Harvard discrimination lawsuit: data show penalization of Asian-Americans • Hacker News Board

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

#121

Post by hn_throwaway_99 » Mon, Jun 18, 2018, 3:05 AM UTC

allenz wrote: post #112

dokein wrote: post #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…

Racial quotas are illegal, so Harvard cannot say it outright. Harvard says that race is considered as a factor in their holistic evaluation.

Yep, and it is the US Supreme Court responsible for this semi-nonsense. At the end of the day, looking at a statistically large enough population, "one factor in a holistic evaluation" ends up looking exactly the same as quotas.

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

#122

Post by rotred » Mon, Jun 18, 2018, 3:07 AM UTC

aabajian wrote: post #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…

> but there has to be some form of normalization for students whose parents/culture/childhood environment didn't value education

You can't possible judge that unless you resort to stereotypes. How do you tell an Asian/Jewish student whose parents didn't put immense value on their education to one that did. You simply can't without making sweeping generalizations based on someone's appearance.

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

#123

Post by allenz » Mon, Jun 18, 2018, 3:08 AM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #2

Is there an easy way to get updates about this case in my inbox? I'm really hoping Harvard gates raked over the coals for its behavior. Not only for the racism. But the self-righteousness with which it pursued its agenda.

Try Google Alerts: https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/4815696?hl=en

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

#124

Post by siosonel » Mon, Jun 18, 2018, 3:08 AM UTC

userbinator wrote: post #78

rayiner wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Because we must assume black people are intrinsically just as capable as white people, the goal must be to drive that disparity to zero. Must we? There's another comment here about no one seeming too bothered that the NBA doesn't contain very many Asians. Is it already too racist to believe that there are certainly trends in race, and that everyone is different and should be considered on their individual merits alon…

We must.

Asians have not been systematically denied entry to the NBA for hundreds of years. I do not deny that there are ethnic differences or cultural priorities. But if a group of people has been systematically told for a very long time that they cannot achieve anything beyond being a slave, then that oppressed group would probably not bother to engage in technical or scientific pursuits, nor would they have time to pursue higher education because they were not allowed to do so.

Think about that: a group of people have been systematically given a chance to prove themselves, while another group was systematically prevented from doing the same. It's a systemic issue that requires a comprehensive solution. It must start with assuming the very assumption that you are questioning, since how else could start from a clean slate?

(1. And no, race blindness is not starting from a clean slate, it's denying the systematically-imposed disadvantages that already exists. 2. Your examples posing asians against blacks and asians rub me the wrong way, a bit like race baiting although I don't know you enough or the tone of your explanations to say for sure.)

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

#125

Post by toomanybeersies » Mon, Jun 18, 2018, 3:09 AM UTC

temp-dude-87844 wrote: post #43

Thought experiment: if you made all admission decisions by lottery, by randomly admitting a previously decided, fixed number of n applicants out of all valid applications received, and the resulting cohort of admitted individuals was later found to significantly differ in demographic composition from both the local and nationwide composition of population, would that be discriminatory? If not, would it at least be pr…

On face value this system seems fair, the most capable students get accepted, regardless of ethnicity or race.

The problem with this is that a lot of students from disadvantaged minorities don't get the same opportunities growing up. They might be just as capable as non-disadvantaged students, but get worse grades because they had to work after school to help pay the bills, or didn't have internet access at home, or a variety of other reasons.

This is why in some systems, there is a different entry stream for minorities. It's been a while since I applied to university, but I believe that in New Zealand for subjects that have a grade cutoff for entry, Maori (indigenous) students have a lower cutoff for entry to account for this.

Of course, this is a blunt instrument in affirmative action. There are plenty of Maori kids who grew up in a middle class environment who are no worse off than white kids, but still get the same affirmative action as poor Maori kids, and there's white people who get left out because they grew up in a disadvantaged environment.

If you could come up with a model that works better than just bluntly delineating by race, that would be great. But it's hard to factor for every variable. Maybe you could base it on the median income for the zipcode of the school that the student went to, but then you'll be fooled by creative accounting and wealthy families sending their kids to poor schools.

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

#126

Post by somecontext » Mon, Jun 18, 2018, 3:09 AM UTC

CharlesMerriam2 wrote: post #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?

For some context in case anyone was curious, this New York Times article from 1991 discusses the collusion this post is presumably referring to: https://www.nytimes.com/1991/05/23/us/ivy-universities-deny-...

(Note that the purpose of the collusion was to price-fix to avoid competition, which is the exact opposite of the example given.)

