[ad_1]
Justin Ide, Harvard U.
In the midst of a presumptive bias trial against US-Asian candidates, Harvard's revised guidelines for admissions officials became public.
This year's Harvard College admissions procedures include something different: explicit instructions on how to use Race to evaluate student applications. The question of whether and how admissions officers are trained to consider race has been at the center of a lawsuit in which Harvard defended his race-based admissions policy.
The procedures, designed to train officials who read applications for admission to the 2023 class, were presented in evidence on Thursday. The guidelines indicate that admissions officers can take race into account when assigning an overall score to the applications they read, which occurs early in the admissions cycle.
Application Readers "can determine whether a student's background, including race or ethnicity, can contribute to the educational benefits of diversity at Harvard College. Consideration of race or ethnicity can only be considered as one factor among others, "say the guidelines. The word "only" is bold and underlined.
In an email, a Harvard spokesperson said, "The admission policy of Harvard College remains the same, the reading procedures are reissued each year and the 2023 procedures are this year's version."
The new procedures – which have been reported for the first time by The New York Times – have attracted the attention of the lawyers for Students for Fair Admissions, an affirmative anti-action group that claims that Harvard discriminates against US applicants of Asian descent. Friday marked the end of the second week of what should be a three-week trial.
The procedures reinforce some of the statements made by the admissions officers who testified here, but they also reflect some of the changes. On the one hand, admissions officers agreed in their testimony that, for the most part, there were no written instructions in the years for which they had been interviewed.
They also agreed that they took race into consideration when evaluating apps, but they added that practice could never hurt an app. They vehemently denied the accusations of discrimination against American candidates of Asian origin. The race can sometimes be a "tip" when officials award the overall score, they said.
Quiet candidates
But the lawyers for Students for Fair Admissions say that officials consider the breed at other times as well. In addition to the overall score, Harvard admissions officers assign each candidate a score in four categories: athletic ability, academic achievement, extracurricular activities, and personal suitability. The organization claims that US applicants of Asian descent are unfairly penalized on personal scoring, which admissions officials said were false.
Instructions were also given regarding personal classification in the new Harvard admission procedures. Readers of applications should judge the personal qualities of students "based on an assessment of the positive effect that this person could have throughout his life on the basis of what we have seen". There was an explicit stipulation that "the race or ethnicity of the applicant should not be taken into account in the assignment of the personal note."
"Keep in mind that features that are not always synonymous with extraversion have the same value."
And there was this: "Keep in mind that features that are not always synonymous with extraversion are valued in the same way. Candidates who appear to be particularly thoughtful, insightful and / or dedicated should also receive higher personal marks. "
The "discreet" plaintiffs were the subject of some testimony during the trial. William R. Fitzsimmons, the Dean of Admissions, had written about American applicants of Asian descent, calling them "very calm" and the other "calm and strong". Fitzsimmons said he had described the candidates of all races. with these terms at one time or another, and did not want to stereotype anyone.
The numerical scores awarded by Harvard officials were also discussed on Friday when Peter S. Arcidiacono, a Duke University economist hired by Students for Fair Admissions, analyzed admission data at Harvard. Arcidiacono said on Thursday that its models show that Harvard admissions officials are giving American American applicants lower scores on the personal rating, which hurts their chances of being admitted despite academic grades. and extracurricular high.
William F. Lee, a Harvard lawyer, noted that academic and extracurricular scores are based in part on subjective factors, such as high school teacher letters and guidance counselors. They are not based solely on SAT scores and scores or on a list of extracurricular activities of the student. In addition, he added, Asian-American applicants tend to score better on academic and extracurricular assessments, according to Arcidiacono's models.
Lee wanted to know why biased admissions officials would drive Asian American candidates onto the personal note, but then give them a boost for extracurricular and academic results. Arcidiacono said that there was more than that.
The trial will continue Monday.
Nell Gluckman writes on issues relating to faculty and other subjects in higher education. You can follow her on Twitter @nellgluckman, or email him at [email protected].
[ad_2]
Source link
