Suit Accusing Harvard of Capping Asian-American Admissions Could Be Tried This Summer

[hand2handking]

Suit Accusing Harvard of Capping Asian-American Admissions Could Be Tried This Summer

https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/10/politics/harvard-college-lawsuit-asian-americans-trial/index.html

(CNN) A lawsuit that claims Harvard caps the number of high achieving Asian-Americans it admits could go to trial in Boston as early as this summer, according to a new filing in the case.

The lawsuit, begun in 2014 by a conservative advocate who has long challenged affirmative action that benefits blacks and other historically disadvantaged racial minorities, could affect who gets a place on the selective Ivy League campus.

It could have even greater consequences nationwide. The case was devised ultimately to topple a 1978 US Supreme Court decision that first endorsed college affirmative action, Regents of the University of California v. Bakke.

Lawyers for both sides submitted a status report and proposed schedule Friday in US District Court in Boston. Harvard has asked that a trial begin in July or August. Students for Fair Admissions, the group that filed the complaint, wants a trial to begin no earlier than October 1. It says it would need the extra time to prepare for a trial of the size and scope anticipated.

The Students for Fair Admissions challengers, however, also say they want to file a summary-judgment motion by June 15, which would test whether they have already made the case that Harvard intentionally discriminates against Asian-Americans. Harvard contends that the group lacks the grounds even to make the motion and urged US District Judge Allison Burroughs to move directly to a trial.

The challengers recently finished data analysis of about 200,000 Harvard undergraduate admissions files from a six-year period. The files included students' grades, test scores and extracurricular activities; demographic and legacy information; and admissions officers' ratings.

Students for Fair Admissions' team of analysts have been trying to detect patterns that would support the group's claim that Asian-Americans are held to a higher standard than other applicants while the college puts a thumb on the scale for African-Americans and other minorities. The group contends that Harvard engages in unlawful racial balancing, violating Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

In their Friday submission, the challengers said they had collected 37 deposition transcripts and other documentary evidence that includes "incriminating emails" and "Harvard's own inculpatory studies."

Harvard lawyers rejoined that "it is unsurprising that SFFA wishes to project confidence" and noted that Harvard, too, is confident in its case. The lawyers said the parties' experts have offered competing analyses of the same set of admissions data.

From the start, Harvard has rejected the assertion that it sets Asian-American caps, and its officials emphasize the college's goal of broad student diversity.
"To deliver on our educational mission," Harvard spokeswoman Anna Cowenhoven told CNN in a recent statement, "our admissions practices consider the whole person, their capacity not only for academic excellence, but also their ability to contribute to and learn from people profoundly different from themselves."

The case of Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard is moving into a new phase as the Trump administration has separately begun investigating Harvard admissions policies.

Department of Justice officials said last fall that they were re-examining a 2015 discrimination complaint filed by 64 Asian-American groups against Harvard. That investigation is at an early stage, and it is not known whether the Trump administration would become involved in the Students for Fair Admissions case. The department could also bring its own lawsuit against Harvard if it finds the school wrongly discriminated based on race.

Affirmative Action Challenger

The case against Harvard was begun by conservative advocate Edward Blum, who has devised a series of US Supreme Court battles over racial remedies, typically enlisting white plaintiffs to challenge policies that give a boost to blacks and Hispanics. He created Students for Fair Admissions and sought Asian-Americans rejected by Harvard.

In taking up the cause of Asian Americans, Blum tapped into simmering complaints that Ivy League schools set caps on Asian applicants, as happened to Jewish applicants in early decades of the 20th century.

Yukong Zhao, president of the Asian American Coalition for Education, which has supported Blum's effort and, separately, coordinated the groups that filed the complaint with the Justice Department, said Friday that Harvard is using "de facto racial quotas." He said he hoped that the Department of Justice would lend its weight to the lawsuit in the form of an amicus "friend of the court" brief. Zhao said the coalition had recently provided additional information to the Justice Department regarding the exclusion of Asian-American applicants.

Harvard says it is seeking highly qualified individuals from different backgrounds and life experiences.

