Solution to Harvard’s admissions problem is simple: run a lottery
1–10 of 110 posts
Re: Solution to Harvard’s admissions problem is simple: run a lottery
#2The article is substantially predicated on a recently published paper[1] which proposes a threshold lottery for university admissions. Among other things, this paper directly kicks off discussion of several basic criticisms that could be levied against lottery-based admission, such as (for example) the definition of fairness.
In particular, note that the definition used in this context is an admission lottery such that, for all applicants at or above an explicit baseline of qualification, each applicant is equi-probable of being admitted. It's also worth noting the author explictly states the system is pragmatic for distinguishing between qualified candidates of increasingly insignificant meritocratic differences; however, it may not be compatible with "general welfare."
1. https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/670663?seq=1#page_scan_...
Re: Solution to Harvard’s admissions problem is simple: run a lottery
#3Fairer? Yes. Better? No.
The college application process screens for more than just measured ability, and forcing colleges to take on people who aren't a good culture fit changes the experience at that college for the worse.
Re: Solution to Harvard’s admissions problem is simple: run a lottery
#4This presupposes that colleges truly want their admission process to be fair, which they absolutely don't. Then, how would they get to admit legacy students with wealthy parents?
Also, admitting that getting admitted is based on luck directly contradicts the narrative of meritocracy in college admissions, which would decrease the perceived prestige of the school. So yeah, no way would Harvard go for this.
Re: Solution to Harvard’s admissions problem is simple: run a lottery
#5Fairer? Yes. Better? No. The college application process screens for more than just measured ability, and forcing colleges to take on people who aren't a good culture fit changes the experience at that college for the worse.
It may change the culture at some schools. Whether that would be better or worse remains an open question.
Re: Solution to Harvard’s admissions problem is simple: run a lottery
#6Harvard doesn’t have an admissions problem. It’s a highly successful institution, that has lasted for hundreds of years and is not public.
Meaning - they clearly are doing something correct and are not beholden to what we feel is “fair”. They aren’t doing anything illegal, so there is no problem.
Perhaps it doesn’t jive with some sensibilities, but it’s not their responsibility to cater to anyone’s sensibilities. The institutions purpose is to grow and support its pupils. Then it’s pupils pay dividends back to the institution. Anything counter to that, really doesn’t make sense.
Re: Solution to Harvard’s admissions problem is simple: run a lottery
#7"The admissions lottery I envision—which would involve applicants who meet a certain academic threshold—would help universities faced with large numbers of qualified applicants, such as Harvard, admit students in a more equitable way."
The whole point to the modern university application process is they want more axis than academic achievement with which to evaluate prospective students. Did you play and do well in sports? Are you accomplished in any of the arts? Are you a chess master? Did you build a great robot winning several competitions? This is true student diversity, it's not just race and class - and it provides a differentiator between those who just studied and got a perfect SAT score and those with other accomplishments who also happen to have a near-perfect SAT score. The lottery system depicted here is unfair to those students who've gone beyond and accomplished things. We need to recognize accomplishments outside of the classroom are important.
Re: Solution to Harvard’s admissions problem is simple: run a lottery
#8This presupposes that colleges truly want their admission process to be fair, which they absolutely don't. Then, how would they get to admit legacy students with wealthy parents? Also, admitting that getting admitted is based on luck directly contradicts the narrative of meritocracy in college admissions, which would decrease the perceived prestige of the school. So yeah, no way would Harvard go for this.
I think that a lottery without a qualification threshold would contradict meritocracy. In contrast, I don't think a threshold-based lottery contradicts meritocracy. Rather it can be interpreted as a claim that meritocracy cannot be properly quantified beyond a certain precision (which in this case is the threshold). Even if you disagree with that premise, it's substantially different than the rejection of meritocracy altogether.
I also don't think it presupposes anything about what colleges want. What colleges want isn't relevant to a claim about what would be more fair. The paper this article is based on doesn't make an argument for how to force or persuade colleges to espouse the system. It only argues that this system is closer to a platonic ideal of admission fairness.
Re: Solution to Harvard’s admissions problem is simple: run a lottery
#9This would destroy their business model which is predicated on getting into Harvard being an "expensive signal" of intelligence, industriousness, and future potential, which is why they will never do it. But I agree with the points in the article!
Re: Solution to Harvard’s admissions problem is simple: run a lottery
#10Who says that the threshold, as measured by e.g. SAT scores, is a good threshold for a good measure?