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

#127

Post by Jamerson » Mon, Jun 18, 2018, 3:14 AM UTC

Before you downvote, give me a number count: how many people of african descent work in your office? How many are really dark and not just mocha? How many really dark ones are really capable?

See you in the downvote pile!

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

#128

Post by PakG1 » Mon, Jun 18, 2018, 3:18 AM UTC

JauntyHatAngle wrote: post #63

PakG1 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read an academic paper yesterday that read exactly like you. It's crazy hard to parse the words without my eyes glazing over. I fear universities try to teach students to sound clever and intellectual, not clear and comprehensible. I just had to vent because I have to slog through a large number of academic papers over the next few weeks and if they're all like this, I might weep from agony. Besides that, parsing y…

I apologise, but that is my genuine question, and my genuine thoughts. The way I wrote that is because on issues like this, people get quite charged one way or another, so I wanted to avoid anything personal and just hear the specifics. I'm definitely putting myself into the deep end on this stuff, so I want to hear more on the arguments from both sides - and also the specifics on this case because a lot of it slides…

OK, having parsed your comment again on a larger screen, I don't think you've missed the parent's point. But I do think you took an unnecessarily long, roundabout way to ask your question, which I also think didn't need to be asked because I think the parent's view is quite clear. So your question didn't add to the conversation on two points: first, it was really verbose and obtuse; second, it didn't contribute to the conversation because it was unnecessary. A response to the parent would have been much more constructive. And no need for Socratic method here to make points. Just make the point, we're all adults. Yeah, people get charged on these types of topics, but if your own writing is civil and to the point, getting charged is on them, not on you.

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

#129

Post by glangdale » Mon, Jun 18, 2018, 3:19 AM UTC

gizmo686 wrote: post #111

brighteyes wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there has to be some form of normalization for students whose parents/culture/childhood environment didn't value education. Why? Colleges are literally places of education. It doesn't seem odd that children who focused on their education would be highly-represented there. Intervening earlier may make sense - promote education in environments where it's less focused on.

Consider two children, Alice and Bob, who appear equal on objective measurements while applying to college. Alice comes from an environment that heavily values education; Bob comes from one that does not. Despite this, they both achieved equal academic results. Further, if admitted, they will both find themselves in the same education valuing environment (college). Since Bob came from an environment that did not valu…

This assumes that the sum total of Alice and Bob's ability to perform in higher education is measurable by their admissions portfolio.

I can picture many different things matching this overall impression. Perhaps Alice is the child of two university professors and has vaguely drifted to near-perfect scores without really having to work. Alternately, she has slaved over her books desperate to please her parents and is at the end of her rope.

Similarly, Bob might be a self-educated polymath who has transcended his background, or a crammer who has carefully done everything exactly right to produce the highest score possible, but is almost entirely uneducated outside of the areas that produced good-looking admissions.

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

#130

Post by toomanybeersies » Mon, Jun 18, 2018, 3:21 AM UTC

wallace_f wrote: post #38

brighteyes wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It wouldn't be 90%. It would be 40%, most likely, because that's what happens in California universities that don't have racial quotas. Even if it would somehow go up to 90%, and people viewed that negatively, why does that matter? Those people are wrong.

NBA all star teams are virtually 100% Black, and 0% Asian. Does it matter? Nobody seems to care. But if a software company or university has too many or too few Asians, then this is some kind of civil rights issue? Instead of securing equal rights, this country has turned into securing special interest rights. Everything from marijuana prohibition to gay marriage to discrimination goes through its own movement. Why c…

The entire concept of affirmative action is that not everybody has had equal opportunity.

A student from low income parents will probably have gone to a poorly resourced school, they will have never had tutoring, they may have had to start working a job after school, affecting their study. They may not even have access to a computer or the internet outside of school hours (another reason why public libraries are an essential public service). Even the food you eat growing up can have an effect on academic performance. If you're not getting a good breakfast or lunch, there's no way you're going to be able to learn effectively.

A lot of these students are just as smart and capable as students from better off backgrounds. But their school results will be lower. Once they end up in the same environment as their wealthier peers, they tend to catch up quickly. If you look at the pass rates at Harvard by ethnicity [1], you'll see that they're very similar for all ethnicities (with the exception of Native American).

Delineating by race is a very blunt tool for affirmative action, and there are questions as to it's effectiveness, it also means that White people from poor backgrounds get left out, and black or hispanic people from wealthy backgrounds get an unfair leg up. But it's not fair to simply say "if you have good grades, you go to a good university". Equality is not equity.

[1] https://www.scholarships.com/colleges/harvard-university/gra...