Harvard's Cowenhoven provided numbers that showed that the percentages of admitted students, by race, have remained steady in recent years. For the class of 2021 (admitted last year), 22.2% were Asian-American, 14.6% were African-American, 11.6% were Hispanic or Latino and 2% were Native American. The "all other" category, which is mainly white, was 49.6%.

For the lawsuit, Harvard gave Students for Fair Admissions files from applicants covering six admissions cycles (beginning with 2009-2010), under strict terms of confidentiality. Names were redacted, and a protective order prohibited the group from trying to discover applicants' identities.

None of its analysis has yet been made public, and Friday's submission notes that the parties will be conferring in upcoming weeks to try to resolve what materials would become part of the public record.

Lawyers on both sides, as well as Judge Burroughs, have said they expect the case to be eventually resolved at the Supreme Court.

Blum, who relies on a battery of conservative donors for his efforts, engineered the high court case of Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, which began in 2008 after a white student from suburban Houston, Abigail Fisher, was rejected by the flagship campus.

After two rounds before the justices, the court in 2016 upheld the University of Texas policy of considering race to enhance campus diversity, by a single vote.

Such narrow votes have been the pattern for Supreme Court disputes over affirmative action, beginning with the 5-4 Bakke in 1978.

thoughts?

 

[ninjahood]

this could actually be da catalyst for ya over achieving Asians always occupying da upper elite High Schools in NYC, to take ya show on da road to da major leagues completely unimpeded by abitrary caps based on holistic measures.

da story not beIng told here da proxy war...

Students for Fair Admissions' team of analysts have been trying to detect patterns that would support the group's claim that Asian-Americans are held to a higher standard than other applicants while the college puts a thumb on the scale for African-Americans and other minorities. The group contends that Harvard engages in unlawful racial balancing, violating Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

its gonna be a fascinating judgement.

 

[ninjahood]

, "our admissions practices consider the whole person, their capacity not only for academic excellence, but also their ability to contribute to and learn from people profoundly different from themselves."

this is da key....da Stuyvesant highschool admission test is hard AF but its fair....if u pass you in, and that place is floooooooooded with asians, liberal leaders in NYC (Deblasio and co) wanna dismantle it and add a Harvard type admission system...asians here aren't pleased...so whatever happens here will definitely reverberate nationwide.

 

[slighted]

Another relevant article -- http://www.businessinsider.com/the-ivy-leagues-history-of-discriminating-against-jews-2014-12

 

[wallyhopp]

So basically they want to keep their demographic figures exactly as they envision? Sounds a bit God like and controlling. If the school could be 90% Asian just based on scores, why wouldn't they allow or want that?


I always thought admission files were a bit of a secret. Like the names, race, and even place of birth was blurred out. But apparently not. I see them mention legacy. So name dropping your dad or grandfather who went there and contributed money helps? Makes sense.

 

[RustyShackleford]

Bravo to the OP, real talk, this is one of the best trap cards I have seen in a minute.

If this goes well he can successfully jam up and clap back at some of the dudes that were shading him for his past comments on Asian Americans.

Most dudes will not read the article or consider the history going into stuff like this before they respond and will completely miss how something like this is offensive to black people, how a Supreme Court ruling in their favor will hurt other minorities nationwide, and how white supremacy plays a role. Many will just see "discriminating against Asians" and run with it

Cosigning or playing devil's advocate for this is akin to sympathizing with the Peter Liang protesters.

But again, well played hand2handking , well played

 

[gry60]

Most dudes will not read the article or consider the history going into stuff like this before they respond and will completely miss how something like this is offensive to black people, how a Supreme Court ruling in their favor will hurt other minorities nationwide, and how white supremacy plays a role.

Yep.
People refuse to see things long-term when it comes to these issues. They think that there is not a chance that we could go back to segregated but equal; they won't even realize that White supremacists love to hear and repeat pro-segregation arguments from the pro-Black crowd.

I'm just gonna sit here and watch how many take that bait and argue against representation.

 

[tr1ll]

So basically they want to keep their demographic figures exactly as they envision? Sounds a bit God like and controlling. If the school could be 90% Asian just based on scores, why wouldn't they allow or want that?


I always thought admission files were a bit of a secret. Like the names, race, and even place of birth was blurred out. But apparently not. I see them mention legacy. So name dropping your dad or grandfather who went there and contributed money helps? Makes sense.

