11–20 of 568 posts
What a weird way to attempt to be "egalitarian" - Harvard's only purpose is to be selective and exclusionary. You can't be both.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe they found that SAT/ACT were not good criteria for selecting the best candidates.
SAT/ACT tests provide "objective" data that can then be used in lawsuits to prove discrimination. Can't win the lawsuit? Eliminate the proof!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe they found that SAT/ACT were not good criteria for selecting the best candidates.
SAT/ACT tests provide "objective" data that can then be used in lawsuits to prove discrimination. Can't win the lawsuit? Eliminate the proof!
Harvard did win the bias lawsuit last year (october 2019): https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/oct/01/harvard-ruli...
The organization challenging this is still there: https://studentsforfairadmissions.org/
Here's their latest complaint (march 2020): http://samv91khoyt2i553a2t1s05i-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-c...
Their latest update links to this paper (april 2020): http://samv91khoyt2i553a2t1s05i-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-c...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Harvard is selective and exclusionary but it doesn't need to select the objectively best people, it just has to select people that are "good enough". Most of the value of an undergrad degree at Harvard comes from networking rather than the education itself. It's a club.
(Unrelated, but I love, love, love your username.)
This will be slightly off-topic. When my parents were shopping for private schools in the early 1980's, they said they came across a couple of schools that were still requiring pictures like Harvard and other universities did in the past. And we should all should know what that means: passive-aggressive discrimination against non-WASPs in "enlightened" 1982 Santa Clara county, California.
Actually-enlightened admissions would blind the name, address, and appearance of the candidate until after they've seen what they've done, what they've written, and what they plan to do. Anything else, regardless if they drop the SAT or ACT: that reduces to bribery, legacy, appearances, connections, and/or pedigree is just social club pickiness in-order to keep "those other people" out.
Someone let me know when America becomes a meritocracy based on capabilities, accomplishments, and potential rather than the folks paying lip-service to it by and claim it is already from people who have every advantage.
It was just one of those things everyone did because everyone did it. With more opting out that momentum goes away and increasingly now people are asking “so why did we use this test again?”
Likely won’t be long until the SAT just disappears entirely and replaced with nothing, or subject tests or some other exams more practically linked to placement in certain programs.
Caltech is doing this -- actually, they're going test blind -- for two years. I think that's pretty notable, since I trust them to be interested in only admitting students that can pass their physics classes.
What a weird way to attempt to be "egalitarian" - Harvard's only purpose is to be selective and exclusionary. You can't be both.
I am cynical enough to believe it's a loophole to keep overachieving Asians or Indians from owning a rightful slot instead of a son or daughter of a wealthy donor, politician, or celebrity.