Harvard officials accused of racial bias defend their admissions policy

Steven Senne, AP Images

Student's lawyers for fair admissions, the organization that sued Harvard, said that "positive action was not the subject of a trial", but in some parts of their On Friday, they appeared to plead against any consideration of race in admissions.

OA week after the start of a trial involving the use of the breed in Harvard University admissions decisions, the strategies of each party are beginning to become clearer.

Students for Fair Admissions, the group that went on to university in 2014, sought to show that admissions officers at Harvard were trying to admit the targeted number of students from different racial and ethnic groups. The organization's lawyers have attempted to use data compiled by the University's Office of Institutional Research and testimonies from Harvard officials to show that Asian American candidates are penalized by personal assessments by officials of the United States. admissions. On Friday, they tried to prove that Harvard College admissions director had a bias against Americans of Asian descent.

The university vehemently denies these claims. His lawyers argued that the data presented did not provide a complete picture of the operation of the Admissions Office. Harvard officials said that they really consider the race of candidates when they evaluate them – it's not something that can be divorced from a person's life experience, they say. But they insist they never consider it a negative factor.

Regardless of the judge's decision, the appeal is subject to appeal and may be referred to the US Supreme Count, who could then make a decision that significantly challenges the use of affirmative action. many colleges. Students' lawyers for fair admissions declared that "positive action is not in the process of being tried," but in parts of their argument on Friday, they appeared to argue against any consideration of race in the courts. admissions.

Adam K. Mortara, the organization's lawyer, interviewed Marlyn E. McGrath, director of admissions at Harvard College, the university's undergraduate division, on the consideration of race and religion in admissions. .

"Harvard does not follow the religious identity of the candidates, does not it?" Said Mortara. At his request, McGrath explained that when candidates tick a box in the joint application indicating their religion, this information is not seen by admissions officers at Harvard. She stated that this practice was established on the advice of Harvard lawyers. But if candidates reveal their religion elsewhere in their application, Harvard officials would know it.

Mortara asked McGrath if this lack of information was an obstacle to the assessment of a candidate. She said that it was not.

"Do you consider it a disadvantage if you can not consider their race?" He asked. McGrath said that he would do it.

Confuse a stereotype

Mortara also showed the emails from the court between McGrath and his daughter, who was a Harvard alumni interviewer. The emails were heavily redacted, but one of them suggested that the best admitted students from Utah were of Asian descent.

"Send this for your amusement. Pure Utah, "McGrath wrote to his daughter. When asked why she thought it was fun, McGrath said that "confuses the stereotype that many people have of Utah".

Student lawyers for fair admissions also asked about other communications. In a letter, McGrath politely replied to a former Harvard student who had suggested limiting the admission of Japanese students. In another email exchange with her daughter, she spoke to a well-connected student, the child of a former student or former student, who had been admitted.

A Harvard lawyer, William F. Lee, then asked McGrath if she understood that she was accused by Mortara of having a bias against Americans of Asian descent. She said that she understood.

"Is it true?" Lee asked.

"No," McGrath replied.

Earlier in the day, Students for Fair Admissions lawyers focused their questions on a series of tables created by the Harvard Institutional Research Office in 2013 and shared with admissions officers.

The tables were intended to help Harvard officials analyze the "tricks" that candidates might receive to increase their chances of being admitted. One piece of advice – a personal assessment given by admissions officers to each candidate based on interviews, recommendations and other factors – seems to show that being American of Asian descent can harm the chances of a student. a candidate.

Harvard officials in the gallery said the analyzes were supposed to be exploratory and did not give a complete picture of what admissions officials actually do. Some of the analyzes were incomplete, they said, and too simplified. They added that the analyzes could not be used to draw conclusions about the effects of race on the decisions of admissions officers and pointed out that the work also shows that low-income students of all racial and ethnic groups receive a tip in their process.

They stated that they generally did not consider race in personal notation – although this may sometimes be helpful if a candidate had overcome adversity because of his race – but considered it in the notation. overall.

The trial will continue Monday and should last about three weeks.

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].