I thought this was common knowledge. This is where the notion that kids whose parents didn’t go to college are at a disadvantage.

It’s way bigger than people can’t go to college because they can’t afford it.

 

[ninjahood]

So basically they want to keep their demographic figures exactly as they envision? Sounds a bit God like and controlling. If the school could be 90% Asian just based on scores, why wouldn't they allow or want that?

political and narrative implications.

that's why i don't have a problem with it....this has played out at da specialized schools in NYC...

if asians tend to overperform da other minorities, and hell, even da white people and they out hustln for those spot..so be it.

that holistic approach lends to subjectiveness that blunts performance for ish that ultimately lends itself to be manipulated for da "who's who" gettin in instead of what they know.

 

[g14]

only person i know went to havard is asian-american

 

[hand2handking]

Bravo to the OP, real talk, this is one of the best trap cards I have seen in a minute.

If this goes well he can successfully jam up and clap back at some of the dudes that were shading him for his past comments on Asian Americans.

Most dudes will not read the article or consider the history going into stuff like this before they respond and will completely miss how something like this is offensive to black people, how a Supreme Court ruling in their favor will hurt other minorities nationwide, and how white supremacy plays a role. Many will just see "discriminating against Asians" and run with it

Cosigning or playing devil's advocate for this is akin to sympathizing with the Peter Liang protesters.

But again, well played hand2handking , well played

 

[wuchi01]

Most dudes will not read the article or consider the history going into stuff like this before they respond and will completely miss how something like this is offensive to black people, how a Supreme Court ruling in their favor will hurt other minorities nationwide, and how white supremacy plays a role. Many will just see "discriminating against Asians" and run with it

Cosigning or playing devil's advocate for this is akin to sympathizing with the Peter Liang protesters.

This is a serious sincere question post cause I'm genuinely curious about your thoughts on this topic:

-I don't sympathize with the Peter Liang case. Homeboy effed up and was quick to pull the trigger and killed an unarmed innocent person. That deserves some kinda punishment.
-I don't care about the underlying motivations of the OP. Don't usually hang in the NT General Section except for some specific personal interest threads. Just recently came across the dude and can see how he ticks people off. But I can appreciate his conversation starters. Always good to talk like mature adults, free exchange of thoughts.

Now are you actually saying that anyone Asian or not that supports the plaintiffs arguments is somehow egged on by white supremacists and hurting other minorities?! Because Asians are looking out for Asians? So you want a fixed outcome number of who gets in based on Race? What about mixed people of color?
Personally would rather see preferences made more on an economic level.
Appreciate any clarification. Thank you.

 

[sfc415]

I thought this was common knowledge. This is where the notion that kids whose parents didn’t go to college are at a disadvantage.

It’s way bigger than people can’t go to college because they can’t afford it.

It starts even from high school level.

I went to one of the best private schools in the Bay Area, and there were MANY practically illiterate kids who got in because their parents either went to the school or donated thousands for facility upgrades. Most people had to get ~4.0s in middle school, have extracurricular activities, and pass an SAT-like exam to get in.

I remember the entrance prep class I was sent to; my tutor told me straight up that I had to get a much higher score because I wasn't Catholic and because I had no history at the school. Basically if you were a rich white Catholic kid, you could just walk right in with a 75-80%, while I had to get a 90% or above to even have a chance. Not that it was really hard or anything, but the different standard was ridiculous to me. I only went there because my local high school at the time was terrible, and my parents convinced me to go there by buying me a Sony Minidisk player

These rich kids were getting 2.0-2.5 GPAs while their parents were shelling out $$$$ for their education; it made no sense to me how people can just burn money like that, even if they can afford it. If I had that kind of money I'd rather donate it than have my kids use it just to meet other rich kids to party with. Even with their bad grades, many still graduated and made it into private universities through "donations". Must be nice to be able to bribe your way through life

 

[wballz]

It starts even from high school level.

I went to one of the best private schools in the Bay Area, and there were MANY practically illiterate kids who got in because their parents either went to the school or donated thousands for facility upgrades. Most people had to get ~4.0s in middle school, have extracurricular activities, and pass an SAT-like exam to get in.

