<h1>42 - what are you saying. Of course there a plenty of high achieving AA students that do not get in Harvard, Yale, Princeton and other top tier schools. Most of these schools could also get their entire AA population from kids that attended top prep/independent schools, have near perfect or perfect scores, play a sport and belong to a few ECs. There are plenty around. My D’s stats put this example to shame and so do most of the stats of her AA friends that are peppered throughout the Ivy League and other top tier schools. I don’t know why people still believe that the admission process at these schools is based solely on scores and grades. If so, they would be very boring places. They thrive on a well rounded student body.</h1>
<p>@voiceofreason66 </p>
<p>It’s laughable how you wag your finger at me but you have posted your own set of racial stereotypes on another thread, you have only been a member of CC for a few months. I have lived the college admissions process for the past 4 years. I have seen the trends, read the articles & read the posts of hundreds of students here on CC. I also have a close friend whose dd goes to a test in NYC public school. A majority of her classmates attend the hagwons. These same students apply & are getting accepted to HYPSM schools. No stereotyping. Hagwons are a $875 million a year industry. They are quite popular. </p>
<p>@xiggi. Do we know the history of the decisions on this issue at this point? I don’t know the history. </p>
<p>In addition to putting words in other posters’ mouths, voiceofreason is putting a plaintiff into the suit.</p>
<p>The caption is right at the top. The kid’s not a party.</p>
<p>
My data are primarily my own observations. Also, this is how the colleges explain the numbers–they say that they are making holistic determinations. What I am pointing out to you is that even if you are sure discrimination is happening, a court will only take action if those claiming discrimination can prove it. That isn’t going to be easy. Even if it is shown that admitted Asians have, on average, higher stats than admitted white students, that’s not going to be enough. You (by “you” I mean anybody who is trying to prove discrimination) will have to come up with other evidence, and I’m saying that I don’t know how you are going to do it. What I’m also pointing out is that there are some plausible explanations for the statistics that don’t require there to be discrimination based on racial animus, and that the burden will be on “you,” and not on Harvard, to prove that there is racial animus.</p>
<p>And are you denying that a significant subset of Asian applicants to Harvard have high grades and scores, but not many ECs apart from in-school things like tennis and violin?</p>
<p>I’ll give you my theory, which I suspect you won’t like: white applicants with extremely high grades and scores are more likely, on average, to have more impressive ECs than Asian applicants (and especially Asian applicants who are immigrants or have immigrant parents) because in non-immigrant American culture it is expected for high-performing students to also have substantial involvement in ECs both inside and outside the school. That’s what the smart kids do. They don’t spend a lot of time (if any time) in cram schools, and they don’t practice the violin for hours a day unless they are planning to be violinists. The culture of recent Asian immigrants is quite different. Or do you deny that?</p>
<p>NewHavenCTmom I don’t know what you are talking about as to my “own set of racial stereotypes”?? Never heard of Hagwons until today. For those of you who do not know what hagwons are, it is essentially supplemental private education. Not sure how hagwons will get students accepted o HYPSM given that there are others on CC who claim that students can use their time on other things rather than on academics and test prep.</p>
<p>Hunt says that “The Asian kids who don’t fit the stereotype do better in admissions.” so according to him having super high scores and gpas would be a negitive and playing football or basketball would be a positive.</p>
<p>BTW Hunt under strict scrutiny Harvard will have to mount defense and provide evidence that it is not in violation of Equal Protection not the other way around. As to your other comments, I won’t speculate, and will let others comment.</p>
<p>ThereAreLlamas The kid’s a party, the umbrella group in the caption would not have standing without the kid or kids who have suffered harm.</p>
<p>But again, what “harm”? Presumably the kid or kids who didn’t get into Harvard are the same smart, accomplished and hard-working people they were when they applied. There is no evidence to suggest that only Harvard produces successful adults. This is where the argument falls apart. </p>
<p>@voiceofreason66 -Not sure how? Your naïveté is so amusing! 
