Rules changing on For Profit Schools in USA? Affirmative Action too?

[Jimmy Higgins]

Oh that's incredibly refreshing and a nice surprise to see that you are actually about fair treatment for individuals, because I thought you were looking at them as group ....



Oh, nevermind.

Did that include a point, I mean other than your struggling with the English language?

Yes it did. You first said you want to treat individuals based on merits and accomplishments, and then you immediately went back to saying asians are not discriminated against because there are lots of them in Harvard. This just after Jason wrote a post pointing out that individual asians can very much be discriminated against regardless of lots of other asians being admitted to the school.

I’m saying you are abusing the word discrimination.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Have we got to the part where race has been shown to be the deciding factor? I keep reading about how race isn't an achievement, that race isn't a "monolith". Yet, the same people then say blacks getting in are via a monolithic standard... ie because they are black.

If black student <x> gets in but white student <y> with identical scores doesn't you have race being the deciding factor.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

And it hasn't been shown to be. All we are hearing is that their scores are lower, therefore RACISM!!!

And indeed, races are not monoliths, so pointing at the fact that some black people are hard done by isn't a basis to consider race as a plus for other black people when applying to schools.

And this is the strawman of yours, isn't it? Unless you can show that this is what Harvard is doing.

3 in 10 students in the Class of 2021 are legacy students (had a 3 time greater chance at admission), which certainly is a substantial factor which is 'restricting' access to other applicants.

Showing there is another problem doesn't mean the current problem doesn't exist.

And I'm not sure how big a deal legacy admissions are--because they bring in a lot of donor dollars. What I would like to see--but never have--is a comparison of how many additional students they can admit due to the donor dollars the legacy admissions bring in.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

As things stand, Asians are tremendously well represented in Harvard. To say they are discriminated against is about as poor use of the word "discrimination" as it could possibly be.

Saying that there are no differences between people doesn't make it so. While I do not think there are any genetic differences that matter there most certainly are cultural ones.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

So far, I have been unable to find the percentage of Asian applicants, only the percentage of Asian students admitted.

Do you have a source that gives the percentage of Asian applicants? Can you share?

The number of applicants means nothing because it could be measuring the number of schools they apply to.

What matters are the qualifications of those who are admitted. Data we used to have that showed rampant discrimination, but these days the schools hide it. Hopefully the Harvard lawsuit will expose some of it.

 

[Toni]

So far, I have been unable to find the percentage of Asian applicants, only the percentage of Asian students admitted.

Do you have a source that gives the percentage of Asian applicants? Can you share?

The number of applicants means nothing because it could be measuring the number of schools they apply to.

What matters are the qualifications of those who are admitted. Data we used to have that showed rampant discrimination, but these days the schools hide it. Hopefully the Harvard lawsuit will expose some of it.

Of course it would be meaningful! We know that approximately 22% of the incoming freshman class is Asian. There is significance to whether 2% or 22% or 80% of the applicants are Asian. If it is 80%, then that suggests something different than if only 2% of applicants are Asian.

Harvard’s acceptance rate is slightly under 5%. The vast overwhelming majority of applicabts are not admitted.

Harvard admits only extremely qualified candidates, with rxceptions being legacy students and some athletes. Given the stellar qualifications of applicants, it is difficult to make avoid case that academically unqualified students are being admitted, especially given the exceptionally high graduation rates.

 

[Derec]

Nope that was me being honest about not having time to
address the demands of those who are too lazy to research, read or think for themselves.

I researched it and I actually posted a link showing that your claims were erroneous: grades and SATs taken together are predictive of college performance, something even your NY Times article acknowledges. Note that you have yet to back up your claims, which included grades, not just scores.
And by the way, it is you who has a problem with independent thinking here.

If I am totally honest I will add that I should have stuck to my experience in caving to whining demands of those too lazy to read or think is truly a waste of time and effort.

It is not my job to find material supporting your outlandish claims. I have done the research and posted a link showing the opposite.

 

[Derec]

And it hasn't been shown to be. All we are hearing is that their scores are lower, therefore RACISM!!!

