Interviewing the Man Who Ended Affirmative Action | Dr. Peter Arcidiacono | EP 384

Added: Sep 22, 2023

The podcast begins with Dr. Arcidiacono explaining his background as an economics professor who specializes in studying affirmative action in higher education. He was also an expert witness in two recent Supreme Court cases involving Harvard and UNC. He took on these cases because he wanted to study affirmative action with access to actual data, as universities typically hide their data due to lawsuits.

Dr. Arcidiacono discusses the two cases, one involving Harvard and the other involving UNC. The Harvard case focused on Asian discrimination, as affirmative action is designed to help African-American and Hispanic students, but Asian-Americans have been performing well academically. The case also examined the extent of racial preferences at Harvard. The UNC case focused on the size of racial preferences and the availability of race-neutral alternatives.

The conversation then delves into the admissions process at universities like Harvard and UNC. Dr. Arcidiacono explains that these universities use various criteria for admissions, including race, athletics, legacy status, and other factors. He highlights the significant advantage given to athletes, particularly at Harvard, where the athletic preference is the largest. This preference favors wealthy families and also serves as a way to discriminate against Jewish applicants.

Dr. Arcidiacono emphasizes the need for test-based admissions as an alternative to holistic admissions. He argues that while tests may be seen as favoring the rich, other factors such as athletics and legacy status favor the wealthy even more. He believes that test-based admissions would provide a fairer and more objective evaluation of applicants.

The discussion also touches on the issue of mismatch, where students are admitted to universities where they may struggle academically due to lower cognitive abilities. Dr. Arcidiacono suggests that universities should be more transparent with students about their chances of success in different majors. This would allow students to make informed decisions about their education.

The conversation then turns to the importance of merit in admissions. Dr. Arcidiacono defines merit as the documented relationship between a trait and the desired outcome, such as academic success. He argues that objective tests, such as those measuring general cognitive ability, are the most reliable and valid indicators of merit. He also highlights the benefits of using objective tests in selecting candidates for various positions, as they provide a fair and accurate assessment of an individual's abilities.

Dr. Arcidiacono criticizes universities for their unwillingness to use their own data to improve their admissions processes. He believes that universities should be more transparent and use their data to evaluate the effectiveness of their policies, such as their response to the COVID-19 pandemic. He also criticizes universities for not using their data to study the impact of various factors, such as roommate compatibility, on student success.

The podcast continues with a discussion on the need for universities to be honest with their students about their chances of success. Dr. Arcidiacono argues that universities should inform students about the probability of completing a degree in their chosen field based on their academic background. This would allow students to make informed decisions and potentially motivate them to work harder.

Dr. Arcidiacono continues by explaining the statistical evidence he presented in the Harvard and UNC cases. He conducted a study that analyzed the admissions data and found evidence of bias against Asian American applicants. He discovered that Asian American students had to score higher on standardized tests and have stronger academic records compared to other racial groups to have the same chance of admission. This suggested that race was a significant factor in the admissions process.

He also discusses the concept of holistic admissions, which considers various factors beyond test scores and grades, such as personal ratings. Dr. Arcidiacono argues that these subjective evaluations can be influenced by racial bias, leading to discrimination against certain racial groups. He emphasizes the importance of objective measures, such as test scores, in predicting academic success.

Dr. Arcidiacono addresses the argument that affirmative action is necessary to promote diversity on college campuses. He argues that using race as a factor in admissions perpetuates racial disparities and does not address the underlying issues of educational inequity. He suggests that focusing on improving K-12 education and providing equal opportunities for all students would be a more effective approach.

The podcast also explores the potential consequences of a purely objective evaluation system in college admissions. Dr. Arcidiacono acknowledges that such a system could lead to a disproportionate number of Asian and Jewish students at elite universities, while reducing the number of black students. However, he argues that this could also motivate other racial and ethnic groups to improve their academic performance and close the achievement gap.

Dr. Arcidiacono discusses the Supreme Court decision and its implications. He expresses his satisfaction with the ruling, as it vindicated his research and findings. However, he remains cautious about the future actions of universities, as they may try to find legal loopholes to reinstate preferences based on race. He suggests that universities should select students based on objective measures, such as test scores, to ensure fairness and meritocracy.

The podcast also touches on the reactions of Harvard and UNC to the Supreme Court decision. Dr. Arcidiacono notes that both universities expressed disappointment but affirmed their commitment to diversity. He speculates that they may try to find alternative ways to achieve diversity without explicitly considering race.

Dr. Arcidiacono reflects on the personal and professional consequences of his involvement in these cases. He shares his experience of facing protests and criticism, but also finding strength and resilience in his convictions. He emphasizes the importance of treating others with respect and responding with love, even in the face of adversity.

Dr. Arcidiacono believes that merit should be the defining factor in determining admission to universities and job positions. He argues that individuals should be considered meritorious candidates if the features they bring to the position match the desired outcome of performance. He also points out that employers are legally bound to hire based on merit.

He gives an example of a researcher from the University of Michigan who is able to gather data from fundamentalist schools in Pakistan because he is a Muslim from Pakistan himself. Dr. Arcidiacono sees this as a form of diversity that brings unique insights and opens up new areas of research. He believes that this kind of diversity can be considered a measure of merit.

However, he emphasizes that diversity should not be based solely on race. He argues that the differences within any given racial or ethnic group are much larger than the differences between groups. Therefore, he believes that individual differences should be prioritized over group differences.

When discussing how universities will respond to the Supreme Court decision, Dr. Arcidiacono predicts a heterogeneous response. Some schools may eliminate test scores and focus on diversity statements, while others may address pipeline issues and eliminate legacy admissions. He also suggests that universities could use rigorous objective testing models to determine a candidate's probability of success in a particular discipline.

Dr. Arcidiacono also discusses the potential advantages and disadvantages of affirmative action. He acknowledges that affirmative action has increased the representation of minority students at top schools, but questions whether this is a true policy success. He argues that giving less qualified individuals a pedigree that indicates their qualifications and placing them in important positions they are not qualified for is not a net good.

He also highlights the negative impact of affirmative action on truly qualified individuals. He mentions the case of Glenn Lowry, a brilliant scholar who had to endure doubts about his competence due to affirmative action. Dr. Arcidiacono believes that this additional level of doubt is unfair and detrimental to those who are genuinely qualified.