Posted on 10/16/2018 12:09:22 PM PDT by reaganaut1
BOSTON—Harvard University’s longtime admissions dean defended the school’s recruitment of prospective students in the first day of a landmark trial accusing Harvard of discriminating against Asian-American applicants.
On Monday, lawyers for the plaintiffs focused on internal documents showing Harvard sends targeted letters to high-school students who score well on the PSAT, encouraging them to consider applying to the prestigious school. The score thresholds vary by race.
In a recent admissions year, white students in 20 underrepresented states—which Harvard calls “sparse country”—received a recruitment letter if they scored 1310 or higher out of a possible 1600 on the combined verbal and math components, according to the plaintiffs’ exhibit. In all U.S. states, Asian-American women had to score at least 1350 to receive a letter, while Asian-American men had to score at least 1380.
The PSAT is considered a preview of how a student may score on the SAT.
Black, Hispanic and Native American high-schoolers nationally who scored at least 1100 received a letter, the plaintiffs’ exhibit showed.
Students who qualify for these letters are twice as likely to be admitted as students who don’t qualify, according to a handbook provided to Harvard’s alumni interviewers.
William Fitzsimmons, Harvard’s admissions dean since 1986, defended the policy by saying the letters to white students in more rural states help the school recruit from areas where students may be less aware of Harvard. “We do everything we can to reach out to a much broader range of people,” he testified.
Mr. Fitzsimmons, 74 years old, said the lower thresholds for underrepresented minorities take into consideration how the “rather stark economic differences and opportunities” those students face may affect their ability to score higher on standardized tests.
(Excerpt) Read more at wsj.com ...
Those policies are illegal and unconstitutional. If there’s a law that “allows” them, that law is invalid and not binding.
How is the PSAT allowed to obtain race metadata?
Policy Translation:
If there is little chance of converting you into a stark, raving, Totalitarian supporting Stalinist you can’t come here.
It is called achieving racial diversity.
Sometimes you have to discriminate in order not to be discriminatory.
Harvard tries to defend it’s discrimination against Asian applicants...
Let the tap-dancing and pretzel-twisting begin.
bookmark
Not in his top ten choices.
University of Georgia is his #1. Best engineering school. Amazing I know, but it is.
Harvard is a private college. The US Constitution protects their right to peacefully assemble (for the purpose of education, commerce and research) AS THEY PLEASE.
Since Harvard is not a state school, the 14th amendment does not apply. Further, it is not a “public accommodation” as it is not open to everyone.
You could argue that those receiving state grants, scholarships or loans could infer the attachment of the 14th amendment but that would first apply to the granting of such financial instruments.
In short, you have NO RIGHT to be treated equally outside of the government. You have no more “right” to be accepted to Harvard than you have the “right” to trespass on someone’s property.
U of Georgia best engineering school?
Sandra Day O’Connor defied logic when she proclaimed from the bench that affirmative action would remain “constitutional” for the next thirty years but after that it would no longer be relevant and no longer “constitutional”. This is what passes for “constitutional” law these days. No wonder Harvard and other elitists feel they can violate individual rights or discriminate with impunity because they knew all they needed was a liberal judge to find their policies of course legal and “constitutional”. Good luck to the Asian students but somehow Harvard will prevail and keep doing whatever it wants despite the amount of Federal money they receive.
Oh, but “Diversity” is a “compelling state interest” according to the life-appointed “justices”
“…said the lower thresholds for underrepresented minorities take into consideration how the “rather stark economic differences and opportunities”
Becuse we all know that being “White” or “Asian” automarically means you are wealthy and have an abundance of opportunities, BARF.
Descrimination is Discrimanation, I hope the Sue the pants off of these ass-holes
Yep
But doncha know Michael Jordan’s kids have those “rather stark economic . . .opportunities”
Vs the white kids in Appalachia
I hope you meant Georgia Tech.
I think the way this works is that Harvard accepts a lot of contracts from the Feds. Along with those contracts come clauses preventing discrimination in all things, great and small.
Harvard has a stark choice -- give up all government contracts or end discrimination. They are not going to give up the Federal sugar...
Explain Title IX and how all schools must abide.
‘We deserve the right to discriminate because our discrimination compensates for discrimination which is bad.’
Harvard could easily give-up government contracts and go on discriminating if the wanted to. Their $40 billion endowment allows this.
BUT from my many years of experience w/ Affirmative Action in Employment. Recruitment does not guarantee acceptance. I recruit from the under represented group but then accept the most qualified within that group. That acceptance criteria needs to be specific and measurable.
I do not agree with what they are doing, but share this to help Freepers in how the Court may look at this.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.