Yep, one type of applicants were discriminated against for sure, the introverts.
New York Times
By Anemona Hartocollis
October 25, 2018
BOSTON — Days before the opening of a trial accusing Harvard of discriminating against Asian-American applicants, the college issued new guidance to its admissions officers earlier this month on what personalities it is seeking in its incoming freshmen, a question at the heart of the case.
The new guidelines for the Class of 2023 caution officers that character traits “not always synonymous with extroversion” should be valued, and that applicants who seem to be “particularly reflective, insightful and/or dedicated” should receive high personal ratings as well.
The disclosure of the new guidelines on Thursday, the ninth day of the trial in Federal District Court here, address central concerns in the case. The group challenging Harvard’s affirmative action efforts, Students for Fair Admissions, says that the university limits the admission of Asian-American students by giving them lower personal ratings and stereotyping them as quiet and studious. Harvard has denied stereotyping or discriminating against any racial or ethnic group.
The advice on personal ratings does not mention Asian-American bias. But the case has raised the question of whether elite colleges’ preference for certain character traits in applicants — such as extroversion — is culturally biased.
One of the odder quirks of the trial testimony has been how often the word “effervescence” has come up. It has been hammered home that Harvard values applicants who are bubbly, not “flat,” to use another word in the Harvard admissions lexicon.
Admissions documents filed in court awarded advantages to applicants for “unusually appealing personal qualities,” which could include “effervescence, charity, maturity and strength of character.”
Now “reflective” could be a plus as well.
...
