Pages

  • Sharebar

In my opinion, the firing of Larry Summers by the politically correct liberals, was a disgraceful moment for the world's greatest university.

President Drew Faust seems to be bent on fully implementing her politically correct agenda. She recently hired Nohria as the dean of Harvard Business, who explicitly said that he wants the school to accept more women, minorities, and internationals. For those of you who read GMAT club forum or follow HBS Guru, the big PE firms got absolutely destroyed in round 1 admission at HBS this year. Firms like Blackstone, KKR, and Carlyle, which usually sends 90%+ of their pre-MBA associates to HBS did dismally. The number i heard for blackstone is that they went 0 for 4.

I totally appreciate the need to have students from different backgrounds. Business school will be awfully boring if everyone came from a banking/PE background. Nonetheless, I have a major problem when a school accepts people from certain demographics just for the sake of diversity. Once again white and asian men continue to get shafted by the liberals who are obsessed with multiculturalism and making minorities feel better about themselves.

Harvard will remain the greatest school in the world, the standard by which every other school is judged. It is sad though to see this rampant pc agenda.

The WSO Advantage - Investment Banking

Financial Modeling Training

IB Templates, M&A, LBO, Valuation + Learn More.

IB Interview Prep Pack

30,000+ sold & REAL questions Learn More.

Resume Help from Actual IB Pros

Land More IB Interviews. Learn More.

Find Your Perfect IB Mentor

Realistic IB Mock Interviews. Learn More.

Comments (135)

  • Guest1655's picture

    Surprised it took this long. I was thinking the same after seeing these stats posted by Sandy HBS Guru.
    Nearly all the Ivy League schools are super liberal, its funny how they produce so many white-bread bankers and PE guys that ultimately become pretty conservative. I guess this is the beginning of the end of that cycle. Pretty soon Harvard and all the other Ivies will be the stomping grounds for NBA and NFL recruiters.. Perhaps NHL recruiters can go to Duke or something.

  • In reply to Virginia Tech 4ever
    Brady4MVP's picture

    Virginia Tech 4ever:
    When I start hiring for my businesses, my job postings will state at the end: "NOT an affirmative action employer".

    Amen. You're a great American. This country would be so much better if people like you were in charge.

  • In reply to Guest1655
    BigBucks's picture

    Guest1655:
    Pretty soon Harvard and all the other Ivies will be the stomping grounds for NBA and NFL recruiters.. Perhaps NHL recruiters can go to Duke or something.

    what?

  • audaciou02's picture

    lol Did any of you actually go to HBS /Stanford/ Wharton or are attending? Seriously talk about hyperbole

  • Troll's picture

    No, I did not go there.

    But I know one thing: Eliminate the race-based admissions in American higher education and see the proportion of Asian-Americans(including Indians) shoot up at elite institutions in America, and the proportion of Blacks and Hispanics shoot down.

    Lets the results speak for themselves.

    Liberals hate Asians and Asian are still idiotic enough to vote Democrat.

    P.S: Liberals hate Asians because they prove the whole notion of Liberalism wrong. You can come from dire poverty from a third world country in Asia and still do well in life through hard work. This proves that the people who are not doing well right now, can do well in the future without Gov handouts. That is anathema to Liberals.

  • BigBucks's picture

    differences in culture are why they succeed. Africans do great as well, I am African, u know why we do well? Our parents are on our asses every day about academics, they value it greatly, especially coming from where i'm from. The problem is when you have a single mother who is being worked to the bone she doesn't have time to instill the sense in her children to highly value academics. Asians doing well does not prove anything besides the fact that with or without handouts, parents are the most important factor in a child's life. Blacks and, to a lesser extent, hispanics, are behind the proverbial 8-ball from the moment they are born into uncaring homes.

  • New Yorker's picture

    Can't believe KKR went 0-4.....

    Is this fact?

  • audaciou02's picture

    Thanks for your input. I think if you look at rich / wealth / recent immigration status you'll see trends. If you've never gone to the school and are basically taking a random article versus knowing the real policy, then it might be in your best interest not to comment on such things.

    I haven't heard any of my friends, other alums or firms who actually HIRE candidates from these schools complain. And I highly doubt the original article is completely factual or taken into account the entire issue, so instead of going on a tea party rampage about something you don't quite get...pick a different topic.

  • ShreddiesBrah's picture

    On the other hand, Bain Cap apparently got 6/8 (+2 WL) in HBS and 3/4 in GSB, while TPG got 7/10 into HBS. BX and KKR numbers look very odd.

  • In reply to Brady4MVP
    Argonaut's picture

    Brady4MVP:
    Argonaut:
    masterofpuppets:
    Asian Americans are a minority in the this country. (I hate all the PC racial segregation, but Im just saying)

    But no, they will be discriminated against in every step of the admissions process.

