This is a great moment for the AsAm community to remember. It is not how Harvard has changed its admission policy to be more fair to AsAm applicants, but what HAS CAUSED Harvard to change its admissions policy.
To me, Harvard's change was CAUSED by Ed Blum's lawsuit, period. Of course, those of us who had the courage and were willing to spend time greatly supporting Ed also helped. The key lesson? In America, a small minority like us has to be willing to fight, by ourselves or with others' help, in order to be equal.
Harvard's 2 Changes in Admissions Policy, just before the trial
(1) A month before the trial, for the very first time Harvard issued a written statement to its admissions officers stating that "an applicant's race or ethnicity should not be considered in assigning the personal rating," and
(2) A new guideline, applied to next year's applicants, that stated: "It is important to keep in mind that characteristics not always synonymous to extroversion are similarly valued. Applicants who seem to be particularly reflective, insightful, and/or dedicated should receive higher personal ratings as well."
Both changes are commonly seen as being more fair to AsAm applicants. Recall that AsAms got rated the lowest of all races in the "personality rating" and many AsAms are perceived to be more introverted. Note the timing of these changes - shortly before the trial began.
Don't relax. We'll STILL need the court decisions to make sure that these and other needed changes will remain and be applied honestly, after the lawsuits are over.
Don't be too proud of ourselves. This court fight is financed and led by Ed Blum, with almost all non-AsAm lawyers. It is not by AsAm lawyers, nor financed by AsAm rich folks nor backed by a majority of AsAm organizations. However, supporters of 80-20 EF can enjoy some pride*.
Why didn't YOU hear about these NOTEWORTHY changes?
That is why you need to be tuned into 80-20 EF all the time. You can verify the above changes by clicking here and finding the 1st quote in the 4th paragraph and the 2nd quote in the 12th paragraph of the Law360 article, entitled "Harvard Questioned On Admissions Guideline Change At Trial".
Law360 is a news service normally subscribed to by law firms.
The trial is over. What has really gone down in that trial?
In making those two changes in its admissions policy, a month before the trial, Harvard has in effect admitted that it had discriminated against AsAms in the past. We've won a partial victory for our children.
Will Harvard ever publicly admit having discriminated against us?
NEVER!!! Indeed, the 2 changes were also lawyerly tricks, yielding in substance in the hopes of gaining a more favorable ruling from the Boston Court. Note that Harvard didn't announce the 2 changes, They came out ONLY under cross examination by SFFA lawyers in the second to the last day of the trial. Harvard has ample time to tell the judge about those two changes in admissions policy before she rules. Tricks, tricks and tricks.
The case will likely arrive at the Supreme Court in 2021, where we may win a complete victory for our children.
S. B. Woo
