[ardent_uno]

>"[Harvard] lashed out at the founder of Students for Fair Admissions, Edward Blum, accusing him of using Harvard in an effort to orchestrate a challenge to race-conscious admissions that would go to the Supreme Court."

I feel that in 100 years we will look back on quotes like this and shake our heads at institutions like Harvard actually defending "race conscious admissions".

Reward people that do well and hold them up as examples for other people to follow.

Racial discrimination must end.

[preordained]

>Reward groups that do well

And what does that mean? Using GPA or standardized test scores as the _only_ criteria? If I have 10 people in the 99th percentile of test scores but I only have 5 seats, do I _really_ think the upper 5 who beat the lower 5 by a handful of points are the "best" fit, or are there other factors that might influence my decision?

To me, these is like taking NFL players only based on their raw sprint and lift stats...yah, it's important...but it's in no way a firm indicator of "best".

[ardent_uno]

There are many ways to judge someone aside from "race", whatever race really means anyway. Race should have nothing to do with it. It shouldn't be part of the equation.

That's the point. We don't have to restrict ourselves to test scores and GPA.

Just don't be racist.

[uncletaco]

> Reward people that do well and hold them up as examples for other people to follow.

FTFY

Also, I think that quote speaks more to what Edward Blum is trying to do. Blum wants to challenge "race-conscious admissions" at the level of the Supreme Court. But Harvard will probably try to prove that being "race-conscious" is only a small part of their admissions process, and not a make or break aspect of a candidate's application.