Affirmative action is all about using race in admissions. What are you talking about? It's not denied by AA proponents.

3 in 10 students in the Class of 2021 are legacy students (had a 3 time greater chance at admission), which certainly is a substantial factor which is 'restricting' access to other applicants.

It is hardly surprising that people who have Harvard graduate parents are well represented among current Harvard students. Neither is it surprising that they have higher admission rates. After all, intelligence is about both nature and nurture. If your parents went to Harvard they not only gave you their genes, but it can be assumed they cultivated a pro-education atmosphere at home and nurtured their children to be competitive applicants at a school like Harvard. Being well off financially and sending your kids to private preparatory schools doesn't hurt either.

When legacy admissions are attacked, it is the lowering of standards to admit students who could not get in on their own. Just having parents that went to the same school is not bad in itself. Note that your article talks about the latter, not former, when they cite that 29% are "legacy".

- - - Updated - - -

Why shouldn't they be able to buy their way in? If it's a private, for-profit institution then doesn't it make financial sense for them to prioritize students who's families have a history of donating money to the university?

Schools like Harvard are private, but not for-profit. You are confusing them with the likes of DeVry and Phoenix.

 

[Derec]

Did that include a point, I mean other than your struggling with the English language?

I think it is you who is struggling with the English language, as Jolly's point was quite clear.

 

[Toni]

Did that include a point, I mean other than your struggling with the English language?

I think it is you who is struggling with the English language, as Jolly's point was quite clear.

Really? I didn’t think so.

 

[laughing dog]

Nope that was me being honest about not having time to
address the demands of those who are too lazy to research, read or think for themselves.

I researched it and I actually posted a link showing that your claims were erroneous: grades and SATs taken together are predictive of college performance, something even your NY Times article acknowledges. Note that you have yet to back up your claims, which included grades, not just scores.
And by the way, it is you who has a problem with independent thinking here.

You cherry-picked your research. For example
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2014/02/21/a-telling-study-about-act-sat-scores/?utm_term=.d06ed9f4d02a,

https://qz.com/853128/grades-not-iq-or-standardized-test-score-is-what-predicts-future-success/,

https://www.goodcall.com/news/college-success-09835 are but a few examples of reports of recent research that dispute the importance of standardized test scores in predicting college success and success in life.

The point is that the claim that standardized test scores are useful is disputed.

And, while I am not familiar with all the research (pro or con), I wonder if these studies can find differential effects of GPA or test scores once those are in the minimum range that Harvard requires.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Did that include a point, I mean other than your struggling with the English language?

I think it is you who is struggling with the English language, as Jolly's point was quite clear.

Really? I didn’t think so.

There is a reason for that, and it isn't because the point wasn't clear.

 

[Derec]

You cherry-picked your research.

I did not.

For example
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2014/02/21/a-telling-study-about-act-sat-scores/?utm_term=.d06ed9f4d02a,

That one references the same single study from Toni's NY Times article by William C. Hiss, who is an opponent of standardized testing. Not exactly the most unbiased of researchers.

https://qz.com/853128/grades-not-iq-or-standardized-test-score-is-what-predicts-future-success/,

From this article:

Employers and colleges have generally preferred standardized tests like the SAT over grade point averages because grades can vary wildly by teacher and school, but GPA reflects other life skills the SAT can’t capture, Humphries says. “It measures your ability to do your school work,” he says. “It measures your knowledge of the material but also things like how well you do at taking tests, going to class, doing homework.”

That's a bit of a straw man. Nobody is advocating using SATs instead of grades. What the research I found showed is that grades plus SATs (or other standardized tests) together were best at predicting performance. And that is for exactly the reason outlined here: they are complementary - SATs are standardized and correct for variance between schools and grades show how a student does over time and in variety of of schoolwork, not a single high-stakes test. So it is best to use them together, rather than discard one for political reasons. Or even worse, do as Toni wants, and discard both.

https://www.goodcall.com/news/college-success-09835 are but a few examples of reports of recent research that dispute the importance of standardized test scores in predicting college success and success in life.