    Are you fucking shitting me? Population of Asians in the US is 4.5%. Population of Asians at Harvard is nearly 20%.
    Blacks are under represented by about a third (8%vs. more representative 12%), and non-Hispanic whites are underrepresented by about a third as well (47% vs. 65% general population). Hispanics are represented proportionately.

    There aren't that many academically qualified blacks out there. Derek Bok, the former president of Harvard, said that if there were no affirmative action, there would only be a handful of blacks at Harvard undergrad.

    Ok, so let's agree for a second that blacks are under-represented because they are not qualified. Why are then whites under-represented?

    More is good, all is better

  • In reply to WishYouWereHere
    Argonaut's picture

    southernlovr:
    Argonaut they are discriminated against, that 20% is despite not because of reverse affirmative action. If admissions was race blind asians would make up 30-40% of colleges/grad schools, if not more

    So let's analyze this statement.
    Assumption 1. Asians are over-represented due to their intellectual superiority
    Assumption 2. Merit-wise they are under-represented by about 50% (20% vs. 40% that they *should get*)
    Fact 1. Asians are over-represented by 300% (that is 4 times their share in the population)
    Fact 2. Whites are under-represented by 30% (that is 2/3 of the share of the population)

    Conclusion 1 (incorporating only the Assumption 1): Asians, as a population, are 6 times smarter than whites [4/(2/3)]
    Conclusion 2 (incorporating both assumptions): Asians, as a population, are TWELVE times as smart as whites.

    You know what, maybe there's some truth to that. Maybe Asians are smarter than everyone. I mean you got white people rallying on behalf of "poor oppressed" asians, trying to knock blacks and latinos for measly couple of % here and there, all meanwhile if the 15% by which asians are over-represented could be re-distributed to other races, it could either *completely* close the under-representation gap for blacks and *significantly even out the disparity for whites as well - from (47%/65% = 72%) to (58%/65% = 89%), OR give the blacks 1%, thus increasing their representation by about 12% (1% / 8%) and keeping them happy, and close the gap for whites - in either of cases having a more balanced representation of races, which would actually lead to phasing out of Affirmative Action and similar programs.

    More is good, all is better

  • In reply to Brady4MVP
    Argonaut's picture

    Brady4MVP:
    Argonaut:
    masterofpuppets:
    Asian Americans are a minority in the this country. (I hate all the PC racial segregation, but Im just saying)

    But no, they will be discriminated against in every step of the admissions process.

    Are you fucking shitting me? Population of Asians in the US is 4.5%. Population of Asians at Harvard is nearly 20%.
    Blacks are under represented by about a third (8%vs. more representative 12%), and non-Hispanic whites are underrepresented by about a third as well (47% vs. 65% general population). Hispanics are represented proportionately.

    There aren't that many academically qualified blacks out there. Derek Bok, the former president of Harvard, said that if there were no affirmative action, there would only be a handful of blacks at Harvard undergrad.

    No, I don't think he said THAT.

    What he said was:

    Although over half of the black students attending these selective schools would have been rejected under a race-neutral admissions regime -- that is, if only the same proportions of black and white students had been admitted within each SAT interval -- they have done exceedingly well after college.

    AND

    As a group, however, the black applicants are highly qualified. Of the black applicants at five of the 28 schools for which detailed admission data were available in 1989, over 90 percent scored above the national average for black test-takers on both the verbal and math SATs, considered separately. The large majority of these black applicants handily outscored not only the average black test-taker, but also the average white test-taker. Moreover, the average SAT score for black matriculants in 1989 was slightly higher than the average SAT score for all matriculants in 1951.

    And his general sentiment is that "affirmative action" has been actually very successful:

    Indeed, the data in our study prove what I have observed for years through experience -- that diversity is valued and that "learning through diversity" actually occurs. Our study indicates that diversity is a benefit for all students, minorities and nonminorities alike. Moreover, the data overwhelmingly demonstrate that minority students admitted to selective schools had strong academic credentials, graduated in large numbers and did very well after leaving college. By every measure of success graduation, attainment of professional degrees, employment, earnings, civic participation, and overall satisfaction), the more selective the school, the more blacks achieved (holding constant their initial test scores and grades).

    Moreover, his definition of "merit" is very different from yours:

    Our findings also clarify the much misunderstood concept of merit in college admission. Many people suppose that all students with especially high grades and test scores "deserve" to be admitted and that it is unfair to reject them in favor of minority applicants with lower grades and test scores. But selective colleges do not automatically offer admission as a reward for past performance to anyone. Nor should they. For any institution, choosing fairly, "on the merits," means selecting applicants by criteria that are reasonably related to the purposes of the organization. For colleges and universities, this means choosing academically qualified applicants who not only give promise of doing well academically, but who also can enlarge the understanding of other students and contribute after graduation to their professions and communities. Though clearly relevant, grades and test scores are by no means all that matter.
    Past performance does not guarantee future results :)

    Source: http://www.vpcomm.umich.edu/admissions/legal/exper...

