We Seek Justice!
We Present Forensic Evidence Showing
Harvard's Discrimination Against Asian-American Students.
We present the following 6 pieces of evidence for your consideration:
[A] The Simulated Characteristics of Students Applying to Harvard:
The following simulated distribution curves represent Harvard applicants, broken
down by race. The x-axis is total SAT scores, having a maximum of 2400 points.
The y-axis is the counts of Harvard applicants
in 2015.
For details of how the curves are constructed, please click here.
To
help viewers gain a quick understanding of the curves, please note that
(1)
the height of each distribution is primarily based on data released by Harvard regarding the percentages of applicants broken down by race.
(2) the mean SAT score of each race is based on data released by the
Dept. of
Education for all students who took SAT exams in 2015. It is
NOT the mean
SAT score of Harvard applicants, which is expected to
be
higher. In other words
if Harvard's admissions data were available,
the
center of each curve would move
towards to the right somewhat.
However, the high-score-end of the tail of each distribution will NOT
move at all!
(3) the racial characteristics of the distributions including the width of
one
standard deviation
are based on information released by
Brookings Institute,
which in turn used data released by the College
Board.
The vertical line drawn above the SAT point of 1850 is arbitrarily chosen. Most
colleges have such a vague line in mind in admitting student. It is both for the benefit of
the admitted students who desire to graduate in 4 years, and that of the
professors who would find a class of huge disparity in academic preparation very
difficult to teach. The areas under the curves to the right of the cut-off line represent the total
number of students admitted according to race.
Hence,
if
SAT scores were the
only standard for admitting students, then more Asian students will be admitted
than white peers, and very few Black and Hispanic peers would be admitted. In
reality, most colleges take into consideration such other factors as class ranking, l
etters of recommendation from applicant's high school counselors, extra curricular
activities, legacy status, the reports from interviews done by alumni, and the strength
of the common and specific composition
accompanying a student's application.
Note: Soon the real applicant data from Harvard will be available to plot
these curves. They will not be the perfect Gaussians but quite similar to the ones seen above.
[B] The % of students admitted by Harvard in 2015, broken down by race:
51.6% whites,
21% Asian-Americans,
13.3% Latinos,
12.1% blacks, and
2% Native Americans or Native Hawaiians.
The "% of students admitted broken down by race", shown above, seem in drastic
contradiction to the
scholastic
achievement of its applicants shown n the 4 curves presented in section
[A]
.
[C] The findings of Princeton Professors Espenshade and Radford:
Table 3.5 (emphasis added)
Race Admission Preferences at Public & Private Institutions
Measured in ACT & SAT Points, Fall 1997
----------------------------------------------------
Public Institutions Private Institutions
ACT-Point Equivalents SAT-Point Equivalents
Item (out of 36) (out of 1600)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Race
(White) -- --
Black 3.8 310
Hispanics 0.3 130
Asian -3.4 -140
Our readers may now begin to perceive how the rather
contradictory
information under sections [A] and [B]
could co-exist. It is because SAT points were taken away from the
Asian-Am applicants, while points were added to black and Hispanic applicants.
[D] The findings of Ron Unz's book:
The black dotted line shows that the number of college-aged Asian Americans
has approximately doubled over a recent 20-year period. The red solid line
indicating the % of AsAm students at the California Institute of Technology (CIT),
whose admissions tracks that increase. That is because CIT doesn't practice race-
preference.
In strong contrast, the Ivy League colleges converge to 16% +/- 3% Asian
American students.
[E] Harvard's "Holistic Evaluation":
Harvard claims to practice "holistic evaluation." Holistic is an ambiguous word
unless it is defined. However, most people can be induced to think that holistic
evaluation must be fair. In reality, Harvard's holistic evaluation is a charade to provide for it
the leeway to race-balance as it sees fit.
The fallacy of Harvard's holistic evaluation can be revealed qualitatively
in 2 sentences. Using holistic evaluation system, Harvard adds the most points
to black applicants. Does that imply that, holistically speaking, black applicants to
Harvard are the best and most deserving, next the Hispanics, then the whites, and
Asian-American applicants are the worst?
Quantitatively, the
"White House Commission on Presidential Scholars"
evaluates
all high school graduates annually. It evaluates students "on
academic achievement, personal characteristics, leadership, service,
other extracurricular activities, and an analysis of their essays." It is about
as holistic as it could be. Yet, over the past 15 years, Asian Americans
averaged 28% of the finalists, while Harvard accepted only about 18% of Asian
American students over the same period.
[F] Harvard's Emphasis on Diversity:
If
diversity were Harvard's only goal, it merely needed to add more
SAT points to black and Hispanic applicants. It didn't need to take
SAT points away from Asian American applicants.
Harvard's holistic
evaluation and its emphasis on diversity were simply camouflage for
its real intention to limit the number of admitted Asian American
students and to admit more of their white peers. Recall that Harvard engaged in
blatant
discrimination against Jewish students decades ago, using similar
methods.
In conclusion
,
Harvard is obviously engaged in race-
balancing.
It violates Title VI of the Civil Rights
Act of 1964.
|