Again, it is not either or. We should not be limited to one. Sure, grades alone are better than scores alone, but both together are best. Therefore, we should not discard tests.

The point is that the claim that standardized test scores are useful is disputed.

By a single study made by a testing opponent and some straw man language in the other two articles.
For comparison, this was the study I found earlier:

Despite its predictive efficacy, HSGPA should not be used in isolation when predicting
college GPA because standardized tests such as the SAT, ACT, and CLA improve the prediction
significantly. Results from this study revealed that the best prediction of college GPA was
obtained using the combination of HSGPA and a standardized test, which corroborates previous
predictive validity research (ACT, 2009; Kobrin, et al., 2008; Rothstein, 2004).

I.e. it's not about grades vs. tests, but that tests add to the predictive ability of grades.

And note that Toni thinks that neither grades nor scores are predictive of anything, something she has failed to show any hint of evidence for.

And, while I am not familiar with all the research (pro or con), I wonder if these studies can find differential effects of GPA or test scores once those are in the minimum range that Harvard requires.

we need an unbiased study for that.

 

[laughing dog]

I did not.

Given the plethora of studies that dispute your claim and the ease of finding them, yes you did.

That one references the same single study from Toni's NY Times article by William C. Hiss, who is an opponent of standardized testing. Not exactly the most unbiased of researchers.

Unless you have an actual reason to dismiss the results?

That's a bit of a straw man. Nobody is advocating using SATs instead of grades. What the research I found showed is that grades plus SATs (or other standardized tests) together were best at predicting performance. And that is for exactly the reason outlined here: they are complementary - SATs are standardized and correct for variance between schools and grades show how a student does over time and in variety of of schoolwork, not a single high-stakes test. So it is best to use them together, rather than discard one for political reasons. Or even worse, do as Toni wants, and discard both.

You missed the point - the SAT does not much, if anything.

 

[Toni]

I did not.


That one references the same single study from Toni's NY Times article by William C. Hiss, who is an opponent of standardized testing. Not exactly the most unbiased of researchers.

https://qz.com/853128/grades-not-iq-or-standardized-test-score-is-what-predicts-future-success/,

From this article:

Employers and colleges have generally preferred standardized tests like the SAT over grade point averages because grades can vary wildly by teacher and school, but GPA reflects other life skills the SAT can’t capture, Humphries says. “It measures your ability to do your school work,” he says. “It measures your knowledge of the material but also things like how well you do at taking tests, going to class, doing homework.”

That's a bit of a straw man. Nobody is advocating using SATs instead of grades. What the research I found showed is that grades plus SATs (or other standardized tests) together were best at predicting performance. And that is for exactly the reason outlined here: they are complementary - SATs are standardized and correct for variance between schools and grades show how a student does over time and in variety of of schoolwork, not a single high-stakes test. So it is best to use them together, rather than discard one for political reasons. Or even worse, do as Toni wants, and discard both.

https://www.goodcall.com/news/college-success-09835 are but a few examples of reports of recent research that dispute the importance of standardized test scores in predicting college success and success in life.

Again, it is not either or. We should not be limited to one. Sure, grades alone are better than scores alone, but both together are best. Therefore, we should not discard tests.

The point is that the claim that standardized test scores are useful is disputed.

By a single study made by a testing opponent and some straw man language in the other two articles.
For comparison, this was the study I found earlier:

Despite its predictive efficacy, HSGPA should not be used in isolation when predicting
college GPA because standardized tests such as the SAT, ACT, and CLA improve the prediction
significantly. Results from this study revealed that the best prediction of college GPA was
obtained using the combination of HSGPA and a standardized test, which corroborates previous
predictive validity research (ACT, 2009; Kobrin, et al., 2008; Rothstein, 2004).

I.e. it's not about grades vs. tests, but that tests add to the predictive ability of grades.

And note that Toni thinks that neither grades nor scores are predictive of anything, something she has failed to show any hint of evidence for.

And, while I am not familiar with all the research (pro or con), I wonder if these studies can find differential effects of GPA or test scores once those are in the minimum range that Harvard requires.

we need an unbiased study for that.

