考研MTI经济学人资料大学录取.docx
考研 MTI经济学人资料大学录取University admissionsAffirmative dissatisfactionA lawsuit reveals how peculiar Harvards definition of merit is大学录取平权之不平一场诉讼揭露出哈佛大学对“优秀”的定义有多独特ABBOTT LAWRENCE LOWELL, the president of Harvard from 1909 until 1933, thought the university had too many Jews. In the first year of Lowells presidency, they made up 10% of the student body. By 1922 their numbers had more than doubled. To address what he called “the Hebrew problem”, Lowell proposed an explicit Jewish quota of 15%. When that proved controversial, he set about making “a rule whose motive was less obvious on its face” to deny admission to students suspected of being Jewish. Admission to Harvard, previously granted by meeting a clear academic cut-off, became more nebulousbased more heavily on the “character and fitness” of applicants. The new “holistic” admissions policy worked as intended, successfully suppressing Jewish admissions.阿伯特劳伦斯洛厄尔(Abbott Lawrence Lowell)在 1909年至 1933年间担任哈佛大学校长,当时他认为哈佛招收了过多的犹太人。他在任的第一年,犹太人占该校学生总数的 10%,到 1922年他们的数量增加了一倍多。为了解决他所谓的“希伯来问题”,洛厄尔提议明确将犹太学生的比例限定在15%。此举引起争议后,他开始着手制定“一项动机较不明显的规则”来拒掉疑似是犹太人的学生。以往学生只要满足明确的学业要求就能入读哈佛,现在条件变得模糊了变得更偏重申请人的“品格和适合度”。这一“全面评估”的招生新政如愿发挥了功效,成功限制了入读哈佛的犹太人数量。Harvard, like many of Americas top universities, retains a holistic admissions process. Unlike elite universities in most other countries, American colleges do not simply select the cleverest pupilsthey also take into account extracurricular activities, family wealth and race. To critics, this system still operates as an engine of unfairness, except that the victims have now become Asian-Americans, who outperform their white peers on academic measures but still face stiffer odds when applying to Ivy League colleges. Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA), an organisation founded by Edward Blum, a conservative activist opposed to race-based affirmative action, filed a lawsuit against Harvard alleging discrimination against Asian-American students in 2014. Despite a furious effort to quash the suit, Harvard was forced to turn over 90,000 pages on its tightly guarded admissions process. On June 15th both sides revealed duelling statistical analyses of admissions-decision data in court filings. Harvards reputation for fairness and impartiality emerges bruised.和美国众多顶尖学府一样,哈佛大学保留了“全面评估”这种录取流程。不同于大多数其他国家的精英学府,美国的大学不是直接挑选最聪明的学生,而是要同时考虑课外活动、家庭财富和种族。在批评者看来,这一体系仍然造成了不公,只是现在受害者变成了亚裔美国人他们的学业成绩优于白人,但在申请常春藤盟校时成功率更低。2014 年,由反对基于种族的扶持措施的保守派活动人士爱德华布鲁姆(Edward Blum)创立的“公平招生组织”(以下简称 SFFA)把哈佛大学告上法庭,指控该校歧视亚裔美国学生。尽管哈佛全力争取法官驳回诉讼,它还是被迫就自己守口如瓶的招生过程提交了九万多页资料。6 月 15日,双方在法庭文件中披露了针对招生决策数据做出的完全对立的统计分析。哈佛大学公平公正的形象受损。By the admission offices own ratings, Asian-Americans rank higher than white applicants in both their academic prowess and the quality of their extracurricular activities. Yet their admission rates are much lower. For Asian-Americans in the top decile of academic skill, just 13.4% are admitted, compared with 18.5% of whites (see chart). Asians are scored much worse on another measure of applicant qualitythe “personal rating”by admissions officers. Unlike the other two metrics, personality is judged subjectively and is decided by admissions officers who have not met the applicants. The alumni who conduct in-person interviews rate Asian-Americans as highly as white applicants. To SFFA, this constitutes clear proof of discrimination.按哈佛招生办自己的评定,亚裔美国学生的学业能力和课外活动质量都高于白人申请者,但其录取率却相对低出许多。学业能力处于前 10%的亚裔学生中只有 13.4%被录取,而白人为 18.5%。但在另一个衡量标准“个性评分”上,哈佛招生人员对亚裔学生的打分则低得多。与前两项指标不同的是,对个性的判断属主观意见,而且是在招生人员还没见过申请者本人的情况下评断的。而面试申请者的校友给亚裔申请人的评分并不比白人差。SFFA 认为这是构成歧视的明显证据。Peter Arcidiacono, an economist at Duke University employed by the plaintiffs, built a statistical model of the effect of race on admissions. He estimates that a male, non-poor Asian-American applicant with the qualifications to have a 25% chance of admission to Harvard would have a 36% chance if he were white. If he were Hispanic, that would be 77%; if black, it would rise to 95%. Damningly for the defendants, an internal report by Harvards research arm, obtained during discovery, reached the same conclusions. Harvard officials claim that the report was incomplete and the analysis oversimplified.