    More is good, all is better

  • In reply to Brady4MVP
    eokpar02's picture

    Brady4MVP:
    Argonaut:
    masterofpuppets:
    Asian Americans are a minority in the this country. (I hate all the PC racial segregation, but Im just saying)

    But no, they will be discriminated against in every step of the admissions process.

    Are you fucking shitting me? Population of Asians in the US is 4.5%. Population of Asians at Harvard is nearly 20%.
    Blacks are under represented by about a third (8%vs. more representative 12%), and non-Hispanic whites are underrepresented by about a third as well (47% vs. 65% general population). Hispanics are represented proportionately.

    There aren't that many academically qualified blacks out there. Derek Bok, the former president of Harvard, said that if there were no affirmative action, there would only be a handful of blacks at Harvard undergrad.

    What does that mean? What metric are you using? What is academically qualified? All the metrics that are used are jokes. I improved my SAT score by 500 points by self studying. Not everyone has that opportunity. And Ivy League schools are easy; I don't think a 2300 SAT scorer is better at political science than someone with a 2000.

    There are people with perfect scores who get rejected and Asians and Whites with 2100s who get accepted. Should these whites and Asians give up their position? Of course not.

    I love how people love to pick on black college students at good schools put pay no mind to legacies who on average receive an SAT boost of 135 points. 1/4th of everyone at Harvard has SAT scores below 2080/1300; even if every black person was below the average a significant portion of the white people would be too.

    I am not cocky, I am confident, and when you tell me I am the best it is a compliment.
    -Styles P

The WSO Advantage - Investment Banking

Financial Modeling Training

IB Templates, M&A, LBO, Valuation + Learn More.

IB Interview Prep Pack

30,000+ sold & REAL questions Learn More.

Resume Help from Actual IB Pros

Land More IB Interviews. Learn More.

Find Your Perfect IB Mentor

Realistic IB Mock Interviews. Learn More.

  • absinthe's picture

    In my opinion, Summers needed to go, but not because of his comments regarding women. Rather, his cover-up for the criminal Andrei Shleifer.

    Long story short, Schleifer conducted massive insider trading while advising the Russian government. Courts ruled that Harvard was not liable, but that Schleifer was liable for up to $100 million+ if convicted. In stead, Summers worked out a deal where Harvard paid approx $27 million and Schliefer got away with a slap on the wrist ($2 million)....Summers was good friends with Schleifer, of course...

    They did strip him of his honorary title, at least...

    Also, I agree the PC bullshit and the anti-finance bullshit needs to stop...

  • In reply to Gekko21
    eokpar02's picture

    Gekko21:

    What the hell are you talking about...that stereotype is spot on.

    You must be the arbiter of stereotypes and their accuracy.

    I am not cocky, I am confident, and when you tell me I am the best it is a compliment.
    -Styles P

  • Rhino85's picture
  • In reply to eokpar02
    happypantsmcgee's picture

    eokpar02:
    Gekko21:

    What the hell are you talking about...that stereotype is spot on.

    You must be the arbiter of stereotypes and their accuracy.

    Yea because you never make any 'unsubstantiated' claims based on personal experience...

    If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses - Henry Ford

  • In reply to happypantsmcgee
    eokpar02's picture

    happypantsmcgee:
    eokpar02:
    Gekko21:

    What the hell are you talking about...that stereotype is spot on.

    You must be the arbiter of stereotypes and their accuracy.

    Yea because you never make any 'unsubstantiated' claims based on personal experience...

    Really, please name these ""unsubstantiated"" claims. If there were any I would think you would have augmented your original post with them.

    I am not cocky, I am confident, and when you tell me I am the best it is a compliment.
    -Styles P

  • In reply to eokpar02
    happypantsmcgee's picture

    eokpar02:
    happypantsmcgee:
    eokpar02:
    Gekko21:

    What the hell are you talking about...that stereotype is spot on.

    You must be the arbiter of stereotypes and their accuracy.

    Yea because you never make any 'unsubstantiated' claims based on personal experience...

    Really, please name these ""unsubstantiated"" claims. If there were any I would think you would have augmented your original post with them.

    No, I think your reputation here is pretty established and to that end, I see no reason to prove my point with any additional 'augmentation'.