</p>
<p>@voiceofreason66 </p>
<p>You’ve gone from being a voice of reason to being a voice of spin. You want data points, you want to know why Asian Americans aren’t represented in college sports, etc. You dismiss everyone who tries to show you why things are the way they are. </p>
<p>Understand that experience is something which comes with the one thing that money can’t buy and you can’t work hard/study for - Time. The folks here have been good enough to share their experiences with you. Data points can never do justice to experience. You can learn from their experiences or you can continue to call for data points and supporting arguments. Doing so just perpetuates the stereotype that you say doesn’t exist. </p>
<p>wait. So, Harvard has to “prove” it’s case and not those bringing the case against Harvard? I didn’t know this was possible in the justice system. If it’s true it’s interesting.</p>
<p>
No, what gets you into Harvard is having super high scores AND something else that is impressive. They just don’t take too many people who just have high scores and grades without more. Indeed, they will reject a person with super high scores and not much else, and take a person with lower scores who has written a successful novel, or is a recruitable athlete, or is a top musician, or who has started a business or a (real) charity, etc.</p>
<p>And if I were a parent of an Asian student, and wanted him to get into an Ivy League school one day, the LAST thing I would do would be to hand him a violin or a tennis racket. I’d hand him an accordion, maybe.</p>
<p>Poetgrl, as far as I know, there have been no determination of discrimination (as alleged in the current lawsuit) yet. </p>
<p>In the past, there have been examination by the Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights into Harvard’s handling of Asian-American applicants more than 20 years ago. The agency concluded in 1990 that Harvard didn’t violate civil rights laws because preferences for alumni children and recruited athletes, rather than racial discrimination, accounted for the gap.</p>
<p>There was a case in California (Boalt Law School) that pointed towards discrimination in 1992 but was ultimately decided in favor of the school, with no wrongdoing noted. </p>
<p>In a more recent history, there have been claims by Jian Li aganst Princeton and more recent claims by a California student with Indian roots against Yale and Harvard. The claims were dropped against Yale, and AFAIK, the cases of Li and the unnamed Indian have been rolled into on. Jial Li transferred from Yale to Harvard and graduated in 2010.</p>
<p>sally305 I agree with you that going to Harvard is not the end all, but you would agree going to Harvard does provide unique opportunities that another school cannot provide, so the harm is lost opportunity.</p>
<p>menefrega don’t know what you are trying to say, please explain?</p>
<p>poetgrl Strict Scrutiny requires that Harvard (defacto government actor since it accepts federal funds) prove the following:
- must show compelling government interest
- narrowly tailored admission policy
- and that the policy is the least restrictive
absent a showing of the above Harvard loses.</p>
<p>voiceofreason, I think you’re mistaken about the burden of proof in a case like this one. Harvard is not a government actor. The plaintiffs will also need at least some evidence of discrimination, and I’m not sure that the statistical evidence will be enough even to get them to the discovery phase. I know that you, and a lot of other people, think that it is obvious that Harvard is discriminating against Asian applicants. But it really isn’t obvious, and it will be extremely difficult to prove.</p>
<p>Even if you were right about the burden of proof, Harvard would provide evidence that its method is holistic, that race is only considered (if at all) in connection with URMs as a plus factor, and that any statistical findings can be explained by other factors. There will be no smoking gun, and the case will fail. If it gets that far, which is unlikely.</p>
<p>Okay. Thanks @xiggi. et al. </p>
<p>I’d like to know which standard of proof will actually be required. @Hunt has been reliable on this for me in the past. </p>
<p>Should be interesting, as always.</p>
<p>A lot of those schools have consistently admitted approximately same number of people from different race. If there is no discrimination (or accommodation) then how could it be that consistent? At the same time, the school can also say that they are trying to build a community. To do that, they don’t want their class to have 50% Asians. This is no different than only admitting limited number students for different talents.</p>
<p>“sally305 I agree with you that going to Harvard is not the end all, but you would agree going to Harvard does provide unique opportunities that another school cannot provide, so the harm is lost opportunity.”</p>
<p>A) I don’t agree with that.<br>
B) The same could be said of anyone or organization who doesn’t “accept” me - there are lost opportunities – but that is life. I don’t have standing to sue a company who interviewed me who then declined to extend me a job offer, because I can’t claim that I have a fundamental right to be employed by them. I don’t have standing to sue the cute guy at the bar who didn’t ask me out, because I can’t claim that I have a fundamental right to date / marry him. I don’t have standing to sue the exclusive club whose bouncer didn’t let me in that night. I don’t have standing to sue the popular crowd for not letting me sit at their lunch table. It just doesn’t work that way.
As the great philosopher Mick Jagger noted, you can’t always get what you want. </p>
<p>I think your naivete is shown in your very belief that “going to Harvard does provide unique opportunities that another school cannot provide.” If 30,000 applications are vying for 2,000 spots, 28,000 of them will be disappointed. It’s very possible that the majority of those applicants were indeed “qualified” for Harvard - insofar as they had test scores, GPAs, etc that were within the range of what Harvard admits. Is Harvard obligated to admit everyone who could fairly benefit from the opportunities they provide? You are aware that they don’t have the beds to do that, of course. </p>
<p>“And here’s something to consider about the statistical evidence: you say that there has been a fairly static number of Asian students admitted to Harvard each year, despite changes in the number of “qualified” Asian applicants. Why do you assume that the number of Asians is held artificially low–as opposed to artificially high? It’s because you think of qualified in terms of grades and scores. Well, what if a huge proportion of those Asian applicants are high-stats kids without impressive other achievements, and are the products of cram schools? It’s possible that Harvard is giving some of those relatively unimpressive kids a break because they are Asian. How, exactly, will you prove that this isn’t the case?”</p>
<p>Exactly. At my kids’ schools, the % of the pop that is Asian is well ABOVE the % of the pop that is Asian. If these schools wanted to discriminate against Asians, they could very well set a ceiling that is equal to the % of the pop that is Asian. They wouldn’t be funding Korean-American and Chinese-American and so forth student associations. They wouldn’t offer Asian studies majors. Really, you guys are a little clueless in terms of what people do when they discriminate. There were actual smoking guns with the Jewish-thing years ago. </p>
<p>Pizzagirl you would have that right if they discriminated against you as a member of a protected class. Heard of the Civil Right Act?? If your an employer, tell an applicant he/she can’t have the job because hs/she is not White, see what happens.</p>
<p>The idea that Harvard provides opportunities that Yale or Stanford or Northwestern or MIT or Berkeley or Wellesley or Williams or [insert selective, well known U/college here] does not, seems way off to me. </p>
<p>But we’ve had this discussion before.</p>