Live data from Hacker News

Harvard discrimination lawsuit: data show penalization of Asian-Americans

infoproc.blogspot.com

81–90 of 259 posts

Re: Harvard discrimination lawsuit: data show penalization of Asian-Americans

#81
I think something that's overlooked is the importance of parents in admissions. Case in point: Jewish culture values education in the same way that Asian families value education. As a result, a large number of white students admitted to Ivy Leagues are Jewish. 25% of the white students in my med school (Yale) were Jewish, despite making up only 1.4% of the U.S. population.

I don't agree with racial quotas, but there has to be some form of normalization for students whose parents/culture/childhood environment didn't value education.

Re: Harvard discrimination lawsuit: data show penalization of Asian-Americans

#82
Just to remember the 1990s, Harvard was also shown to colluded with other good schools to maximize the number of scholarships awarded. For example, one might receive a full scholarship from MIT or Harvard but not both.

As in that case, the activity leads to great discussions about what is fair, what are the goals of a university, and what may a private university choose?

Re: Harvard discrimination lawsuit: data show penalization of Asian-Americans

#83

To get past the affirmative-action-is-reverse-racism argument that often frame these discussions, I'd recommend checking out this thoughtful breakdown of the case from Metafilter: Yeah, debates over affirmative action are just one of many situations where the Asian American "model-minority" mythos gets used in service of anti-Black and anti-Latinx racism, and I encourage other Asian Americans to resist being used as…

Are those privileges really given to Asians? Isn't there a little possibility they have reached those privileges by themselves?

Why should a student who has worked hard all his life be punished for being Asian?

Why don't we try instead teaching those who are left behind how to get a at the top?

And by the way I'm not "white" at least not in the new racist standard, I'm a Latino (as if that meant anything, a race or an ethnicity? No one knows).

Re: Harvard discrimination lawsuit: data show penalization of Asian-Americans

#84
post #4

By enforcing racial quotas, Harvard and other institutions are actively cementing race as an important factor in our society, as if it's something we should care about. As such, they are not helping society to become post-racial - as must be our goal - but instead are forcing a racialized view of the world down our collective throats. While well intentioned, racial quotas are a regressive policy and history will look…

It seems like there are two conflicting goals: - don’t explicitly consider race, gender, etc., while you make a decision about a cohort of admitted applicants. That is, only use other “performance” criteria (grades, essay, recommendations, etc). - ensure that post facto, the observed distribution of demographic properties of your cohort of admitted students fairly reflects the natural distribution, within a societall…

> a cohort of students that greatly favors basically wealthy white people Isn't that already the case?

Re: Harvard discrimination lawsuit: data show penalization of Asian-Americans

#85
post #4

By enforcing racial quotas, Harvard and other institutions are actively cementing race as an important factor in our society, as if it's something we should care about. As such, they are not helping society to become post-racial - as must be our goal - but instead are forcing a racialized view of the world down our collective throats. While well intentioned, racial quotas are a regressive policy and history will look…

We can only become "post-racial" by acknowledging the role that race plays in our society. Otherwise, too much systemic and subconscious discrimination will get swept under the rug. Too many people who claim to want to be blind to race are either naive or willfully wanting to perpetuate conditions that are not equal based on the long history of discrimination in our society.

And Harvard's admissions aren't just about selecting the best collection of individual students. It's about selecting the best cohort of students. It's not just teachers that educate students, it's other classmates and a diversity of perspectives benefits all students. A good chef doesn't just choose all the most expensive ingredients, they try to balance flavors. Admissions departments should do the same, since their goal is to maximize the post-graduation success of the class they assemble, not to capture as much pre-admission achievement as possible.

For me, college was a time when I broadened my perspectives greatly. I can remember a discussion on, somewhat ironically, affirmative action in admissions, in which an African-American student said he didn't support it. His reasoning, which was eye opening to me at the time, was that he had no way of knowing whether he actually belonged there and worried that people looked at the color of his skin and assumed he got into school because of his race and not his intelligence. Up until that moment, I'd always looked at affirmative action as benefiting minorities at the expense of more deserving students. But I'd never consider the emotional toll it took on minorities. And that moment also drove home the fact that I'd never have gotten to hear that perspective if he hadn't been in that discussion group and, therefore, my education had been improved by his presence. After I made those points, it seemed to hit him that his presence there was valuable to the rest of us and not just the more limited way he'd seen it before. It was a bit of a kumbaya moment and several students remarked that their views of affirmative action had become more nuanced and (pardon the pun) less black and white.

The one area where I do agree with you is that I think racial categories often lack the nuance necessary to have that broadness of perspective in a college class. Lumping Southeast Asians, East Asians and South Asians together, for example, feels wrong to me. Similarly, lumping American caucasians with Russians, Scandanavian or Spanish people feels equally reductionist. Within the overly-broad racial categories, there's a lot of diversity that isn't necessarily recognized.