    If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses - Henry Ford

  • In reply to happypantsmcgee
    eokpar02's picture

    happypantsmcgee:
    eokpar02:
    happypantsmcgee:
    eokpar02:
    Gekko21:

    What the hell are you talking about...that stereotype is spot on.

    You must be the arbiter of stereotypes and their accuracy.

    Yea because you never make any 'unsubstantiated' claims based on personal experience...

    Really, please name these ""unsubstantiated"" claims. If there were any I would think you would have augmented your original post with them.

    No, I think your reputation here is pretty established and to that end, I see no reason to prove my point with any additional 'augmentation'.

    Whatever, you might as well STFU if you don't want to defend your statements.

    I am not cocky, I am confident, and when you tell me I am the best it is a compliment.
    -Styles P

  • In reply to Argonaut
    eokpar02's picture

    Argonaut:
    southernlovr:
    Argonaut they are discriminated against, that 20% is despite not because of reverse affirmative action. If admissions was race blind asians would make up 30-40% of colleges/grad schools, if not more

    So let's analyze this statement.
    Assumption 1. Asians are over-represented due to their intellectual superiority
    Assumption 2. Merit-wise they are under-represented by about 50% (20% vs. 40% that they *should get*)
    Fact 1. Asians are over-represented by 300% (that is 4 times their share in the population)
    Fact 2. Whites are under-represented by 30% (that is 2/3 of the share of the population)

    Conclusion 1 (incorporating only the Assumption 1): Asians, as a population, are 6 times smarter than whites [4/(2/3)]
    Conclusion 2 (incorporating both assumptions): Asians, as a population, are TWELVE times as smart as whites.

    You know what, maybe there's some truth to that. Maybe Asians are smarter than everyone. I mean you got white people rallying on behalf of "poor oppressed" asians, trying to knock blacks and latinos for measly couple of % here and there, all meanwhile if the 15% by which asians are over-represented could be re-distributed to other races, it could either *completely* close the under-representation gap for blacks and *significantly even out the disparity for whites as well - from (47%/65% = 72%) to (58%/65% = 89%), OR give the blacks 1%, thus increasing their representation by about 12% (1% / 8%) and keeping them happy, and close the gap for whites - in either of cases having a more balanced representation of races, which would actually lead to phasing out of Affirmative Action and similar programs.

    Great post.

    I am not cocky, I am confident, and when you tell me I am the best it is a compliment.
    -Styles P

  • In reply to eokpar02
    Status_Quo's picture

    eokpar02:
    Argonaut:
    southernlovr:
    Argonaut they are discriminated against, that 20% is despite not because of reverse affirmative action. If admissions was race blind asians would make up 30-40% of colleges/grad schools, if not more

    So let's analyze this statement.
    Assumption 1. Asians are over-represented due to their intellectual superiority
    Assumption 2. Merit-wise they are under-represented by about 50% (20% vs. 40% that they *should get*)
    Fact 1. Asians are over-represented by 300% (that is 4 times their share in the population)
    Fact 2. Whites are under-represented by 30% (that is 2/3 of the share of the population)

    Conclusion 1 (incorporating only the Assumption 1): Asians, as a population, are 6 times smarter than whites [4/(2/3)]
    Conclusion 2 (incorporating both assumptions): Asians, as a population, are TWELVE times as smart as whites.

    You know what, maybe there's some truth to that. Maybe Asians are smarter than everyone. I mean you got white people rallying on behalf of "poor oppressed" asians, trying to knock blacks and latinos for measly couple of % here and there, all meanwhile if the 15% by which asians are over-represented could be re-distributed to other races, it could either *completely* close the under-representation gap for blacks and *significantly even out the disparity for whites as well - from (47%/65% = 72%) to (58%/65% = 89%), OR give the blacks 1%, thus increasing their representation by about 12% (1% / 8%) and keeping them happy, and close the gap for whites - in either of cases having a more balanced representation of races, which would actually lead to phasing out of Affirmative Action and similar programs.

    Great post.

    Are you serious? You can't arithmetically extrapolate figures the way he did. Utterly nonsensical post.

    http://ayainsight.co/ Curating the best advice and making it actionable.

  • Ryu Banker's picture

    I'm Asian and white. Am I double fucked?

  • In reply to Status_Quo
    Argonaut's picture

    Stratus:
    eokpar02:
    Argonaut:
    southernlovr:
    Argonaut they are discriminated against, that 20% is despite not because of reverse affirmative action. If admissions was race blind asians would make up 30-40% of colleges/grad schools, if not more

    So let's analyze this statement.
    Assumption 1. Asians are over-represented due to their intellectual superiority
    Assumption 2. Merit-wise they are under-represented by about 50% (20% vs. 40% that they *should get*)
    Fact 1. Asians are over-represented by 300% (that is 4 times their share in the population)
    Fact 2. Whites are under-represented by 30% (that is 2/3 of the share of the population)

    Conclusion 1 (incorporating only the Assumption 1): Asians, as a population, are 6 times smarter than whites [4/(2/3)]
    Conclusion 2 (incorporating both assumptions): Asians, as a population, are TWELVE times as smart as whites.

