Thread by @RuleandRuin

1. Arguments have closed in the Harvard Asian-American admissions case. I used to enjoy writing about meritocracy but now it has become a dreadful, stomach-churning subject that I usually try to avoid
nbcnews.com/news/asian-ame…

2. I covered meritocracy while writing about Kingman Brewster's reform of Yale admissions in the '60s. I believe it was brave & necessary to admit talented students from all backgrounds in place of the traditional clientele of advantaged WASP males...
archives.yalealumnimagazine.com/issues/99_12/a…

3. But it was also in Yale's self-interest since new opportunities were opening up for women/minorities while society's top jobs required more IQ; as an "intellectual investment banker" Brewster knew the old WASP elite was the equivalent of low-yield bonds
nytimes.com/1964/04/11/arc…

4. The Ivies & other elite univs always have acted from self-interest. David Riesman told me that as a freshman in the '20s he criticized Pres. Lowell for spending $ on opulent houses instead of education. Lowell said "I want students to come to Harvard...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A._Lawren…

5. "...and get accustomed to luxury. To continue to enjoy it they'll have to pursue lucrative careers, and that means they'll have more resources to give to Harvard." Even the architecture is in service to the self-interest of the elite universities!

6. Brewster's 1967 admissions statement codified the elite univs' enlightened self-interest in having their graduates become truly outstanding "leaders in their generation." This is the Prime Directive; other considerations are important but secondary
asc.yale.edu/sites/default/…

7. Elite univ. admissions are thus an attempt to foretell the future: what will the composition of the elite be 2-3 decades hence? Which of these 17- & 18-year-olds have what it will take to become society's leaders? & which could benefit most from what the univs. can offer them?

8. These are enormously subjective questions. Grades & test scores can predict how students will perform academically but often are poor indicators of future success
inc.com/ilya-pozin/why…

9. And the elite universities don't just want grads who will make good salaries -- they want future leaders. Clearly, Harvard believes David Hogg will be one of those leaders despite his unimpressive SATs
washingtonpost.com/education/2018…

10. Much of the discussion of elite university admissions assumes they are pure meritocracies, based solely on tests & grades. But they're not and won't be unless & until the US becomes a technocracy (the predicate for Michael Young's dystopia)
amazon.com/Rise-Meritocra…

11. Harvard's problem is that its self-interest in maintaining elite share contradicts its desire to be seen as a racially progressive meritocracy. It clearly believes that Asian-Americans (5.6% of US pop.) will be no more than 20% of the 2050 elite yet can't admit this openly

12. What should be done? Had I the power, I'd cut way back on athletics. The Ivy League supports more athletic teams than any other US athletic conference. This advantages the already advantaged and seems based on an outdated idea of what makes leaders
huffingtonpost.com/jonathan-r-col…

13. I'd also try to admit applicants with the most curiosity. It's a trait that's identifiable even at a young age, hard to game, a critical attribute of the student who will make best use of a university's total offerings, & essential to success
psychologytoday.com/us/blog/passio…

14. This might in turn delink elite universities from the lucrative yet socially parasitical financial sector -- a connection that drives much of the frenzy over admission to such univs. & gives them overinflated symbolic importance
qz.com/678561/the-pre…

15. And I've come around to Jerry Karabel's view that some fraction of the elite univ. classes should be chosen by lottery. I've no doubt that many of the 40,787 rejected by Harvard last year were at least as able as the 1,962 who were admitted...
thecrimson.com/article/2018/3…

16. ...and a lottery among applicants of objectively indistinguishable merit would, as Jerry put it, "promote a certain measure of humility — a quality in short supply in the upper rungs of the 'meritocracy' — among admission officers and students alike"
nytimes.com/2007/09/24/opi…