this can be corrected for to some extent by weighting exam scores based on school/region/socioeconomic status. that would be fairer and more transparent than the current system used by elite universities in america.
the ability to develop an "interesting" application is of course strongly influenced by family background and finances...
in other words, use unclear and vague criteria to judge admissions that just happen to massively disadvantage asian americans. it's strange that Faust is not condemned for her absurd and racist suggestion that asian american applicants are on average much less "interesting" people.
That's a rather pithy way to interpret what was said. Here's an alternate interpretation: be different from all the other applicants. If you have the same grades, the same extracurriculars, and the same things to talk about in an essay, you're not going to be different from everyone else and thus won't get in. And that's the nature of being different - you can't quantify it until you see it.
Having gone to a high-percentage Asian high school, I can tell you that traditional Asian parents mostly push their kids to do a limited set of things (high academic scores, orchestra, etc.), which can easily lead to a homogeneous pool of applicants.
Faust is saying that if you want your kid to get into Harvard, you should instead encourage them to do things that set them apart from the thousands of other smart kids applying. Build an airplane, climb a famous mountain, invent something, be a sailor, race sled dogs, etc. Those are the things that make an applicant stand out.
the point is that holistic can be easily used as a cover for race based discrimination and that this is what is happening at harvard and elite universities. when you look at the quantitative disadvantage for asian applicants in terms of SAT/GPA, I think it's clear that homogeneity cannot explain this away. it's also a little absurd that they publicly place so much emphasis on diversity and "interesting" applicants when the actual student body of ivy league colleges is filled with bland wealthy strivers of all races.
the interpretation in your last paragraph is even worse in a way for faust and harvard: only children with the right parental financial resources and support would have been able to "Build an airplane, climb a famous mountain, invent something, be a sailor, race sled dogs" before the age of 18. it is also hard to see why an academic institution cares so much about such things.
The problem is that the SAT isn't a very interesting test, IMO, for college admission. It doesn't test achievement, but is closer to an IQ test. I think its reasonable for top-tier schools to create a cut-off, but once you score above a threshold, I don't think it provides much value.
And as another poster noted -- Asians are still greatly overrepresented at Harvard. Faust really is saying that Whites aren't interesting (Blacks are of about average interest as their numbers match the general population now).
Not to put too fine a point on it, but 20% of those admitted were Asian American, for the class of 2019, in a country where less than 5%, self-identify as Asian-American.[1][2]
I'm not the one to defend Harvard, but an unestablished minority group only has so many opportunities so of course a lot of peoples resumes are going to look the same. That said, this is pretty much just traditional elitism. If your work harder than anyone else you'll still not get recognized because you're not claimed to be smart, cultured, pretty or interesting enough.
> If your work harder than anyone else you'll still not get recognized because you're not claimed to be smart, cultured, pretty or interesting enough.
Err, that's not at all what she said or even implied.
That's the point: they didn't work harder than anyone else applying to Harvard. They can't make decisions based on GPA/ACT/SAT scores, because everyone has the same top scores.
Hypothetically, and probably not that far off: So you have 10,000 applicants for a class of 2,000 and 8,000 of those applicants are valedictorians with extremely high SAT/ACT scores and they've managed to check all the regular boxes (played sports, instruments, etc.). How are you going to cull 6,000 applicants?
> College admissions could really do with some sort of objective criteria
Like GPA and SAT/ACT scores? Because they tried that. Secondary education is too easy and variable in the US, and Harvard can't really do much about that.
perhaps michael wang fell short in terms of extracurricular achievements (though this is unlikely given information provided in the article). but this is unlikely to be true of all asian candidates as a group. serious questions need to be asked about the use of subjective and hard to quantify non academic criteria that discriminate against a particular group.
the usa is after all quite unique in using non academic achievements for admissions to elite universities...
perhaps i am missing something, but it looks like this just highlights two very common and easy to define types of error. how much practical value is there in this? Has this not been done before?
Hi! We are beta-testing additional types of checks in consultation with our existing clients. The main challenge we face is controlling the urge to do too much for our users.
says... another account created just to comment on this issue.
I put my foot in my mouth all the time, but I put my name to it. Taleb is interesting. Are you saying that the other account is literally Taleb, and that he's known for astroturfing campaigns? I wouldn't discard such a proposition, but I'd prefer hearing it from someone non-anonymous.
(For all I know, you're just an account created to extend the thread.)