    You know what, maybe there's some truth to that. Maybe Asians are smarter than everyone. I mean you got white people rallying on behalf of "poor oppressed" asians, trying to knock blacks and latinos for measly couple of % here and there, all meanwhile if the 15% by which asians are over-represented could be re-distributed to other races, it could either *completely* close the under-representation gap for blacks and *significantly even out the disparity for whites as well - from (47%/65% = 72%) to (58%/65% = 89%), OR give the blacks 1%, thus increasing their representation by about 12% (1% / 8%) and keeping them happy, and close the gap for whites - in either of cases having a more balanced representation of races, which would actually lead to phasing out of Affirmative Action and similar programs.

    Great post.

    Are you serious? You can't arithmetically extrapolate figures the way he did. Utterly nonsensical post.

    Please, show me the error of my ways, o wise one!

    More is good, all is better

  • absinthe's picture

    http://www.jbhe.com/latest/index093010.html#harvard

    "This year, Harvard accepted only 8.3 percent of its black applicants. This is only a slightly higher rate than for applicants as a whole.

    There are 155 black first-year students at Harvard this fall. They make up 9.3 percent of all Harvard freshmen. "

    So in others words, a higher percentage of black applicants are accepted than white/asian/hispanics. Admissions in 2010 (for class of 2014) was 6.9% overall. So

    .069 = .083*.093+x*(1-.083), where x is the admission rate of non-black applicants.

    x works out to 6.68%. So 8.3% vs 6.68%, that's a 24% higher chance of admission. If you adjust for quantitative metrics such as GPA/SAT (which are usually lower for black applications), and compare only to whites/asians, this bonus for being black is assuredly much, much higher.

  • In reply to absinthe
    eokpar02's picture

    absinthe:
    http://www.jbhe.com/latest/index093010.html#harvard

    "This year, Harvard accepted only 8.3 percent of its black applicants. This is only a slightly higher rate than for applicants as a whole.

    There are 155 black first-year students at Harvard this fall. They make up 9.3 percent of all Harvard freshmen. "

    So in others words, a higher percentage of black applicants are accepted than white/asian/hispanics. Admissions in 2010 (for class of 2014) was 6.9% overall. So

    .069 = .083*.093+x*(1-.083), where x is the admission rate of non-black applicants.

    x works out to 6.68%. So 8.3% vs 6.68%, that's a 24% higher chance of admission. If you adjust for quantitative metrics such as GPA/SAT (which are usually lower for black applications), and compare only to whites/asians, this bonus for being black is assuredly much, much higher.

    No one is saying that blacks don't have lower SAT scores (I don't know how you can compare GPAs from school to school); people are just saying that the metrics themselves are garbage. Increases of 700 points on the SAT are uncommon. Look at the Harvard Scammer Adam Wheeler, he pulled off a 4.0 at Harvard and he got a 1220. The SAT doesn't measure anything.

    I literally moved from being in the 50th percentile to the 10th percentile; how could the SAT be a good metric for anything? Even Harvard says the metrics are garbage. People with perfect scores get rejected. Should whites and Asians with 2100s immediately abdicate their position in their class to accommodate whites and Asians who were rejected with perfect scores?

    I am not cocky, I am confident, and when you tell me I am the best it is a compliment.
    -Styles P

  • In reply to eokpar02
    absinthe's picture

    eokpar02:
    Look at the Harvard Scammer Adam Wheeler, he pulled off a 4.0 at Harvard and he got a 1220. The SAT doesn't measure anything.

    Maybe SAT measures a lot, and GPA measures nothing. :P

  • In reply to absinthe
    eokpar02's picture

    absinthe:
    eokpar02:
    Look at the Harvard Scammer Adam Wheeler, he pulled off a 4.0 at Harvard and he got a 1220. The SAT doesn't measure anything.

    Maybe SAT measures a lot, and GPA measures nothing. :P

    Your statement is a tad bit too profound; could you expand on that dear sir? Are you saying a GPA at Harvard isn't worth anything?

    I am not cocky, I am confident, and when you tell me I am the best it is a compliment.
    -Styles P

  • In reply to absinthe
    NewMountain's picture

    absinthe:
    In my opinion, Summers needed to go, but not because of his comments regarding women. Rather, his cover-up for the criminal Andrei Shleifer.

