What’s New in Harvard’s Admissions Procedures: Explicit Instructions on Race

This year’s Harvard College admissions procedures include something different: explicit instructions on how to use race when evaluating students’ applications. The question of whether and how admissions officials are trained on considering race has been a focal point of a trial here in which Harvard has defended its race-conscious admissions policy.

The procedures, meant to train officials who read applications for admission to the Class of 2023, were submitted as evidence on Thursday. The guidelines say that admissions officials can consider race when assigning overall ratings for the applications they read — something that happens early in the admissions cycle.

Readers of applications “may consider whether a student’s background, including his or her race or ethnicity, may contribute to the educational benefits of diversity at Harvard College. The consideration of race or ethnicity may be considered only as one factor among many,” the guidelines say. The word “only” is boldfaced and underlined.

In an email a Harvard spokeswoman said that “Harvard College’s admissions policies remain the same, the reading procedures are reissued annually, and 2023 procedures are this year’s version.”

The new procedures — which were first reported by The New York Times — have caught the attention of lawyers for Students for Fair Admissions, an anti-affirmative-action group that claims Harvard discriminates against Asian-American applicants. Friday marked the end of the second week in what’s expected to be a three-week trial.

The procedures reinforce some of what the admissions officials who testified here have said, but they also reflect some changes. For one thing, the admissions officials agreed in their testimony that, for the most part, there were no written instructions during the years they were questioned about.

They also agreed that they considered race when evaluating applications, but they said the practice can never hurt an application. They vehemently denied claims of discrimination against Asian-American applicants. Race can sometimes be a “tip” when officials are assigning the overall rating, they said.

‘Quiet’ Applicants

But lawyers for Students for Fair Admissions claim the officials consider race at other times too. In addition to the overall rating, Harvard admissions officials give each applicant scores in four categories: athletic ability, academic achievement, extracurricular activities, and personal qualities. The organization says that Asian-American applicants are unfairly penalized on the personal rating — something admissions officials said was not true.

There also were instructions about the personal rating in Harvard’s new admissions procedures. Readers of applications should judge students’ personal qualities “based on an assessment of what kind of positive effect this person might have throughout his or her life based on what we have seen.” And there was an explicit stipulation that “an applicant’s race or ethnicity should not be considered in assigning the personal rating.”

And there was this: “Keep in mind that characteristics not always synonymous with extroversion are similarly valued. Applicants who seem to be particularly reflective, insightful, and/or dedicated should receive higher personal ratings as well.”

“Quiet” applicants have been the subject of some testimony in the trial. A lawyer for Students for Fair Admissions cited notes William R. Fitzsimmons, the dean of admissions, had written about Asian-American applicants, calling one “very quiet” and another “quiet and strong.” Fitzsimmons said he had described applicants of all races with those terms at one point or another, and in no way meant to stereotype anyone.

Harvard on Trial

Detailed background on the lawsuit over the university’s race-conscious admissions policy, the case’s implications for selective colleges, and coverage of the trial as it unfolded, in a federal court in Boston.

• Harvard Doesn’t Discriminate Against Asian American Applicants, U.S. Appeals Court Rules
• 3 Takeaways From the Appeal of the Harvard Admissions Lawsuit
• A Judge Advised Harvard to Give Its Admissions Officers Training to Stop Bias. Will That Help?

The numerical ratings Harvard officials give applicants also came up on Friday during the testimony of Peter S. Arcidiacono, a Duke University economist who was hired by Students for Fair Admissions to analyze Harvard’s admissions data. Arcidiacono testified on Thursday that his models show that Harvard admissions officials give Asian-American applicants lower scores on the personal rating, which hurt their chances of admission despite strong academic and extracurricular ratings.

William F. Lee, a lawyer for Harvard, noted that the academic and extracurricular scores are based in part on subjective factors, such as letters from high-school teachers and guidance counselors. They’re not based only on SAT scores and grades or a list of a student’s after-school activities. Further, he said, Asian-American applicants tend to score better on the academic and extracurricular ratings, according to Arcidiacono’s models.

So, Lee wanted to know, why would biased admissions officials dock applicants for being Asian-American on the personal rating, but then give them a boost in the score for their extracurricular and academic achievements? Arcidiacono said there was more to it than that.

The trial will continue on Monday.

Nell Gluckman writes about faculty issues and other topics in higher education. You can follow her on Twitter @nellgluckman, or email her at nell.gluckman@chronicle.com.