<img src = "https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2018/10/22/harvardpublicopinionpoll_sq-6eaa93af9579a9378f883eaa7d96d261baf72003-s100 -c15.jpeg "data-original =" https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2018/10/22/harvardpublicopinionpoll_sq-6eaa93af9579a9378f883eaa7d96d261baf72003-s100.jpeg "class =" img lazyOnLoad "alt =" As Americans Feeling More Affirmative Action in Higher Education  However, the Judge's findings in this case are likely to be even closer.There is no set timeline for these findings, however, court observers believe US District Court Judge Allison Burroughs will deliver its opinion in early 2019 Both sides plan to appeal, which in turn means that the fate of a policy of positive action could again be in the hands of the Supreme Court.
For followers of positive A ction diversity at the universities. University executives say that adopting race-conscious admissions would lead to homogenous classes. But others, like the plaintiff, say that's an overreaction. They argue that one's race opens the door to racial bias.
What both sides have argued
Like many lawsuits, this case has been largely surveyed by statistics. At the beginning of the study, SFFA attorneys referred to recruitment figures and a Harvard program that sends recruitment letters to high school students based on standardized test results. According to school policy, living Asian Americans living in rural states need to score 1370 points on the PSAT to receive a letter. White men, however, only need one 1310.
"This is racial discrimination plain and simple," argued SFFA attorney John Hughes.
Harvard's Admissions Dean William Fitzsimmons pushed the college back to apply this tactic to attract people to rural areas, many of whom have not considered the school in the past, and these standards are not used when students enter the pool of applicants ,
The SFFA also argued that Harvard officials should think about blind licensing tactics. According to the plaintiff, it is possible to obtain a diverse class irrespective of race, especially when Harvard has raised its "tip" for applicants with low socioeconomic status. Harvard officials say this would lead to an unacceptable decline in the academic quality of an incoming class.
But Harvard's appraisal system was at the heart of the process. The SFFA analysis shows that Asian Americans in this system routinely perform better on academic and extracurricular ratings, but they consistently lag behind other ethnic groups in their so-called "personal score."
When the plaintiffs limited their analysis to only high-profile scientists, the differences in personal ratings became broader.
"The extent of racial preferences is quite large," said Peter Arcidiacono, economist at Duke University, who conducted the plaintiff's analysis.
Harvard denies the allegations and the lawyers of the school presented their own statistics to prove their case.
According to David Card, a Berkeley economist at Berkeley and an expert witness to Harvard, it is misleading to focus so much on academic achievement. In his analysis, he explains that the school receives several thousand applications with perfect GPAs and standardized test results. However, Harvard only has space for around 2,000 freshman students per year, and school officials believe that high scores are needed in several areas to get started.
Contrary to the findings of the SFFA, the analysis of Card shows that the Asian-American nature had no effect on the probability of an applicant being statistically significantly accepted.
Why are these two analyzes different? That was another hot topic. While both Harvard and SFFA received the same application data to prepare for the study, the SFFA excluded a group of students that included recruited athletes, children of alumni, and faculty children. The SFFA argued that students had higher admission rates than the general population and exerted an overwhelming influence on the results. However, Harvard said it could not draw any conclusions about the licensing bias without looking at the entire pool of applicants.
Witnessing and Taking
The trial also contained some very emotional statements.
For hours answering questions on the witness stand, Harvard's Dean of the Rakesh Khurana College asked, "If I felt that there was a deliberate discrimination, I would have sounded several alarm bells as a professor, dean, and father." He also claimed that it was not possible for the receptionists to ignore the race of a student because their race is fundamental to many applicants who they are.
This feeling was also shared by eight Harvard students and alumni who took the stand to defend the university for their use of race-conscious photography.
"Personally, I've benefited from positive action," said Harvard senior Thang Diep. "It allowed me to consider my immigration history [from Vietnam] and to consider my own experiences."
Alum Sarah Cole, an African American, testified that she would not have applied to Harvard for race consideration in the admissions process and for appreciating diversity in his elementary school classes.
"Racial admission is an act of extinction," she said on the witness stand. "Not seeing my race means not seeing me."
Regardless of how Burroughs rules, this process has opened up an opaque process of public scrutiny.
And there were several interesting stop-offs on how to get to Harvard: Living in a rural state helps make a big donation to the school. Coming from a low-income family has helped some applicants stand out and is good at sports (recruited athletes enjoy an 80 percent admissions rate). Qualities of the Sand have helped some candidates survive the endless cuts that are required to narrow a pool of 20,000 applications.
"It's an open secret in our community"
Straightforward Case – Harvard is either discriminatory or not – but many in the community of Harvard and the Greater Boston community have a mixed view.
Harvard senior Jang Lee said he did not know. Thus, Asian Americans are used as wedges in this case of discrimination. He also speaks with Edward Blum, the conservative legal strategist behind the SFFA, and the same person who led the lawsuit against the University of Texas, Austin, who made it to the Supreme Court.
"I get angry and frustrated because this white guy says he supports Asian Americans," Lee said. "Looking at his track record, it's clear he's not interested in Asian Americans or people of color."
Lee believes that race-conscious approvals are a good thing and should remain part of the admissions process. But he acknowledges that Harvard could do more to reduce campus prejudice and make the school more inclusive for minority students.
Harvard graduate Natalie Bao Tram Le believes that race-conscious approvals are needed.
"I am definitely much more than my race," she said. "I care about human rights, social change, and positive action overlooks the key characteristics that a person at the school can bring to the table, not just the characteristics we were born with."
For Asian-American parent Jane Chen, this lawsuit took a long time.
"There is an open secret in our community," she said. "You have to work ten times harder than other races to attend high school."
Chen is a member of a group of Chinese-American parents who regularly participated in court proceedings about an hour away from their Boston suburb community.
After witnessing for hours on personal score trends, Chen said she still supported the idea of positive action, but wished it was fairer to Asian-American students.
"I do not know why Asians are so unlikely from the school's point of view."
Despite the decision of this court, the debate on this lawsuit is far from over.