Derec, you are misrepresenting me. I have never advocated FOR or AGAINST using SAT scores or GPA’s for admissions. I’ve stated that many universities are moving away from using test scores and/or GPAs primarily or at all in their selection process. There are many reasons for this but two are that in some areas, there is significant cheating and more significantly, those high test scores are achieved as a result of parents shelling out lots of money for prep and cram courses to improve their kids’ scores. Please note that this is distinctly different from actually helping their kid be better prepared to do well in academics. High test scores are often an excellent proxy for parental wealth rather than academic talent or personal drive. What schools, especially schools like Harvard are looking for is academic talent and personal drive. Test scores and GPAs don’t measure that perfectly. Or necessarily very well when achieved by the parents wealth and drive.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

High test scores are often an excellent proxy for parental wealth rather than academic talent or personal drive. What schools, especially schools like Harvard are looking for is academic talent and personal drive. Test scores and GPAs don’t measure that perfectly.

You are correct. They don't measure that perfectly. So improve them. Don't abandon them.

Is race any measure of academic talent or personal drive?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

So far, I have been unable to find the percentage of Asian applicants, only the percentage of Asian students admitted.

Do you have a source that gives the percentage of Asian applicants? Can you share?

The number of applicants means nothing because it could be measuring the number of schools they apply to.

What matters are the qualifications of those who are admitted. Data we used to have that showed rampant discrimination, but these days the schools hide it. Hopefully the Harvard lawsuit will expose some of it.

Of course it would be meaningful! We know that approximately 22% of the incoming freshman class is Asian. There is significance to whether 2% or 22% or 80% of the applicants are Asian. If it is 80%, then that suggests something different than if only 2% of applicants are Asian.

Harvard’s acceptance rate is slightly under 5%. The vast overwhelming majority of applicabts are not admitted.

Harvard admits only extremely qualified candidates, with rxceptions being legacy students and some athletes. Given the stellar qualifications of applicants, it is difficult to make avoid case that academically unqualified students are being admitted, especially given the exceptionally high graduation rates.

The problem is that "applicants" != "qualified applicants". It's the latter that matters.

 

[Toni]

Of course it would be meaningful! We know that approximately 22% of the incoming freshman class is Asian. There is significance to whether 2% or 22% or 80% of the applicants are Asian. If it is 80%, then that suggests something different than if only 2% of applicants are Asian.

Harvard’s acceptance rate is slightly under 5%. The vast overwhelming majority of applicabts are not admitted.

Harvard admits only extremely qualified candidates, with rxceptions being legacy students and some athletes. Given the stellar qualifications of applicants, it is difficult to make avoid case that academically unqualified students are being admitted, especially given the exceptionally high graduation rates.

The problem is that "applicants" != "qualified applicants". It's the latter that matters.

So, are you suggesting that there are a lot of unqualified Asian applicants?

Not sure what you are trying to get at here....

- - - Updated - - -

Thought this might be pertinent to the discussion at hand:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...e1c013f8c33_story.html?utm_term=.48d5e13b197f

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

The problem is that "applicants" != "qualified applicants". It's the latter that matters.

So, are you suggesting that there are a lot of unqualified Asian applicants?

There could be. They would be irrelevant. Your measure of how many of each race applied is irrelevant, as is the measure of how many of each race get in, unless you are considering race as a plus or minus for entry. All that matters here is whether individuals are being treated equally regardless of race. That isn't happening if race is being considered even as a small factor in entrance.

Thought this might be pertinent to the discussion at hand:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...e1c013f8c33_story.html?utm_term=.48d5e13b197f

So some schools are abandoning measuring talent in favour of lowering costs. Is that a good thing? It creates more room, not less, to base entry on things like race and family connections.

What would be a positive development would be transparent, objective and consistent criteria. This does the opposite.

It is nice to see that some schools still care though and are switching to reading the applicants' high school essays.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jIhaQWL-_Q[/youtube]

His guest makes a great point about how "Asians" includes Vietnamese, Filipino, etc, who are NOT well represented in numbers.