Yale, Princeton and Duke Are Questioned over Decline in Asian Students
nytimes.com
nytimes.com
It most certainly did not.
From the decision:
"despite the dissent’s assertion to the contrary, universities may not simply establish through application essays or other means the regime we hold unlawful today..."[W]hat cannot be done directly cannot be done indirectly. The Constitution deals with substance, not shadows," and the prohibition against racial discrimination is "levelled at the thing, not the name." ... A benefit to a student who overcame racial discrimination, for example, must be tied to that student’s courage and determination. Or a benefit to a student whose heritage or culture motivated him or her to assume a leadership role or attain a particular goal must be tied to that student’s unique ability to contribute to the university. In other words, the student must be treated based on his or her experiences as an individual - not on the basis of race".
-- https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/20-1199_hgdj.pdf
The Supreme Court decision is not toothless because it explicitly disallows universities to create race proxies.
They simply have to smart about it. In addition to the explicit statement from Chief Justice John Roberts: "Nothing prohibits universities from considering an applicant’s discussion of how race affected the applicant’s life," there are simple ways to use factors others than merit. Some are listed here https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-affirmative-action-...: preferences for lower-income students, accepting fewer early admission applications (which are more likely to come from white students), giving preference to first-generation college students, placing less value on test scores and more on high school class ranks, basing admissions on zip codes, and devaluing high school quality, etc. Many more strategies will surface if colleges go through discovery. In the name of surface-level diversity, all of them result in students who will perform worse in college than if admissions were based solely on merit.
How rude. It's also straight wrong. The merit of a student is in what they could do with education.
Also, I’m not sure if international students count here but there’s likely been a drop in Asian students applying to US universities which if they do count may affect the numbers as well.
For me, I no longer pick medical specialists who graduated from Harvard since 2017. Others at various later date. And I felt vindicated after reading
If you're going in for surgery, would you say there's no difference?
lol, The burden is not on the world to prove that 10 years of med school can turn anyone into a good doctor.
It's on the people that decided to not take in the best students in the first place.
Some of them basically felt burned by the education system that accepted them into undergrad where they performed at bottom of class as they were let in with lowest standards. Then this process repeated as they felt burned by med school again as they were let in with lowest scores. Some of them would assume, these schools let me in hoping i would fail out so their diversity numbers look good, instead i graduated at bottom of my class and jad a terrible experience.
The psychological effect of being at the bottom of your class at an Ivy, vs top of your class at a public state university, is an interesting way to start your career in any field.
if u lower academic metrics to admit racially diverse students, these students will all be in bottom 20% unless university changes other factors.
To prevent bottom 20% from all being racially preffered students, the univ or professor has the choice of either lowering level of education to allow racial students to compete, just give them better scores for being racial, or just let them be the bottom 20% of class because they cant keep up with the other academic merit based students.
Some Ivy professors such as Amy Wax have discussed this, mentioning racially admitted students are always in bottom of class, the current process sets them up to fail rather than pushing them to state school where they might be top of class,racial students have never been in top of her classes, as expected the university is trying to revoke her tenure.
The reason all students at this level look exactly the same is that everyone in the pool at this point has essentially unlimited potential.
It's about people who are qualified or over qualified who are never considered but should be. At the expense of the rich buying their kids way in..? Maybe.
Still, institutional reputation risked is because of diverse underachievers? Seems like they are doing it to themselves independently.
- 8 outrageous details from the U.S. college scam court documents https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/us-college-scam-court-cheating...
- https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/mar/12/us-col...
- College admissions scandal paints Yale in “Varsity Blues” https://yaledailynews.com/blog/2022/05/22/college-admissions...
- Yale revokes student's admission over '$1.2m bribe' https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-47709546
- Bribes to Get Into Yale and Stanford? What Else Is New? https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/12/opinion/college-bribery-a...
- Frequently Asked Questions Related to Admissions Fraud Scheme https://president.yale.edu/frequently-asked-questions-relate...
It's only quality candidates that never get a chance.
What's one reason why?
The contrary evidence to the idea that diversity is bad, when the rich are doing the same instead by using money to get privileged access to university at the expense of qualified students.
Well that's pretty significant. And ironically, there could be a link between the increased focus on race in admissions and applicants "opting out," so to speak.
“We estimate that Asian American applicants had 28% lower odds of ultimately attending an Ivy-11 school than white applicants with similar academic and extracurricular qualifications. The gap was particularly pronounced for students of South Asian descent (49% lower odds).”
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-024-55119-0#:~:text=W....
The white male college student
Unlike many Asian countries, the US doesn’t have some big single exam that determines your life outcome.
Remind me of where the best universities in the world are again? The places that do admissions solely on test scores? Or these “unfair” places that use more than one metric?
That's exactly the problem these Asian countries want to avoid/address: as soon as you deviate from the standardized test scores, you lay yourself open to potential biases and discrimination.
> Remind me of where the best universities in the world are again?
Quality of Bachelors programs (which is what's being discussed here) has pretty much zero bearing on how universities are ranked.
Maybe not the undergrad students, but grad students and many professors of research universities come from the countries where admissions are done solely on test scores.
Having a big single exam that determines one's life outcome is bad on principle, but, it removes corruption, and is the most transparent method, ever.
Couldn't we have multiple big exams and do some averaging? Maybe even take the median to discard outliers? This would keep the meritocratic fairness aspect and take the pressure from performing in one single exam determining your fate in life.
What I absolutely despise is having metrics on the admission that are highly, highly skewed against the poors, like lifelong A's, school presidency, music performance, other co-curriculars, and so on.
And the focus on increasing diversity at the cost of ability.
I know many who could climb the socio economic ladder due to test based admission. And in significant numbers, not like the ~5 taken by Harvard in each meaningful program a year.
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/society/article/3090774/chin...
All humans are biased. Holistic admission has many more inherent flaws than test-score based admission.
The candidates who have good test scores and nothing else get cut in the second round, it’s one of the easiest steps in doing the cull.
I like the exam-only entry. Here in Sweden that was why I got to go where I went. The alternative is a bunch of hoop-jumping which, at least for me, would feel oppressive.
'We are going to sue you for something that affirmative action helped avoid'
I know i'm likely oversimplifying it but I am trying to highlight the ridiculousness of it