    Long story short, Schleifer conducted massive insider trading while advising the Russian government. Courts ruled that Harvard was not liable, but that Schleifer was liable for up to $100 million+ if convicted. In stead, Summers worked out a deal where Harvard paid approx $27 million and Schliefer got away with a slap on the wrist ($2 million)....Summers was good friends with Schleifer, of course...

    They did strip him of his honorary title, at least...

    Also, I agree the PC bullshit and the anti-finance bullshit needs to stop...

    SILVER BANANA FOR YOU!!! Summers and Schleifer fucked Russia. My wife and I (former Moscovites) nearly died when we heard that Obama appointed him for economic advice. He is a criminal and deserves to rot in Lubyanka. While he and Schliefer didn't ruin Russia, they took a country is its infancy and in the name of "constructing an emerging capital market", lied, cheated and stole every last ruble (and taxpayer dollars as well) and covered it up.
    http://janinewedel.info/harvardinvestigative_InstI...

  • TNA's picture

    I think the issue is we are focusing on race and not situation. People from the ghetto probably have lower SAT's because they have shittier teachers. Those people are not always black. Giving blacks a leg up just helps higher income blacks.

    Instead of race stats, I want to see socio economic stats. If Harvard is letting in more wealthy black kids it isn't doing shit for diversity.

  • In reply to NewMountain
    eokpar02's picture

    NewMountain:
    absinthe:
    In my opinion, Summers needed to go, but not because of his comments regarding women. Rather, his cover-up for the criminal Andrei Shleifer.

    Long story short, Schleifer conducted massive insider trading while advising the Russian government. Courts ruled that Harvard was not liable, but that Schleifer was liable for up to $100 million+ if convicted. In stead, Summers worked out a deal where Harvard paid approx $27 million and Schliefer got away with a slap on the wrist ($2 million)....Summers was good friends with Schleifer, of course...

    They did strip him of his honorary title, at least...

    Also, I agree the PC bullshit and the anti-finance bullshit needs to stop...

    SILVER BANANA FOR YOU!!! Summers and Schleifer fucked Russia. My wife and I (former Moscovites) nearly died when we heard that Obama appointed him for economic advice. He is a criminal and deserves to rot in Lubyanka. While he and Schliefer didn't ruin Russia, they took a country is its infancy and in the name of "constructing an emerging capital market", lied, cheated and stole every last ruble (and taxpayer dollars as well) and covered it up.
    http://janinewedel.info/harvardinvestigative_InstI...

    Thanks

    I am not cocky, I am confident, and when you tell me I am the best it is a compliment.
    -Styles P

  • physconomist's picture

    Completely agree with MSFHQ,

    All the current arguments for affirmative action apply just as well if not better to issues of socio-economics. Cut race out entirely from the equation.

    It all comes down to concepts of fairness. We are brought up to know that discrimination is wrong and treatment of people based on skin color/orientation etc is wrong ( well us younger guys to a certain extent the old timers certainly didn't learn it as much). Therefore, when we see preferential treatment, especially treatment that impedes our avenues to success, it shouldn't be a surprise to anyone that we are pissed off.

    As MSFHQ said, cut out the race and everybody wins

  • In reply to absinthe
    Argonaut's picture

    absinthe:
    http://www.jbhe.com/latest/index093010.html#harvard

    "This year, Harvard accepted only 8.3 percent of its black applicants. This is only a slightly higher rate than for applicants as a whole.

    There are 155 black first-year students at Harvard this fall. They make up 9.3 percent of all Harvard freshmen. "

    So in others words, a higher percentage of black applicants are accepted than white/asian/hispanics. Admissions in 2010 (for class of 2014) was 6.9% overall. So

    .069 = .083*.093+x*(1-.083), where x is the admission rate of non-black applicants.

    x works out to 6.68%. So 8.3% vs 6.68%, that's a 24% higher chance of admission. If you adjust for quantitative metrics such as GPA/SAT (which are usually lower for black applications), and compare only to whites/asians, this bonus for being black is assuredly much, much higher.

    you forgot to also quote this part:

    The numbers released by Harvard this year show that acceptance rates for black and white students are almost identical.

    So it would mean that a higher percentage of white AND black *applicants* (2 most under-represented accepted groups, in relation to their prevalence in the general population) is being accepted, which in turn means that some *OTHER* group is applying at a rate much higher than all other applicants (in proportion to its representation in general population).

    I WONDER WHICH GROUP WOULD THAT BE?....

    More is good, all is better

  • In reply to TNA
    Argonaut's picture

    MSFHQ:
    I think the issue is we are focusing on race and not situation. People from the ghetto probably have lower SAT's because they have shittier teachers. Those people are not always black. Giving blacks a leg up just helps higher income blacks.