I remember the entrance prep class I was sent to; my tutor told me straight up that I had to get a much higher score because I wasn't Catholic and because I had no history at the school. Basically if you were a rich white Catholic kid, you could just walk right in with a 75-80%, while I had to get a 90% or above to even have a chance. Not that it was really hard or anything, but the different standard was ridiculous to me. I only went there because my local high school at the time was terrible, and my parents bribed me to go there by buying me a Sony Minidisk player

These rich kids were getting 2.0-2.5 GPAs while their parents were shelling out $$$$ for their education; it made no sense to me how people can just burn money like that, even if they can afford it. If I had that kind of money I'd rather donate it than have my kids use it just to meet other rich kids to party with. Even with their bad grades, many still made it into private universities through "donations".

Of course it makes sense, you spend as much as you can to pave the best way for your kids. My parents did it for me and I will do it for my kids.

You have to realize that it is a private school. They are there to make money. As long as they have high achieving graduates, they can also let in wealthy under achieving students with parents who donate a ton of $$ ( and are very influential in the business community ).

 

[sfc415]

Of course it makes sense, you spend as much as you can to pave the best way for your kids. My parents did it for me and I will do it for my kids.

You have to realize that it is a private school. They are there to make money. As long as they have high achieving graduates, they can also let in wealthy under achieving students with parents who donate a ton of $$ ( and are very influential in the business community ).

My parents would not have spent a single cent for me if I was getting 2.0s though Even in college, my parents said they'd only pay for me if I maintained a high GPA.

I understand what you're saying, but it's also unfair to kids whose parents work extremely hard to save up for a good school like that, only for a rich kid with mediocre grades to take those valuable spots with a donation/bribe.

Like I said, at the time, my local high school was one of the worst in the area, so there were a ton of middle class people out there trying to send their kids to these private schools. It was damn near a necessity. You know how many kids I've seen get rejected with "low" 3.8 GPAs and entrance scores? Meanwhile some idiot rich kids who would be fine no matter where they went took those kids' spots and did nothing but party for 4 years, while the higher achieving students were left in overcrowded schools with almost zero AP classes, no counselors, terrible teachers, high violence, low graduation rates, etc.

This continues in college, where you often see people who have no business being in a classroom taking up spots that someone less privileged and harder working could have benefited from. I mean, take a look at all these Republicans that went to Harvard, Yale, etc. but are dumb as rocks. It's not even an exaggeration when people say that the country would be better off if those types of people's spots were given to people more deserving of a higher education.

I know how the education system here works; that doesn't mean I have to like it or think that it's fair.

 

[gry60]

So you want a fixed outcome number of who gets in based on Race?

If we're not talking about legacy admissions (which is it's own can of worms), the thing that often gets overlooked is that those who get preference are as qualified to get in as those who get rejected. By focusing on race, the assumption is that it is the only thing those admitted applicants from underrepresented backgrounds have to offer, which plays into white supremacy mythology (minorities only get into Ivy league schools because of they're minorities).

Another thing that gets overlooked about over/under representation is that it creates socioeconomic blindspots: for example, one could wonder if the response to the events of Black Wall Street would be received today (in a society that knows that there are knowledgeable people of all colors, religions, orientations, etc...) the way they were received in the pre-civil rights era, where it was much more accepted to think that certain people, by virtue of their race/gender/origin were inherently inferior, due to the relative ignorance that White America had regarding smart, successful people of color.

 

[RustyShackleford]

This is a serious sincere question post cause I'm genuinely curious about your thoughts on this topic:

-I don't sympathize with the Peter Liang case. Homeboy effed up and was quick to pull the trigger and killed an unarmed innocent person. That deserves some kinda punishment.
-I don't care about the underlying motivations of the OP. Don't usually hang in the NT General Section except for some specific personal interest threads. Just recently came across the dude and can see how he ticks people off. But I can appreciate his conversation starters. Always good to talk like mature adults, free exchange of thoughts.

Now are you actually saying that anyone Asian or not that supports the plaintiffs arguments is somehow egged on by white supremacists and hurting other minorities?! Because Asians are looking out for Asians? So you want a fixed outcome number of who gets in based on Race? What about mixed people of color?
Personally would rather see preferences made more on an economic level.
Appreciate any clarification. Thank you.

