There's a misunderstanding about affirmative action that's based on elite data: people think Asians are those most negatively impacted by it, but in the U.S. at large, Asians aren't numerous enough for that to be true.
What would happen if admissions went test-only? Take a look:
What would happen if admissions went test-only? Take a look:
The misunderstanding is because, at Harvard, the results look different: clearly Asians are the most harmed
There's also harm beyond race because poor but academically elite people are crowded out by legacies who perform worse.
Though race matters more:
There's also harm beyond race because poor but academically elite people are crowded out by legacies who perform worse.
Though race matters more:
https://x.com/cremieuxrecueil/status/1674947896783806464
And though there's a class bias at Harvard, it's also reversed nationally.
Asians are not a stalking horse for White interests, but beating affirmative action does benefit socioeconomically well-off people and Whites outside of the Ivies.
Asians are not a stalking horse for White interests, but beating affirmative action does benefit socioeconomically well-off people and Whites outside of the Ivies.
This is just a natural result of Whites being numerous and high SES people genuinely being more qualified, coupled with stronger competition at more elite institutions. So of course the impacts differ.
Sources:
SFFA v. Harvardweb.archive.org/web/2019063002…
Sources:
SFFA v. Harvardweb.archive.org/web/2019063002…
Someone posted what they claim is 2013 ACT data by race and it broadly agrees with the figures from the HSLS: Asian admits would be 9.9%, Whites would be 82.8%, Hispanics would be 5.8%, and Blacks would be 1.5%. They didn't supply an "Other" category.
https://x.com/cremieuxrecueil/status/1679576509151887360
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
