I Guess It All Depends On Who You Are Discriminating Against

Yesterday The New York Post posted an editorial about Harvard University’s discrimination against Asian applicants.

The editorial states:

Harvard University records unveiled Friday show the school engages in blatant, egregious racism in the name of diversity.

The info came out thanks to the lawsuit by Students for Fair Admissions over admission policies that discriminate against Asian-Americans. Perhaps the most damaging revelation was a 2013 internal Harvard study that concluded exactly what the suit charges — and the only action the school took was to suppress the research.

The documents also show how Harvard discriminates. To counter Asians’ tendency to do extremely well on traditional measures (test scores, grades and extracurriculars), it routinely rates them lower on soft categories like “positive personality,” being “widely respected,” likability, kindness, etc.

An analysis by the plaintiffs’ experts of Harvard data on more than 160,000 applicants show how skewed the process has grown: A male Asian-American with a 25 percent chance of admission would have a 35 percent chance if he were white, 75 percent if he were Hispanic and 95 percent if he were black. (The legal brief didn’t outline a similar breakdown for females.)

This is not only unfair–it is unwise. By discriminating against students with strong academic skills, the college brings down the overall skill level of the students, resulting in a higher drop-out rate and lower grades in general. If the school wanted to maintain their reputation for excellence, they would be better off to admit the students with the highest academic achievement levels. This policy is not only wrong, it is detrimental to the academic achievement of the students.


Parents, Beware Of Misleading Statistics

The statistics and information in this article have been taken from the State of North Carolina Department of Public Instruction Website.

Since Common Core was introduced in North Carolina, people with a vested interest in its success have been reporting statistics to justify its existence. Some of these statistics look really good; but when you analyze the data, you find that things are not what they appear to be. In other words, the acceptable standard has been altered to make the results appear better than they actually are. (See chart below.)

aaaaDpiInfoaaaaDpiInfo2As you can see, Level 3 now includes what was previously the top half of Level 2. In October 2013, the State Board of Education adopted four academic achievement levels. In March of 2014, an additional achievement level was added, for a total of five levels. The current five levels are:

Level 1  Limited Command

Level 2  Partial Command

Level 3  Sufficient Command (State Proficiency Standard)

Level 4  Solid Command (College and Career Readiness)

Level 5 Superior Command (College and Career Readiness)

What was previously the top half of ‘partial command’ has been moved to ‘sufficient command.’

The new standards have not raised the educational achievement of North Carolina students. The reporting has not accurately reflected the impact Common Core has had on our students–they are not doing better–the method of reporting test scores has simply been altered to make it appear as if Common Core is providing a higher level of college and career readiness. As you can see from the charts above, that is not the case. The numbers have been changed to protect the politically connected.