Because if you feel withholding test scores most certainly means the whole applicant is under-qualified (which is so counter to the elites’ idea the “rest of the story” is a key determinant,) then it would follow that you apply that to white kids, too. Hmm, maybe throw out all who don’t meet your own standards. Same old, same old.
Wow @lookingforward, you apparently gained all sorts of insights into my deeper thinking that I didn’t even know were there. ^:)^ To repeat what I’d said earlier, “my use of the word “qualified” here was obviously with respect to test scores, and I’m not suggesting that schools should use the tests more or less than they already do in determining qualifications.” Other than with my reference to millifooquals (which I would hope you weren’t taking seriously), I never said or suggested anything about URMs, white kids, or any other particular population. Maybe it is you – by equating Hooked applicants with URMs – who should consider your biases.
@foosondaughter Wow, why haven’t other schools thought of this clever system? Notre Dame instead of #18 could be #1 in US News with just a small admissions trick. USC as well.
Basically, it comes down to ignorant people forming opinions about athletes. Maybe stupid is a better word than ignorant.
Keep in mind you are talking about NESCAC schools, not SEC schools.
As much as I would love to take credit for “discovering” this, I’m by no means the first to point it out. E.g., from http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevecohen/2012/09/29/the-three-biggest-lies-in-college-admission/2/:
FWIW, I don’t necessarily agree that the schools are “chasing rankings,” but the effect of not reporting all scores is pretty self evident.
Guess you found your voice of authority. Carry on.
Wow, that would make Bowdoin pretty darn prescient!
(Bowdoin went test-optional in 1969. USNWR started publishing its rankings in 1983.)
Re: standardized tests
The standardized tests are basically checks against excessive grade inflation or lack of rigor in high schools. Colleges that are test optional can free ride on the use of the tests by most applicants and colleges, particularly if the high schools are known.
Eliminating tests altogether would require more standardized curricula and grading standards across high schools. This is not likely in the US, even with Common Core. Some other countries’ universities do not require testing for domestic applicants, since grading is consistent. Other countries use only tests because high school grades are not trusted at all.
The release of the % of who gets in from what categories will fail because individuals fall into many categories. So if you have an Asian you can put him into the Asian admit percentages . But if he is also an athlete then what do you do? Double report him in that category? What if he is also a legacy? The point is and dare I say the point of holistic admissions is that people don’t fall into one category. So trying to analyze with numbers what is by definition a messy process is hopeless. You will not be able to draw from these numbers the chances of your specific mixture of categories getting you admitted. And as to optional testing, well I think the colleges will come to regret that. People want to go to schools where they will feel comfortable. And to let someone in because they wrote one good essay (and maybe didn’t write even that) could easily lead to imbalanced classrooms, something which many students, both high achieving and not, want to escape. To reduce the grip that tests have on the process we should stop making distinctions between really close scores. I think 650 and 800 are in the same bandwidth. (Think of how many people would not re take the exams if that were the case. ) Then let people distinguish them selves in other ways.
I disagree. People of color experience discrimination and marginalization regardless of how much money they have.
@myallieboy-
I agree with you about the futility of trying to segment the applicants, particularly at small schools.
I have to disagree with you about test-optional policies resulting in imbalanced classrooms. A 20-year study at Bates found virtually no difference between the college performances of submitter and non-submitters. Non submitters had very slightly lower GPA’s (five hundredths of a GPA point lower) and very slightly higher graduation rates (one tenth of one percent higher.)
@sue22 The study was done by a former admissions Dean at Bates, it wasn’t funded by Bates and it included over 30 schools.
Years back the test was used to force private schools to adopt a curriculum the Ivy League schools wanted and also as way to award scholarships. Later, IBM saw a good commercial use newly developed scanning technology, so with industry support it became a quick way to evaluate students. Prior, student essays were the cornerstone of the application.
So with the proliferation of the test and watering down of the essay, students over time applied to more and more schools.
The Common App has made a mess of the process on top of everything else.
