?Harvard causing 'brain drain' through discrimination against Asians

By Sumantra Maitra
0 Comment(s)Print E-mail China.org.cn, July 1, 2018
Adjust font size:




A graduation ceremony in Harvard University [Photo/Xinhua]


Of all of the baffling but predictable news of the last few weeks, Harvard's discrimination against Asians stands out. According to a new report that has created a significant stir, Harvard admissions officers have consistently rated Asian-American applicants on personal qualities, compared to students of other ethnic backgrounds. A study conducted by a Duke University economics professor, citing 20 years of data, clarified this finding. The study found that from 2000 to the current year, Asians had the lowest admission rate of all racial groups. Put simply, Asian students scoring high on admission tests and intelligence were discriminated against arbitrarily for qualities such as shyness and social awkwardness. 

Surprisingly, this was discovered not long ago by Harvard's own internal process, which then tried to cover it up. A group of Asian-American students filed a lawsuit against the institution for its discrimination, and the Students for Fair Admissions organization joined in. Harvard wanted to keep the records hidden, but was court-ordered to publish everything. This is incredible to believe, but is a symptom of the sort of discrimination against hardworking male Asian students that is becoming increasingly common in the United States. 

For example, an Asian male, according to the study, who is from a stable economic background, regardless of his merit, test results, or aptitude, would have a 25 percent chance of getting in. Meanwhile, coming from a similar or more disadvantaged background, the chances would be 77 percent for a Hispanic student, and a whopping 95 percent for an African or African-American student. The reason is that Harvard has a holistic admission process, which means that admissions doesn't care about actual merit only. It also cares about racial backgrounds and personalities, which are arbitrarily defined. 

So an Indian, Korean, Chinese or Japanese student who studies hard, but is overall shy and studious compared to other students, will not get into Harvard's system. This discrimination has of course had adverse effects on admission. Harvard's Asian-American representation for the last two decades has remained between 20 to 22 percent, which is illogical given that if only academics were a factor, Asians would be around 50 percent of total Harvard students. Harvard has naturally disagreed with the study, and said that it is intentional harassment, and that it is Harvard's right to decide on a holistic approach so that there's a more diverse student body. 

This comes at a time when American polity is ripping itself apart on race, migration and resistance to the central administration. The special treatment of Hispanics by the previous administration resulted in increasing migration from Latin America, which resulted in a severe backlash leading to Trump's win. The fabric of race is heavily woven into the American body politic and is more complicated than it seems. This is just one example. Asians are considered the model minority. South Asian or Indian-Americans are the most successful minority group, and Asian-Americans score over any other minority groups in the U.S. based on academic performance. However, they have always been the most discriminated against. 

During the 1992 L.A. race riots, Korean shopkeepers had to defend their shops from gangs, and this has been repeated during protests associated with Black Lives Matter. People of Chinese heritage and many Chinese academics cannot take part in joint projects due to fear of spying. And Indians are routinely discriminated against during visa programs for jobs in the tech sector. These effects are only increasing as society gets more polarized and violence erupts. Now institutions, which are supposed to be arbiters of merit, are discriminating against people who are more successful and conservative, come from stable families and have a better work ethic. In simple words, Asians work hard, and come from a competitive culture which prefers success, and their hard work is being punished. 

In an ironic way, this is deserved. It is baffling why other countries cannot produce and provide an alternative place for these brilliant students and researchers, who are frustrated by discrimination and quotas, whether in Silicon Valley or the tech industries. But ultimately, if this continues, there will result a massive brain drain from United States institutions, and that spells a gain for any other institutions that respects hard work, a competitive spirit, ethics and merit, and nothing else. 

Sumantra Maitra is a columnist with China.org.cn. For more information please visit:

http://www.ccgp-fushun.com/opinion/SumantraMaitra.htm

Opinion articles reflect the views of their authors only, not necessarily those of China.org.cn.

Follow China.org.cn on Twitter and Facebook to join the conversation.
ChinaNews App Download
Print E-mail Bookmark and Share

Go to Forum >>0 Comment(s)

No comments.

Add your comments...

  • User Name Required
  • Your Comment
  • Enter the words you see:   
    Racist, abusive and off-topic comments may be removed by the moderator.
Send your storiesGet more from China.org.cnMobileRSSNewsletter
主站蜘蛛池模板: 亲密爱人在线观看韩剧完整版免费 | 夫妇交换性3中文字幕| 久久精品亚洲日本波多野结衣| 欧美免赞性视频| 亚洲精品国产成人片| 竹菊影视欧美日韩一区二区三区四区五区| 国产igao为爱做激情| 金发美女与黑人巨大交| 国产成人精品亚洲精品| 两个人看www免费视频| 国产综合欧美日韩视频一区| heyzo亚洲精品日韩| 欧美亚洲人成网站在线观看刚交| 亚洲美女精品视频| 第四色婷婷基地| 午夜dj在线观看免费视频| 色偷偷成人网免费视频男人的天堂| 国产在AJ精品| 99久久国产热无码精品免费| 无码人妻丰满熟妇啪啪网站 | 性xxxxx护士第一次| 中文字幕校园春色| 欧美午夜艳片欧美精品| 亚洲欧美中文日韩v在线观看| 激情亚洲综合网| 人妻无码久久一区二区三区免费| 粉色视频免费试看| 免费观看的a级毛片的网站| 网曝门精品国产事件在线观看| 国产精品亚洲精品日韩动图| 一级毛片www| 成年大片免费视频| 中文字幕无码日韩欧毛| 挺进邻居丰满少妇的身体| 久久九九99热这里只有精品| 欧美成人午夜视频在线观看| 亚洲最大看欧美片网站| 波多野结衣三人蕾丝边| 亚洲精品国产精品国自产网站| 污网站在线免费观看| 亚洲永久精品ww47|