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

141–150 of 166 posts

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

#141

Post by Grue3 »

baybal2 wrote: post #20

I wonder if HN news algo reads my mind. In another news thread, I just pulled out the fact that Xiaomi electronics makes overwhelmingly superior gadgetry, yet can't break through the stigma of Asian "uncoolness" Situation for them is pretty much as it was with Toyota in its first decade in US, and them being greatly puzzled why Americans were so bent on buying Buicks over "twice as cheap, and twice as better" Corolla…

Xiaomi created a stigma for themselves, by shamelessly copying Apple in everything including presentation style. [1] So I can't really take them seriously (doesn't help that I don't like Apple either).

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/05/business/global/in-china-...

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

#142

Post by vinceguidry »

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 that can become successful despite the school they go to are classic social climbers and obviously the school they go to would benefit from having those social climbers go there. But the relative benefit to the organization of one successful alum is miniscule compared to the benefit that the school has on every single matriculant.

A university's entire goal is to empower anyone to succeed. That's the whole reason they exist. If Harvard's reputation as a gateway to elite society is lost, society doesn't gain another one elsewhere. It's just lost. People that could succeed without college will still succeed. It's all those people that couldn't have succeeded without college, that went to college and gained the benefit of having an education there, that will lose that opportunity.

Imagine a world in which Harvard is only slightly better than Georgia State. That's what's at stake here.

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

#143

Post by fapjacks »

vinceguidry wrote: post #140
fapjacks wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you, but this is not a tragedy of the commons.

> The tragedy of the commons is a term used in social science to describe a situation in a shared-resource system where individual users acting independently according to their own self-interest behave contrary to the common good of all users by depleting or spoiling that resource through their collective action. The Ivy League is a resource shared by both the commons and the elites. The belief stated at the end of m…

Huh, it's an interesting idea, that Ivy League is a public resource. I don't agree with that, because they're private institutions. I can see where you're coming from, though, and I'd say that's a super-populist way of thinking about them (and please note that I didn't say anything else about populism). But even in the case that the Ivy League universities were a public resource, it certainly is not "writ large" that this is a tragedy of the commons.

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

#144

Post by johan_larson »

akhilcacharya wrote: post #139
jogjayr wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting. Thanks for providing that additional viewpoint. My impression, based on my experience navigating the American grad school admissions process, was that the undergrad process was the same thing turned up to 11. I read about personal essay writers and interview coaches and the right set of extracurricular activities.

Not at all, only for the top schools. I got into 2 of my state schools (1 of which is also being sued for this) and I was a very average student (#2 in class, 1500/1600, 66 college credits). You only need a fancy resume if you apply to the T20 schools, some of which are more selective if you’re from out of state.

> (#2 in class, 1500/1600, 66 college credits)

That doesn't sounds like an average student to me. You were entering college as a junior, effectively.

Thanks for the info, though.

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

#145

Post by sridca »

jfnixon wrote: post #124
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?

The world is built by Harvard graduates? Who?

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

#146

Post by vinceguidry »

fapjacks wrote: post #143
vinceguidry wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The tragedy of the commons is a term used in social science to describe a situation in a shared-resource system where individual users acting independently according to their own self-interest behave contrary to the common good of all users by depleting or spoiling that resource through their collective action. The Ivy League is a resource shared by both the commons and the elites. The belief stated at the end of m…

Huh, it's an interesting idea, that Ivy League is a public resource. I don't agree with that, because they're private institutions. I can see where you're coming from, though, and I'd say that's a super-populist way of thinking about them (and please note that I didn't say anything else about populism). But even in the case that the Ivy League universities were a public resource, it certainly is not "writ large" that…

You seem to have knowledge and an understanding of the concept that I don't. I'd love to hear your articulation.

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

#147

Post by johan_larson »

jogjayr wrote: post #130
johan_larson wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

The case where it might help is the bright kid from a working class background; you know, the kind who works part-time and therefore doesn't have time for extracurricular activities.

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

#148

Post by fapjacks »

vinceguidry wrote: post #146
fapjacks wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh, it's an interesting idea, that Ivy League is a public resource. I don't agree with that, because they're private institutions. I can see where you're coming from, though, and I'd say that's a super-populist way of thinking about them (and please note that I didn't say anything else about populism). But even in the case that the Ivy League universities were a public resource, it certainly is not "writ large" that…

You seem to have knowledge and an understanding of the concept that I don't. I'd love to hear your articulation.

It's right there in my last post. Ivy League universities are not a public resource. Also, a tragedy of the commons is a tragedy of the commons, and you are being really disingenuous trying to compare control on the inputs of an Ivy League university with eating a species into extinction.

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

#149

Post by [deleted] »

Jagat wrote: post #63
nmeofthestate wrote: post #27

I guess the more woolly selection criteria are there so that racial discrimination can be conducted, otherwise the student population would be overwhelmingly asian with a large white minority?

It's possible. Controlling for grit and time spent not resting, being the best at anything demands a significant time investment in that activity. If you had just one hour a day, you could spend it either playing basketball or doing math. I'm not saying one is better than the other; just that if you do the former, you'll get better at basketball. If you do the latter, you'll do better at math. (I'm fully aware of stu…

[deleted]

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

#150

Post by vinceguidry »

fapjacks wrote: post #148
vinceguidry wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to have knowledge and an understanding of the concept that I don't. I'd love to hear your articulation.

It's right there in my last post. Ivy League universities are not a public resource. Also, a tragedy of the commons is a tragedy of the commons, and you are being really disingenuous trying to compare control on the inputs of an Ivy League university with eating a species into extinction.

They don't have to be public, they have to be shared.

I thought you had some interesting economic point to make about these kinds of situations. So instead let me make one of my own. Economics isn't physics, it's broadly applicable to any kind of situation you think to apply it to. Any time you have a situation where you'd want to say, "this is why we can't have nice things," you're looking at a tragedy of the commons.

Post reply on HN