How do we know that blacks were admitted to Harvard at about 20 times the rate they would have been admitted had admissions been based solely on academic performance?
Because the consultant to the plaintiffs in the Harvard lawsuit (a Duke professor) found that if Harvard had admitted only those students in the top academic performance decile of applicants, the percentage of those admitted who were black would have been 0.9%, not the 15.8% which were actually admitted — in other words, with a 10% admissions rate, and using academic merit as the only admissions criterion, black applicants would have had their chance of admission reduced by about 16 times.
But Harvard's admission rate isn't 10%. It's about 3%. So what would have happened if Harvard had only admitted the top 3% of the applicants solely on academic merit?
I don't have the raw data set, so I can't use it to estimate whether the 16 times preference accorded blacks would have increased or decreased, but I don't need it because we know that EVERY large-sample data set of group cognitive performance in the US has shown the same thing: As one approaches the far right-tails of the group cognitive distribution curves, black representation (compared to whites and especially Asians) almost vanishes. We see this with both standardized college admissions testing and with IQ testing.
This means that an admissions policy looking only at high school GPA and standardized test performance, when combined with a 3% admissions rate, would have produced a percentage of admitted blacks that was even less than 0.9%. Extrapolating from what see in standard group cognitive testing distributions, I estimate that the black percentage of admits would have shrunk from 0.9% to about 0.4-0.6%.
That 20 times advantage for blacks that I referenced earlier is a very conservative estimate. It's likely that blacks applying to Harvard under the previous institutionally-racist admissions policies enjoyed an advantage in excess of that.
OK, I can see that some repliers are confused, and perhaps I contributed to this confusion.
I use the term "admission rate" above, not "enrollment rate." In other words, I'm referring to those students who were offered admission to Harvard, not those who actually enrolled.
It occurs to me that a less confusing term might have been "acceptance rate."
The black enrollment rate at undergrad Harvard (which has typically been in the upper single-digits) has always less than the black admissions rate because many blacks accepted at Harvard decide to enroll at another school.
Stats for black students in San Francisco public schools (2021-22):
Math proficient: 9%. (It's 64% for whites.)
Chronically absent: 63%. (It's 8% for Asians.)
Ready for high school in 8th grade: 15%.
Enrolled in college after graduation: 45%.
Notice the disconnect?
If you think that the disconnect between the lousy academic performance of black students and their college enrollment percentage might be due to low performers dropping out of high school, you would be wrong: The high school graduation rate for blacks is an impressive 86%.
In fact, the SFUSD black graduation rate has been rising even as black academic performance has been dropping.
You can thank the school board's black-esteem-building "antiracist" policies for the coexistence of lousy black academic performance and high black graduation rates.
Among white Americans, beyond a certain threshold, the more liberal you are, the higher your IQ.
If IQ testing is conducted among all Americans (not just whites), the differences in IQ between political orientations diminishes because blacks and Hispanics (who tend to be more liberal than conservative) drag down the overall liberal averages.
The correlation between WORDSUM (the test used to obtain the data above) and IQ is approximately 0.70. There's enough g-loading for it to have value, but it's not exactly the best IQ test around.
1/ At a South African university, an argument is made to eliminate science from study because it's a "product of Western modernity."
"We have to restart science from an African perspective."
As an example, the speaker suggests "Black magic."
2/ When a "science person" objects, he is scolded by the organizer for "disrespecting the sacredness of this space," and asked to apologize, which he does. But that doesn't stop the scolding. Opinions can only be expressed under rules that appear to guide outcomes.
3/ The "Black magic" advocate then adds that, despite the fact that she took some science in high school, she decided to not be on the science faculty because science stands in the way of "decolonization." [Note: Africa was decolonized over 50 years ago.]
Black people in America commit wildly disproportionate amounts of violent crime, and the government statistics on this crime rarely if ever get reported in the media.
I also talk about the scientifically-established (and scientifically-uncontroversial) group differences in IQ, and the effect these have on group outcomes in the US.
Full-scale East Asian-American IQ: 105+
White: 100
African-American: 85