(Replying to PARENT post)
(Replying to PARENT post)
Sorry but what makes you think students with stellar grades have no social life? My memory of my four years at an "elite" NYC high school is that the students with the best grades (I was not even close) were just as social as the rest of us and participated in plenty of after school clubs and whatnot (more than I did).
"Who's going into investment banking to pull down big bonuses 10 years from now?"
Ironically that is a career path with a reputation for attracting anti-social psycopaths (but maybe this is a myth -- after all, Harvard admissions committees are there to find the applicants who proved their pro-social personalities by participating in exactly the sort of extracurriculars Harvard is looking for).
"No one is out to discriminate against asian people, their applications are just very problematic at scale."
The simple version of that sentence would be of the form, "I am not racist, but [racist statement]."
(Replying to PARENT post)
Expect big changes in banking over the coming decades as well. You may want to evolve your thinking.
(Replying to PARENT post)
(Replying to PARENT post)
Are they largely looking for people with ‘change-the-world’, ‘make-a-big-impact’ potentials and great academic records (with the former being the more important criterion)? Or something else?
I expect these criteria can be described in words and it is not only learned through apprenticeship as supposedly there are tens or hundreds of officers doing the filtering.
(Replying to PARENT post)
Kind of reminds me of the 1970's lawsuit against UC Berkeley where women were claiming discrimination because of lower grad admissions than men. When they analysed the numbers, they found that it was because women generally applied to very departments with low admission rates, and men generally applied to departments with high admission rates.
There is a bit of self selection in the outcome here.
(Replying to PARENT post)
from here:
https://infoproc.blogspot.com/2018/06/harvard-discrimination...
(Replying to PARENT post)
More seriously if your aim is to limit the number of people applying for premed then limit the number of pre-med slots and let the applicants know.
If demand is greater than supply then just put everyone over the acceptable score into a pool and draw out at random. Why resort to outright racism to solve a problem of supply and demand?
(Replying to PARENT post)
(Replying to PARENT post)
Let's take your low end of 600 students. Let's say you are a former musician and could judge their ability after listening to a mere 1 minute of music. Plus perhaps 30 seconds to reflect upon what you heard and make some notes.
That alone is 15 hours of your work week as an admissions officer, or 3% of your total time for the review period if you figure a full 3 months of reviews for applications. That's assuming you didn't listen to musical excerpts from the thousands of other musician students you ostensibly reviewed to fill in the slots for the rest of the Freshman class.
Did you do that as an admissions officer?
(Replying to PARENT post)
Then why do college admissions factor in race at all?
> Their grades and scores are STELLAR!
But the complaint is that their grades and scores aren't stellar. That lower grades and scores are being chosen over higher grades and scores based apparently on race.
> What's going to happen to campus social life if half the class has a history of not being social at all?
Once again, the complaint is that people with equal or better extracurricular activities and better grades are being passed over based on race.
> No one is out to discriminate against asian people, their applications are just very problematic at scale.
But we know this isn't true. We know that college admins have discriminated before.
Your argument is just a rehash of the anti-semitic discrimination against jews decades ago.
https://www.businessinsider.com/the-ivy-leagues-history-of-d...
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2018/06/18/harvard-ad...
It's pretty much boilerplate word for word copy of previous racist admission policies.
(Replying to PARENT post)
I was a college admissions officer for a few years and am familiar with the process at the top Ivies.
The outcome is racist but there's no intent to be racist.
Imagine your job is to create the best possible 2000-student freshman class for Harvard from the 40,000 students who apply.
You review the applications and notice to your horror that 600-1000 of them all have perfect or near perfect test scores, boring essays, so-so extracurriculars (Overwatch tournaments and robotics club don't cut it), play an instrument (very well, but not remarkably), and want to study pre-med.
Their grades and scores are STELLAR! But if you admit these students your campus is fucked. Half the freshman class can't do pre-med. Once the pre-med spots fill up what will the rest do? That seems like a very horrible situation to put students in. There's just not enough spots.
What's going to happen to campus social life if half the class has a history of not being social at all? Who's going to produce art and go into politics? Who's going into investment banking to pull down big bonuses 10 years from now?
So you work your way through them and try to take the very best of them. The rest of them you reject. They'll get into fine schools and be successful, there's just only so many slots of students like that in the class.
This cohort of students happens to be disproportionately asian. No one is out to discriminate against asian people, their applications are just very problematic at scale.