The plaintiffs’ analysis was based on data extracted from the records of more than 160,000 applicants who applied for admission over six cycles from 2000 to 2017.
原告报告中的数据取自2000年至2017年间六个招生周期中超过16万名申请人的档案。
They compare Harvard’s treatment of Asian-Americans with its well-documented campaign to reduce the growing number of Jews being admitted to Harvard in the 1920s. Until then, applicants had been admitted on academic merit. To avoid adopting a blatant quota system, Harvard introduced subjective criteria like character, personality and promise. The plaintiffs call this the “original sin of holistic admissions.”
哈佛大学在20世纪20年代为控制越来越多的犹太学生人数所采取的措施得到了详尽记载,原告方把哈佛对待亚裔的措施与之进行了比较。在那之前,录取只依据申请人的学业能力。为了不让配额制太明显,哈佛采用了性格、气质、前途等主观性标准。原告方称之为“全面入学评估的原罪”。
They argue that the same character-based system is being used now to hold the proportion of Asian-Americans at Harvard to roughly 20 percent year after year, except for minor increases, they say, spurred by litigation.
原告方认为哈佛现在用同样的基于性格的录取评估制度,年复一年地把亚裔学生比例控制在20%左右,几次微小的增长都由诉讼导致。
【哈佛歧视亚裔案曝新证据!“人都没见,直接给亚裔最低分”】相关文章:
最新
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15