Results of the SAT and ACT just reinforce what you know already, so they are a waste.
Also, the vast majority of parents and students wrongly believe the tests are a big part of admissions. If you look at Stanford’s ACT and SAT ranges and averages they aren’t a whole lot different from other top 25 schools.
The President of Middlebury has been quoted saying the scores rarely drive the decision.
@BatesParents2019 In fact, Stanford’s median SAT scores are below a number of the Ivy League schools in the consolidated data set information, -50 versus Yale, -35 versus Princeton, -45 versus Harvard . . . just goes to show that with holistic admissions, different schools will have different approaches. Obviously any of the top schools could have higher median SAT scores if they wanted.
Absolutely right. My bad. I always think of it as the “Bates study” since Bill Hiss was the PI.
For anyone interested in the study, here’s a synopsis.
http://www.nacacnet.org/media-center/PressRoom/2014/Pages/BillHiss.aspx
“Absolutely right. My bad. I always think of it as the “Bates study” since Bill Hiss was the PI.”
The original study was done by Hiss when he was at Bates and was over the course of 20 years. The 30 college study he did came later.
Speaking with my lawyer hat on here, I doubt if Harvard will need to worry about opening up its admissions process to scrutiny, because it’s highly unlikely the case will ever reach the discovery stage. That’s because, in my opinion, a court will find that the plaintiffs don’t have enough evidence of wrongdoing to overcome a motion to dismiss. At best, they have a statistical argument that can (pretty easily, in my opinion) be explained by factors that have nothing to do with discrimination.
Remember (as I keep harping on), the plaintiffs will not be able to prevail simply by showing that Harvard gives preference to URM. That’s already known, and it’s legal. They will only be able to prevail (maybe) if they can show that Harvard limits the number of Asians vs. whites for an unlawful reason. The evidence of that is really thin. I know that it seems to be enough to convince lots of Asian students that they’re being wronged, but a court will be applying stricter standards.
And, if Harvard did open up its records, do you really think the secret Asian quota document is there? Do you think Harvard admissions people are dumb enough to write on applications something like, “Reject–another cookie cutter Asian.”–? Instead, the documents are going to have lots of subjective statements, and it will be hard to tell why Harvard chose one candidate over another (which is enough to explain why Harvard will resist turning over any such documents). In my opinion, the lawsuit is a wild goose chase that won’t have any positive results.
@Hunt Putting on my cynical 21st century American hat here, I’d say you dramatically underestimate the chances that this case does get to the discovery phase. With the current composition of the Federal courts, and the strong propensity for the appointees of a certain political party to attack anything related to affirmative action, I’d say it is much more likely than you think that this case might reach the trial stage. Not that it should in my opinion, but I think you are being a little naive.
(back to lurking)
The case has nothing to do with affirmative action.
If the political party you’re talking about is the one that is usually against affirmative action, do you really think they’re going to go out of their way to tell Harvard to stop taking so many white students?
So little chance of a smoking gun.
Hunt, I completely agree with you, on all counts. I know enough about law to concur and also enough about admissions to understand that whatever is in the student’s file, in the comments, is terse. This came up recently when someone “wanted their file” for a public and was disappointed to learn that there’s not much in there. But the bigger point is that since admissions is comparative, the plaintiffs, in order to make a case, would have to get access to all the files of all the (thousands of) competing applicants, which it seems to me would be an abridgment of the privacy of strangers.
If Harvard says that there is evidence to explain the statistics, that evidence will have to be opened up for both sides to examine. Statistics will show that their admissions system has a disparate impact on Asians. Harvard will have to show that the admissions system is non-biased in order to counter that disparate impact and that opens up the entire discovery ball of wax.
Discovery is more than documents. All it would take is one former (disgruntled) admissions employee, like the U Penn article writer to give a deposition on statements made at the admissions meetings and the case is made. I’ve seen it happen in other types of cases. The former employee who saved notes that the company lost or destroyed.
If Harvard feels they are on rock solid legal ground, they won’t fight discovery by the other side.