Everything concerning minority admissions and recruitment has been acquired through struggle, everything from getting the program, to making it work, to keeping the program. The hardest struggle, however, has been to get Harvard to adopt fair criteria for Third World people. Harvard has certain "objective" and "subjective" criteria that determine if a person is to be accepted. When applied to Third World students, these criteria show that Harvard thinks America is still the land of the rich and the white.

The criterion that shows most clearly Harvard feels this is the land of the rich and white is the so-called "objective" admissions criterion Harvard uses. We have been constantly told how important the Scholastic Achievement Tests are for minority students. A large part of the admissions office effort for Third World students is based on a search list that includes Third World students who have done well on the PSATs. The SAT is specifically designed to test the "average" students, i.e., the average middle class white student. Clearly, not many Third World students fall within that definition of an average student--although some try.

Further, it has been shown that the SATs have little or no correlation with the future academic or professional success of minority students. How could SATs possibly test the verbal capabilities of a Third World student, when many of the words used in the test do not exist in his or her environment? Words such as canopy, blender, pantry or perambulator are common for the average white student. But they are not familiar to minority students. A Third World student's depth of assimilation into a white society cannot be the only judge of future performance.

The admissions office makes even less of a pretense of being fair when it comes to subjective criteria. These criteria always involve evaluation by an individual who seldom can or will be fair to Third World students. An example of this is the way the admissions office looks at grade point averages.

How can an admissions officer whose life experience has largely consisted of trees, birds, babbling brooks and grandma's applie pie understand the graffiti, garbage and noise of a city ghetto? A person from one environment cannot possibly be fair in evaluating the success of an applicant from a totally different environment, and yet this is what the admissions office does.

Different Environments

Does an "A" average at an inner-city school have the same value as an "A" average at Exeter? We think it does, but the admissions office doesn't. The amount of effort, determination and motivation is actually infinitely greater on the part of the Third World student who must deal with overcrowded classes, incompetent teachers, discouraging and limited counseling services, violence and language barriers--not to mention the oppressive conditions in the neighborhoods of these Third World students.

One would expect the teacher recommendations, another important subjective criterion, to give some insight into the performance of Third World students. Here also the Third World is shortchanged. The teacher cannot possibly give a good and informative recommendation for a student when he barely knows the students. This is inevitable when the teacher is trying to effectively teach 50 or more students. In addition to this, the typical situation is that many teachers do not sympathize with, understand, or have confidence in the aspirations of their Third World students--largely because most of those teachers are white.

Even if the teacher writes a good recommendation, that involvement stops outside the classroom.

Finally the most subjective and least fair judgement that is made upon Third World students is that made by the alumni. It is unrealistic to expect that alumni, most of whom were here when Harvard was an all-white institution and have not reconciled themselves to its integration, will fairly evaluate Third World students. Even those alumni who do not show open contempt for Third World students lack an understanding and appreciation of the Third World experience.

The typical alumni interviewer is a middle-aged preppie, financially successful, who is primarily interested in seeing students of his own ilk admitted. He seldom if ever has any extensive contact with Third World people. He continues to judge success in terms of a white upper middle class experience, and condemns Third World people for not living such an experience. The admissions office makes it clear that alumni interviews and the alumni are vital parts of the process, yet nothing is being done to change the all-white and unfair character of this and other parts of admissions and recruitment.

The above is even further reflected in the University's concept of diversity. Admissions officers stress the importance of diversity in considering the composition of each class. They actively seek classical musicians, newspaper editors, alumni children, club presidents, farmers, poets, et cetera, all for the sake of a diverse student body. While the concept of diversity is a good one, as administered by Harvard it works against Third World students.

All types of extracurricular activities are important in determining the concept of diversity. This is fine, but certain things must be understood. First, many minority students have jobs so they can help their families--and therefore these people cannot participate in the activities that look so good on the application. Their jobs are slighted in favour of the school newspaper, the class presidency, debating championship, et cetera.

Poor High Schools

The emphasis on extracurricular activities works on the assumption that high schools offer a large number of extracurricular activities. But the reality is that many Third World people go to substandard schools. One of the writers of this article went to a high school so overcrowded that athletics were the only activities offered.