News
Harvard Quietly Resolves Anti-Palestinian Discrimination Complaint With Ed. Department
News
Following Dining Hall Crowds, Harvard College Won’t Say Whether It Tracked Wintersession Move-Ins
News
Harvard Outsources Program to Identify Descendants of Those Enslaved by University Affiliates, Lays Off Internal Staff
News
Harvard Medical School Cancels Class Session With Gazan Patients, Calling It One-Sided
News
Garber Privately Tells Faculty That Harvard Must Rethink Messaging After GOP Victory
To the Editors of The Crimson:
Harvard has recently filed an amicus curiae brief in the DeFunis vs. Odegaard suit to defend its posture in favor of minority applicants. In a very narrow sense, the issue of the suit may be construed as solely one of admissions policies for minorities. Yet, in a broader sense, the issue involves the possibility of meritocratic admissions policies based on strict statistical criteria. Thus, there are a few points regarding the possible consequences of this suit for Harvard College that were not adequately discussed in the editorial "The 'Reverse Discrimination' Backlash" (Crimson, Feb. 8, 1974).
Initially, we must recall that Harvard has a questionable posture towards minorities in terms of shareholder responsibility (e.g., Gulf, Middle South Utilities), a marginally acceptable affirmative action plan, a paucity of tenured black faculty, and an unenthusiastic attitude towards the W.E.B. DuBois Research Institute to cite a few examples. In light of these issues, one becomes suspicious of Harvard being in the amicus curiae vanguard on behalf of solely minority students.
The most de-emphasized point is that if Harvard were to use only strict statistical academic criteria, not only would some minority applicants be affected, but also some persons with exceptional athletic ability, persons with strong leadership potential, persons with high creative talent, and persons whose fathers are wealthy Harvard alumni would be affected. If applicants were evaluated on the basis of two sets of numbers alone, not only would Harvard be ignoring many, many persons with talents immeasurable in quantitative terms, but it would probably have a very dull, undiverse student body as well.
Thus, the broader issue in DeFunis vs. Odegaard revolves not around minorities, but around meritocracy. Harvard has filed an amicus curiae brief because, ultimately, the admission of all students in terms of non-academic criteria is jeopardized. Surely, if 800 board scores and 4.0 averages were requirements for admission, not all of the present Harvard College students of any race would be here today.
Leon A. Fraser, Jr. '75
Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.