’t get into Harvard but were contenders are not hurting for overall choice.

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

#129

Post by jogjayr » Sat, Jun 16, 2018, 5:55 AM UTC

acomjean wrote: post #39

jogjayr wrote: post #11

I can't help but think that college admissions based solely on test scores (as done in India, Russia, maybe China?), and nothing else, might be the least unfair way to judge applicants. Every admission system is unfair in some way but tests are a yardstick everyone understands and can optimize for. In India they publicly post the list of admitted students and their marks. Richer students may benefit from higher-quali…

The supreme court ruled that you can use a variety of metrics for admissions. Like hiring you have to try and make a transparent decision, not just "I feel like this person would work well", so everything gets measured and quantified. Harvard hired an analysis of their admissions: 196 page analysis of the admissions process. It seems like they rank 4 things: Academics/ extracurricular/ personality / athletics. You ca…

Thanks for providing that information. I respect that the admissions office at Harvard have a tough job and they've made it tougher, for the worthwhile goal of increasing diversity of student life experiences, for themselves by taking into account all these extra factors. And I know that the admissions office at every college is 100% committed to doing their jobs to the very best of their ability.

But extracurricular activities and personality seem like things that are fundamentally incomparable. What's better, 3 years at a local soup kitchen or 2 summers in a developing nation teaching arts and crafts? Cello or acting? Public speaking skills or organizational ability? Ambitious go-getter or diplomatic consensus-builder? For all I know Harvard has a rubric for judging what's better or worse but at some level they all seem like subjective judgments prone to some sort of bias. My mental model of the implementation details of this system is most likely flawed but I don't see how you can get around this problem. Happy to learn more though.

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

#130

Post by jogjayr » Sat, Jun 16, 2018, 6:01 AM UTC

johan_larson wrote: post #48

jogjayr wrote: post #11

I can't help but think that college admissions based solely on test scores (as done in India, Russia, maybe China?), and nothing else, might be the least unfair way to judge applicants. Every admission system is unfair in some way but tests are a yardstick everyone understands and can optimize for. In India they publicly post the list of admitted students and their marks. Richer students may benefit from higher-quali…

The more I read about the contortions US colleges go through in the name of social justice, the better scores-only admission looks to me.

I'm genuinely curious to know if scores-only admission would deliver a more economically-diverse student population. I don't know how you'd investigate that though.

My hypothesis is, if there's no benefit to doing expensive extracurricular activities, hiring a personal essay coach or college counselors, getting recommendation letters, and all the other ceremony, elite colleges might become more accessible to students of limited means. There's only so much of an advantage that expensive test coaching can give you, right?