    Instead of race stats, I want to see socio economic stats. If Harvard is letting in more wealthy black kids it isn't doing shit for diversity.

    Good point about the socio-economic status.

    More is good, all is better

  • Argonaut's picture

    Score Reports
    Significant regional differences in terms of the average number of score reports sent per examinee are observed in the GMAT student pipeline. As a consequence, some citizen groups sent a greater number of score reports relative to others, despite having taken comparatively fewer exams.
    Figure 2 shows the average number of score reports sent per examinee in TY 2005 and TY 2009. On average, citizens of Central and South Asia sent the greatest number of score reports in TY 2009 with 4.3 per examinee. At the other end of the spectrum, Western European examinees sent an average of only 2.1 score reports per examinee.

    page 8 of http://www.gmac.com/NR/rdonlyres/D42E1C3C-DB8D-4C1...

    Breakdown of Asian Countries:

    http://www.gmac.com/NR/rdonlyres/CB3A83E9-521F-450... (also page 8)

    More is good, all is better

  • wolverine19x89's picture

    I don't understand why race should have anything to do with anything.

    If you think somebody has the smarts and potential to give your school a good name, let em in. If not, don't.

    Accepting minorities just because they're minorities seems like, as others have said, you're just gonna dilute the quality of your school.

    However, I'm pretty sure every single person on this website isn't running a program as prestigious as HBS and doesn't understand the pressures put on them to be politically correct. I'm not saying I do either, but if somebody's making stupid decisions like this, there's probably quite a bit. Either way, whoever's putting this pressure on them should stop.

    If your dreams don't scare you, then they are not big enough.

    "There are two types of people in this world: People who say they pee in the shower, and dirty fucking liars."-Louis C.K.

  • In reply to Barcadia
    Troll's picture

    Barcadia:
    I am a white south african, been living in America for about 10 years... any way this can help me in MBA apps?

    The Affirmative Action in higher education in America is so stupid, that YES: In their eyes, you are an African American. Play the game to your advantage now.

    I know a guy who immigrated from Egypt and got into an Ivy because he is "African."

  • TNA's picture

    At the end of the day, these schools don't care about really helping poor minorities, it is simply advertising.

    We see this in every facet of our society. Really helping someone takes effort. Welfare doesnt help anyone, but it looks and feels good. AA doesn't really fix anything, it just makes it look like we care. Sad and disgusting in my opinion.

    This is why I am so against charity. Just giving someone something never changes a thing. You need to get them to work on their side so it is a partnership. Problem is that is a lot harder than just writing a check. If people saved their money and gave a couple hours a week things would be immensely better. Imagine if a well off, college educated person mentored a lower income family, showed them the ins and outs of the college system, helped get SAT tutors, helped them to see that college could be a reality, then you would see real change.

    Naaa, let's just aim for an artificial number and simply admit people because of their skin color. That will magically fix things.

  • CompBanker's picture

    Wow -- everyone is getting pretty upset over this.

    I think it is important to recognize that Harvard is a private education institution and is under NO circumstances obligated to accept the "most intelligent" or "most successful" applicants. An 800 GMAT and 4.0 from Wharton undergrad will definitely prove that you are hardworking and intelligent, but the application isn't just a test of intelligence. The application is an opportunity for you to make your case to the school that you would be a value-added member of the University -- more so than the 8,000 folks who are going to get rejected. That means you need to convince a highly-opinionated (and experienced) committee of people that you are the best. There is a very human element to this and bitching because you're "smart" and "worked hard" is like applying to a job with a high GPA and whining because you couldn't pass the interview.

    B-school applicants seem to think that they are "owed" a spot in the class because of their past accomplishments. The truth is that people "weight" different accomplishments differently. KKR may be the be-all end-all in your world, but an admissions committee member could very well see that you're just a model monkey and that someone with extreme excel skills is a less attractive candidate than someone who grew up in Libya and can share with classmates his/her experiences. It's a tough pill to swallow, but as soon as people realize b-school isn't an intelligence test, they'll fair much better.

    As for the affirmative action discussion, I think the arguments are pointless. You can't sit there are argue stats as a % of the population because it all comes down to the qualifications of each individual applicant. I personally agree with the socio-economic situation approach more so than the race approach, but arguing isn't going to get anybody anywhere. (Actually, I don't agree with AA at all -- but that's a different discussion). I do believe that a balanced class of women and internationals (those with experience living/working/growing up abroad) is extremely valuable. So while I don't believe in accepting internationals "simply to fill a quota," I do completely agree with the approach of accepting less qualified internationals or women to create a balanced class. (Note that I don't think men/women with similar backgrounds differ much in terms of what they can contribute to the learning environment -- but shit, who wants to go to school for two years with nothing but a bunch of dudes???)