Re: Harvard discrimination lawsuit: data show penalization of Asian-Americans

#86
post #29
post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very easy. Admissions should be race blind and name blind. Everything else, including socioeconomic background, can be included in the admissions packet.

Socioeconomic background is blocked out for need-blind schools, of which there are a ton, Harvard included. The application process becomes a strict meritocracy when all of these points (race/name/need) are blocked, which works in a perfect world but does not work when you consider that socioeconomic disparities tend to impact minority races the most. Strict meritocracies are favored in the bay but are substantially…

Tangentially, if we wanted a strict meritocracy based solely on someone's skills, then we'd base our decisions off of a skill assessment that was open to all people, and do away with college degree credentialism. The current system is based on what you were like when you were 17, what your peers (competition) at the time were like, how admissions personnel feel (what they believe is) your personality at a particular time fits (what they believe is) the culture of an institution at a particular time, etc.

I think this sometimes gets overlooked - no matter what form it takes, the system of college credentialism is in itself fairly arbitrary and removed from actual merit. It shouldn't be surprising that such a system tends to run into a lot of problems.

Re: Harvard discrimination lawsuit: data show penalization of Asian-Americans

#87
In my opinion, Harvard needs to just be straight about why they're doing what they're doing. If it's race-based quotas for the sake of class diversity or long-term societal benefit, then just say it outright and we can have a discussion as a society as to whether that's ok. I personally think this is bad (with medium confidence), but understand that there are arguments for why it may be necessary.

What they shouldn't do is try to say: Asian people have worse personal characteristics, when evaluated by our admissions committee, even though no such deficit is found by the face-to-face interviewers. That's not propping up one race for well-intentioned reasons, but rather suggesting that a specific race is timid, not leadership qualities, worker bees, and many of the other negative stereotypes assigned to Asians.

Can you imagine what the newspapers would say if Harvard just said that Jewish people, on average, had worse personalities? Say, less honest and forthcoming than other ethnic groups?

Re: Harvard discrimination lawsuit: data show penalization of Asian-Americans

#88

> Yet Harvard’s admissions officials assign Asian Americans the lowest score of any racial group on the personal rating—a “subjective” assessment of such traits as ... “attractive person to be with,” is “widely respected,”... Why is such an evaluation is even necessary? What is its purpose? To give higher scores to one's relatives and friends? And how do you measure the wideness of respect? Well, if it is completely…

> Why is such an evaluation is even necessary? What is its purpose?

In general, selecting for good personality traits make sense. In the extreme, only selecting for test scores and grades ignores all of the characteristics that make a person good in real world endeavours (ex: all of the recurring HN stories about genius coders sucking at team work).

That said, evaluating for these in a consistent, non-biased way, at a scale of 40k/year seems incredibly difficult.

Re: Harvard discrimination lawsuit: data show penalization of Asian-Americans

#89
post #80
post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Black people on average make 1/3 less income than the average white person because certain significant subgroups of white people are highly privileged. The problem you then hit is that when you start compensating for certain groups by race, instead of the actual root of the problem (people who don't come from a priviledged background have a hard time getting out of it), you then leave everyone else absolutely screwed…

> Black people on average make 1/3 less income than the average white person because certain significant subgroups of white people are highly privileged. No that is wrong. It’s not some elite white subgroup. According to the BLS: “Among the major race and ethnicity groups, median weekly earnings for Black men working at full-time jobs were $723, or 72.5 percent of the median for White men ($997).” That’s not even cou…

In spite of a century the Black population is still concentrated in the South. I am not saying the disparity does not exist.

Blacks are less than 10% of population in California and about 33% of population in Alabama. That it self will skew numbers in certain way.

Re: Harvard discrimination lawsuit: data show penalization of Asian-Americans

#90
post #53
post #4

By enforcing racial quotas, Harvard and other institutions are actively cementing race as an important factor in our society, as if it's something we should care about. As such, they are not helping society to become post-racial - as must be our goal - but instead are forcing a racialized view of the world down our collective throats. While well intentioned, racial quotas are a regressive policy and history will look…

Race blindness isn’t the end goal, the goal is racial equality. Today, black people on average make 1/3 less income than white people. Because we must assume black people are intrinsically just as capable as white people, the goal must be to drive that disparity to zero. With that in mind, it makes no sense from a scientific/engineering perspective to ignore race. No scientist or engineer looks at a situation, sees a…

This is pure ideology, built with rhetoric on emotional sand instead of argument from principle.

A difference in outcome by itself in no way lays a requirement on society to 'drive that disparity to zero.' This is a baseless, indefensible assertion and leads to utter chaos when applied across society in the myriad ways one may analyze 'inequalities of outcome.'

Post reply on HN