[1420] in Discussion of MIT-community interests
Re: Slate Article
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Will Hafer)
Wed Jun 25 13:24:35 2003
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 13:03:00 -0400
From: Will Hafer <williamh@MIT.EDU>
To: MIT-Talk@MIT.EDU
In-Reply-To: <1056556772.3ef9c6e4ab309@webmail.mit.edu>
> > Admission to a prestige institution like the University of Michigan or its
> > law school is what computer types call a "binary" decision. It's yes or no.
>
>That is true for an individual applicant. That is not true for the population
>of applicants. The population as a whole does not behave in a binary
>way. The
>failure of Kinsley to understand that simple point causes him to misuse his
>computer analogy and draw invalid conclusions.
>
>A 1% change in a single admission factor might be a 100% change for an
>individual, but only a 1% change in the demographics of the population; even
>the chance of an individual being affected is likely 1%. The admissions
>process is less concerned with individuals than with the entirety of the
>student population, as it should be.
Wait - a binary decision over an entire application would be, "yes to all
minorities, no to all whites" or the reverse. no one is suggesting this in
any context. and the last declaration above precisely defines a traditional
quota system.
most college application processes, including Michigan's, *are* concerned
with the individual, not the overall student population.
This opinion appears to be using far less logic than what was found in
Kinsley's Slate article.
Will
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Documentation on the use of the mailing lists mit-talk, all-talk,
mit-news, housing-talk, and the mit-talk Zephyr class is available at:
http://web.mit.edu/institvte/talk/