    With all that said -- I'll throw in the disclaimer that I am a U.S. white male from an upper class background that works in PE and is applying to HBS this cycle (pretty much the exact group getting slammed by HBS this year). So, no one is more affected by this than me.

    CompBanker

  • In reply to TNA
    ieatbananaforlunch's picture

    MSFHQ:
    I think the issue is we are focusing on race and not situation. People from the ghetto probably have lower SAT's because they have shittier teachers. Those people are not always black. Giving blacks a leg up just helps higher income blacks.

    Instead of race stats, I want to see socio economic stats. If Harvard is letting in more wealthy black kids it isn't doing shit for diversity.

    Here are some of the medical and social studies for race and intelligence. I am not trying to be racist, but those are the results from the studies.
    http://www.news-medical.net/news/2005/04/26/9530.a...
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Transracial...

  • ieatbananaforlunch's picture

    HBS or any other top business school should recruit the most competent candidates. Individual from any select race can be competent. However, affirmative action base on race is just totally ridiculous. Socio-economic affirmative action would be more fair, however, it is pretty much impossible to establish it.

  • TNA's picture

    Whether black students are genetically less smart or not, I don't care. Any argument for this is not going to get you anywhere. We could have aliens from a far advanced civilization come to earth, show us the wonders of life and they could tell us the XYZ race is inherently less intelligent and people would try and refute those claims. No one wants to hear or admit that certain people might not have the same raw intelligence.

    Oh well.

    What I am concerned about is basic levels of schools and functionality in society. IQ's might have ranges, but everyone (other than severely retarded people) can obtain a relative level or education and success. Honestly, a lot of the elite jobs in this country only require "Harvard" on your diploma, not pure smarts. We need to detach ourselves from the concept that only brilliant people attend top schools. An MBA is not quantitative. This is about brand and social value.

    Now giving this golden key only to people of certain color is wrong. Giving this to intelligent people who come from poor backgrounds or who did not excel to their fullest because of economic reasons make sense. Middle class and wealthy black families do not need AA. Dirt poor white people, first generation Hispanics people, etc need this. If some of these people are black, fine. The focus is on taking smart people who did not have certain advantages and elevating them.

    I don't think anyone will deny that having parents who went to college makes for an easier college experience. Having parents in professional careers helps you identify and project your image on this careers.

    This is not to scapegoat people and say that being poor is an excuse. Anyone can obtain a level of education in this country. I am just talking about relative EASE.

    AA is reverse racism and the lazy way of doing things. Instead of helping minorities or poor communities they just grap XYZ % of a minority and call it good. Once again I say, no one wants to help, they just want to look like they are helping.

  • dazedmonk's picture

    If you think a school's job is to accept the most measurably intelligent people (grades, scores), then you're wrong. Your vaunted SATs (less so the GMAT) are not IQ tests anyways. Should we reward people who spent onths of their life preparing to ace an exam? (not saying the answer is no, but when you think about intelligence and achievement I bet a lot of you would rather go after the person who spent that time doing something more interesting).

    I bet you wouldn't want to have a school full of people who spent all their time building a path to KKR as well, unless your sole mission is to create a path for people to entire high-flying finance jobs.

    The fact is, the entire process of school admissions (at every level) is doctored not for your rigid definiton of (high grades, test scores) merit, but in order to build something (what exactly, is often hard to identify and depends on the particular school).

    Honestly, I am not impressed by all of this path following, top school gunnership anyways. If you're really hot shit, go prove it by succeeding REGARDLESS OF whether u got into Harvard.

    Finally: if everyone in the world took the SAT/GMAT and were placed based solely on that, most of u suckers would be out :-P

  • Easy's picture

    http://www.princeton.edu/~tje/files/Opportunity%20...

    Can't believe no one has brought up Espenshade and Chung yet. Being Asian is a 280 SAT-point disadvantage over being black when it comes to admissions at elite schools... bigger than the discrepancy being athlete and non-athlete, and legacy and non-legacy.

  • In reply to Easy
    eokpar02's picture

    Easy:
    http://www.princeton.edu/~tje/files/Opportunity%20...

    Can't believe no one has brought up Espenshade and Chung yet. Being Asian is a 280 SAT-point disadvantage over being black when it comes to admissions at elite schools... bigger than the discrepancy being athlete and non-athlete, and legacy and non-legacy.

    Everyone on this forum has agreed that blacks have lower SAT scores. I just said the SAT isn't a measure of anything.

    I am not cocky, I am confident, and when you tell me I am the best it is a compliment.
    -Styles P

  • TNA's picture

    LOL and EOK comes out with the most racist comment of the thread.

Pages