I wrote this yesterday as a general comment, but it addresses why I find this so insulting:

Let's think about this for a second.

They are not going after legacies this hard that help unqualified affluent whites. They are not going after schools for prioritizing taking in affluent international students over educating local/domestic students. They are not taking issue with affirmative action on gender lines. Nope, they want to role back affirmative action along racial lines.

And they are taking money from white conservative groups and are using the 1964 Civil Rights act to argue their case. So a law mainly black people fought and died for, is now gonna help potentially lower their grandkids access to upper education. Furthermore, the Civil Rights movement helped past immigration reforms that helped tons more Asians enter America. Many of the students complaining about these admissions would not even be in America if it were not for black Civil Rights leaders and the black vote.

And of course, the implicit assertion that black applicants are less deserving of a spot. Little talk about how the education system works against African Americans, even affluent ones, that a black kid on average might have to deal with more BS to make it through K-12. Nah, let us act like everything is equal, we live in a perfect Rawlsian society, and black students don't have extra **** to overcome. But I guess this is where responsibility politics can be peddled to push back against this.

So little effort is being put toward making things equitable for all races, so little effort is being put into fixing the structural issues facing millions of kids, so little effort is put into making America is true meritocracy, so little effort is put into going after how affluent white and international students (a lot of from China) finesse the system; actions that will also help Asian American students as well. Instead attack the thing that is in place to help other minorities.

But Nah, let's ignore all the ways America systemically fail black and Latinos, and to add insult to injury lets take the money from groups extremely hostile to black people and use the 1964 Civil Rights Act to attack the little affirmative action that helps black folk. Indulge in the same behavior white people have been using to attack black communities for decades.

I criticized black dudes on NT in the past for going after Asian communities because to me that was punching down. Shading other marginalized group is always counterproductive and is always offensive. I would hope Asian posters on NT take time to consider the implications this will have for the black community before defending such things.

-More directly at you. Harvard to my knowledge does consider income and lets lower income kids go to school there tuition free. Secondly if you which to mainly a class entrance system that would mean more Black and Latinos getting in, which the people you claim "are just Asians looking out for Asians" would be against. And while the class v. direct race policy is a serious one, one country struggles with, I must remind you that while class policy helps that in many instances it is a downgrade and misses many socioeconomic factors at play. And class policy can be turned against the people who fought for it. Like in this case. The Civil Rights Act was written to help everyone, but is being used against black students now.

Harvard is not just letting kids in based on race. Look at the demographic breakdown, the African American student population is not represented in regards to the general population, Asians are. Harvard just tries to make their minority populations be reflective of the general public, the applicants are still qualified. There is not proof these students don't perform well.

You want to claim that this is innocuous just "Asians looking out for Asians" but if the win this case all the way to the Supreme Court that means it could be the case that school have to stop trying to African American students, qualified and on the margin a chance. Some Asians getting "help", at the expense of black students, and this campaign is funded by conservative whites to undermine the last bit of affirms action left and equality based policy in schools. Something they have been doing for years.

They are asking Asia students be helped not at the expense of affluent whites (who is probably benefit from this) but African Americans on the margin; and they are taking rich conservative money to fight this fight. It is white supremacy, and these Asia American people going this route are complicit in it. Just like the Peter Liang protesters

 

[wballz]

.....

They are asking Asia students be helped not at the expense of affluent whites (who is probably benefit from this) but African Americans on the margin; and they are taking rich conservative money to fight this fight. It is white supremacy, and these Asia American people going this route are complicit in it. Just like the Peter Liang protesters

This needs to be emphasized more.

It's not a real removal of cap. It is to setup Asians to take over the spots of other minorities.

I am good if it is a free for all. No race cap whatsoever. Not caring about reflecting about representing different races - just sheer relentless work ethic and talent. We have that here in Canada. Hell, I remember the Dean of Arts at my university raised the topic that maybe other minorities are not represented in their faculty - and that maybe they should look at consciously trying to have a more diverse staff.

I remember everyone telling the Dean to not add race in the hiring equation (mind you, the class was half asian). I think someone even voiced out "us asians are not really looking to have a career in the Arts field, I just need this Philosophy credit" hahahhhahahahahahahah

 

[RustyShackleford]

This needs to be emphasized more.