原告聘请了杜克大学的经济学家彼得阿西迪亚科诺(Peter Arcidiacono)建立统计模型,显示种族对录取结果的影响。据阿西迪亚科诺的估算,一名达到录取标准的亚裔美籍男性非贫困生有 25%的几率被录取,假如换成白人,被录取的机会变为 36%,换成西班牙裔,机会为 77%,如果换成黑人则上升至 95%。对被告极为不利的是,在取证过程中获得的一份哈佛研究部门的内部报告也有同样的结论。哈佛校方则称该报告不完整,分析过于简单。Admission of gilt录取政策真有问题吗?Fighting statistics with statistics, Harvards lawyers hired David Card, a prominent labour economist at the University of California, Berkeley. His model includes factors like the quality of a candidates high school, parents occupations and the disputed personal rating. Under these controls, Mr Card claims that Asian-American applicants are not disadvantaged compared with whites. But given that these factors are themselves correlated with race, Mr Cards argument is statistically rather like saying that once you correct for racial bias, Harvard is not racially biased.哈佛大学以牙还牙,其律师请来了加州大学伯克利分校著名的劳动经济学家大卫卡德(David Card)做统计分析。卡德的模型涵盖的因素包括申请人所在高中的质量、父母的职业,以及有争议的“个性评分”等。卡德声称,在根据这些因素做评定时,学校并没有偏向白人而歧视亚裔美国人。但这些因素本身就与种族相关,因此,从统计学角度来看,卡德的观点等于是说,只要剔除种族因素,哈佛大学就不存在种族偏见。The duelling economists disagree because they cannot agree on what constitutes fairness. Susan Dynarski, an economist at the University of Michigan, argues that Mr Arcidiaconos model tests for racial bias in an idealised system. Mr Cards model searches for racial bias in the context of how Harvard actually operates.两边的经济学家意见相左是因为他们对于“公平”的内涵无法达成共识。密歇根大学的经济学家苏珊戴纳斯基(Susan Dynarski)认为,阿西迪亚科诺的模型是在一个理想化的系统中探测种族歧视,而卡德的模型是在哈佛的实际运作背景中寻找种族歧视。For those unconvinced by fancy maths, the basic statistics also look worrying. Harvard insists that it has no racial quotas or floors, which would fall foul of Supreme Court rulings and jeopardise the universitys federal funding. Yet the share of Asian-Americans it admits has stayed near 20% over the past decade. This is true even as the number of Asian-Americans in high schools has increased. Caltech, a top university without race-based affirmative action, saw its share of Asian-Americans increase dramatically over the same period.如果不相信花哨的数学模型,光看基本的统计数据,情况也不容乐观。哈佛坚称自己并没有设定种族方面的招生配额或下限,毕竟这么做有违美国最高法院的裁决,也会影响哈佛从联邦政府获得资助。但哈佛录取的亚裔美国人的比例在过去十年一直保持在 20%左右,在亚裔高中生数量增加的情况下仍然如此。加州理工学院是一所没有采取基于种族的扶持措施的顶级大学,在同一时期,其亚裔美国学生的比例是显著上升的。Court filings also reveal how legacy preferences, which give significant advantages to the relatives of alumni, skew Harvards admissions system. A suppressed internal report shows that the preference is the same size as that given to black applicants. Roughly 34% of legacy applicants are admittedmore than five times the rate of non-legacy applicants. This is tantamount to affirmative action for well-off white students. According to a survey of freshmen conducted by the Harvard Crimson, the college newspaper, 88% of legacy students come from families making more than $125,000 a year. Recruited athletes, which Harvard admits in droves to fill its lacrosse teams and rowing eights, are also disproportionately white. By Mr Arcidiaconos reckoning, 22% of white students are legacies and 16% are recruited athletes.法庭文件还揭示了“传承性录取”(即对校友子弟优先录取)对哈佛大学录取体系造成的扭曲。一份被禁止披露的内部报告显示,校友子弟的录取规模跟黑人申请者相同。校友子弟申请人中大约 34%会被录取,是其他非传承申请人录取率的五倍多。这相当于是造福富裕白人学生的扶持措施。哈佛大学学生报绯红报(Harvard Crimson)对大学新生的一项调查显示,88%的校友子弟学生来自年收入超过 12.5万美元的家庭。哈佛大学招收的大批体育特长生(用来充实其长曲棍球队和赛艇队)中白人数量也不成比例地高。据阿西迪亚科诺估算,22%的白人学生是校友子弟,16%是体育特长生。Even if Harvard does not actually discriminate against Asian-Americans, its insistence on preserving hereditary preferences undermines its case. Rakesh Khurana, the dean of Harvard College, justified the policy on the grounds that it would bring those with “more experience with Harvard” together with “others who are less familiar with Harvard”. Others say that it is necessary to ensure fundraising. Aside from the moral questions this poses, it is worth noting that nearby MIT, which does not favour legacy applicants, manages to do just fine.即便哈佛大学没有真的歧视亚裔美国人,坚持保留“传承性录取”的机制也有损其公平主张。哈佛学院院长拉克什库拉纳(Rakesh Khurana)认为这项政策是合理的,因为它能把“较熟悉哈佛的人”与“不太熟悉哈佛的其他人”联结起来。也有人认为,为确保能筹募到资金,保留此政策是必要的。除了涉及道德问题外,值得留意的是,隔壁的麻省理工学院并没有优先录取校友子弟的政策,但照样蓬勃发展。