Thernstrom's UCLA data, according to Kidder, was particularly problematic.
"He looked at the class just before and just after [Proposition 209]," Kidder said. "The overall number of students in the class increased by 100, but Thernstrom dealt just with numbers, not percentages."
Advertisement
Kidder said his study, which took data from three years before and three years after the institution of Proposition 209, was more comprehensive than Thernstrom's.
"He made the claim the Asians were the biggest beneficiaries," Kidder said. "But the data don't show that."
--Staff writer Alex B. Ginsberg can be reached at ginsberg@fas.harvard.edu.