It's not a real removal of cap. It is to setup Asians to take over the spots of other minorities.

I am good if it is a free for all. No race cap whatsoever. Not caring about reflecting about representing different races - just sheer relentless work ethic and talent. We have that here in Canada. Hell, I remember the Dean of Arts at my university raised the topic that maybe other minorities are not represented in their faculty - and that maybe they should look at consciously trying to have a more diverse staff.

I remember everyone telling the Dean to not add race in the hiring equation (mind you, the class was half asian). I think someone even voiced out "us asians are not really looking to have a career in the Arts field, I just need this Philosophy credit" hahahhhahahahahahahah

I am confused with what you are saying.

So you want a system where Asian American students take place of black students?

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt before I respond directly but more generally...

Stuff like "just make it a free for all" this plays directly into the model minority myth, the false assertion that America is a meritocracy, ignores systemic factors, and the warped belief that things would be more "fair" if policy helping African Americans was rolled back

 

[wballz]

I am confused with what you are saying.

So you want a system where Asian American students take place of black students?

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt before I respond directly but more generally...

Stuff like "just make it a free for all" this plays directly into the model minority myth, the false assertion that America is a meritocracy, ignores systemic factors, and the warped belief that things would be more "fair" if policy helping African Americans was rolled back

I meant to say:

"Free for all" does work if you have an excellent public secondary/high school system (The system where I grew up in) + other factors that intangibly help people in general like universal health care. This way, almost every mentally and physically able bodied student has a fighting chance.

I was ignorant in my statement about a "free for all", because I was only thinking about what is set up in my country.

The system in the States is terrible. Just embarrassing. If you do have a free for all in the states, people who grew up in lower income households (which has a higher percentage of minorities) have no chance.

Then again, maybe this is what "elite" school wants - no poor people allowed.

 

[sharpshooter718]

Harvard is trash anyway...

 

[ninjahood]

I am good if it is a free for all. No race cap whatsoever. Not caring about reflecting about representing different races - just sheer relentless work ethic and talent.

that's called a high stakes entrance exam...and da usual folks calling it discrimination...

here's Stuyvesant for example...

New York City Progressives Try (And Fail) To Limit Asians At Top Schools.
Progressives in New York City unhappy at the lack of diversity in its elite high schools are urging the mayor to lower the number of Asians admitted. This is unfair and wrong.
By David Marcus

Both The New York Times and the New York Post ran stories this week about the demographic breakdown of students accepted to New York City’s eight elite public high schools. Though dealing with the same numbers, the news items were starkly different. The Times piece was focused on lack of diversity, noting that only 10 percent of students accepted were Black and Hispanic, even though those groups make up 67 percent of all New York public school students. But, there was one word that, somewhat shockingly did not appear in the article — the word “Asian.”

At the Post the opposite was true. There the headline blared, “Asian kids dominate admission to city’s elite high schools.” What the Times had neglected to mention in its coverage was the wildly disproportionate number of Asian students accepted into these schools. It is basically the inverse of what we see with Black and Latino students; over 50 percent of accepted students are Asian, though Asians only make up about 13 percent of all public school students.

The Times’ decision to leave out such a huge piece of a story focused on efforts to increase Black and Hispanic enrollment is indicative of a paradox progressives face in tackling the disparities. Any Lefty worth his salt is happy to jump on board an effort to redistribute resources to minority groups, but in this case, in order to do so, that redistribution must come at the expense another minority group, one largely made up of immigrant families. That’s a tough spot, so the Gray Lady just ignored it.

A Campaign Promise Not Kept
In his 2013 run for mayor, Bill de Blasio pledged to change the admission policies for the city’s elite public high schools, to address the low enrolment of minority groups. By law, these schools, widely considered the equal of the nation’s top private schools, may only consider test scores in admission. This leaves no room to massage the results as our top colleges do, and replace higher scoring Asian students with other minority students.

So far, the mayor has made a few small changes, offering more test prep to minority students and making a few alterations to the test itself. The result has been a further decline in the number of Black and Hispanic students. Now progressives are demanding more wholesale changes to the admission policy, to look at factors beyond simply test scores.

De Blasio’s reticence to make these changes likely has to do with the fact that doing so would be a direct effort to limit the number of Asian students in the schools. That may sound hyperbolic, but the numbers bear it out. Take Stuyvesant High School, considered the best of the eight, according to Business Insider. In 2016 the student body had 23 Black and Hispanic students, 178 white students and a whopping 680 Asian students.

While it is well established that affirmative action programs always disproportionately harm Asian students, the numbers in New York are so stark, that there is no way to move the needle on diversity without the vast majority of those negatively impacted being Asian. This would require the mayor to tell thousands of Asian students and their families that even though they worked hard and got the best score, they are being passed over.

Is There Asian Privilege?
Traditionally affirmative action programs have been based on the idea that white students have advantages that stem from structural racism in our society. It is a way of redressing past and current discrimination and leveling the playing field. This argument makes a lot less sense in regard to Asian students, especially in New York City where most are first or second-generation immigrants. It strains credulity to suggest that somehow American society was created to enshrine Asian privilege.

This leads to some uncomfortable questions. How do we explain this wildly disproportionate dominance of admission to these schools by Asian students? There is no innate quality such as IQ that can explain such a vast difference in success. More likely, we are dealing with something cultural. We see books and articles about dragon moms, and are familiar with stereotypes about overbearing Asian families that insist on academic excellence.

This cultural explanation has some precedent in New York, also one tied to the immigrant experience. In the 1930s and 1940s the public City College of New York was regarded as the “Jewish Ivy.” It was a disproportionately Jewish school, attended by poor and middle class immigrant Jews that produced a number of important thinkers. It was an experience close to what we see in New York’s elite high schools today, and it came with similar stereotypes of bookish Jews with academically demanding families.

Can Diversity Be Achieved Fairly?

But if the explanation is primarily cultural, what can be done to promote diversity, without unfairly punishing kids and families making sacrifices for their education? If we accept the premise that having top schools better reflect the demographics of the city, and there are advantages to this, what’s the best way to make it happen? The answer must not be to discriminate against Asian students, but rather to raise the academic levels of other groups.

In New York City, charter schools may be providing the answer. Though controversial, the city’s charters have a success rate that is undeniable. According to a Stanford University study, translating standard deviation in achievement growth between traditional public schools and charters, “This advantage for charter students is equivalent to 23 more days of learning in a 180-day school year in reading and 63 days in math.”

This is a stunning result, and one that should obviously lead de Blasio and other city leaders to increase these opportunities for better elementary and middle school education. Would that lead to significant change in the numbers at the eight elite high schools? Maybe, maybe not, but whether it does or not, it puts students in a much better position to learn and succeed.

New York City’s top high schools serve a unique purpose, and there are only eight of them (a ninth is a performing arts school that admits based on auditions) in a city of eight million people. For decades they have been point of pride in Gotham. There is no excuse to change the recipe that has had so much success because we don’t like the skin tone of the kids getting in today. Asian students deserve better than to be targeted in the name of diversity. De Blasio must reject calls to change the high standards at these top schools, and instead offer more choice to parents of all races who seek a better education for their kids.

David Marcus is the Federalist's New York Correspondent and the Artistic Director of Blue Box World, a Brooklyn based theater project. Follow him on Twitter, @BlueBoxDave.

http://thefederalist.com/2018/03/09...-try-and-fail-to-limit-asians-at-top-schools/

 

[ninjahood]

Harvard is trash anyway...

that untaxed endowment loot they sitin on da stuff of legends thou

 

[W)taps]

Its no secret that Asians are held to a higher standard.

I feel like applicants should be getting judged based on their economic background the most.

Let's say theres an Asian dude and a Black dude with same GPA, SAT score, + a great essay. The difference is the black guy is/was at an economic disadvantage (poor district, poorly funded schools, etc)

Asian dude took 4 AP classes when his HS 6 offered.
Black dude took 4/4 AP classes.

I feel like the black guy should get accepted....

 

[W)taps]

They can hold their own nuts. Those pats on the head from the white man they idolize so much isn't working out anymore. Got cheating down to a science sommuch that it is blowing up in their faces.

and everything that was given to you was from a white man. only difference was the other minorities were playing the game while you kept whining about it