Harvard University, as many know, is in the process of a legal suit trying to determine whether, in their admission policies, they have been biased toward Asian American students, compared to other applicants. The trial started on Oct 15, and soon after the Wall Street Journal released an internal document on how Harvard evaluates different applicants. It was a somewhat interesting read, but overall, there was nothing that did not scream or even hint at discrimination.

Basically, the document showed step by step the process at which evaluators need to categorize the applicant pool. There were some score boundaries for SAT, how to flag alumni applicants and athletes and other categories of students to help the admission committee determine whether a student is admissible or not. Again, there was nothing really at all revealing nor would one expect there to be in a document that is setting out the guidelines for evaluators.

Maybe the fact that this document is an internal document so it gets those unfamiliar with the admission process excited, but the reality is that if you have been in admission on either side of the desk – university representative or college counselor, the information is not particularly surprising nor will it expose Harvard to the information the prosecutors are looking for in determining their case.

The question in my mind is whether there is a case at all. First, we need to make sure everyone understands that the focus is on Asian Americans. That means Asians who are Americans. So then we must next suppose is whether Asian Americans need to have a higher profile – activities, test scores and overall performance higher that let’s say a Caucasian American. Possibly. Even if that is true, it is important to reflect on the specific applicant pools and their background, overall ability, and achievements. Are they different? Again possibly and probably more probable that an Asian cohort of applicants presents a higher set of boundaries than the top Caucasian American. Possible.

But then we need or more importantly, the prosecution needs to be able to prove that there was some bias in the admission process toward Asian Americans. Given the document that was released, there are all sorts of categories in which a student is being evaluated and assessed. If we could consider a different scenario for the moment, lets say Olympic sports, then it might be possible to understand the minute differences a National Team or Harvard, in this case, needs to make to accept a person on to the team or in the class: highly qualified and perhaps uniquely prepared at an exceedingly high level. But not everyone is going to be accepted to the team nor can Harvard admit every qualified candidate. It all boils down to not everyone in the Olympics wins a Gold Medal. And also, to point out the obvious, they also want a diverse class that is not all outstanding overly qualified candidates. They want a diverse and vibrant cohort that will be successful.

It is very clear that Harvard works to create this very diverse entering class in the admission process. They are culling through approximately 42,749 applicants to admit 2,024. No easy task when 87.2% are American, and 12.8% are international who are all amazing, world-class students. What is interesting is that last year 22.9% of the students admitted were, yes, you guessed it Asian American, the highest percentage of students admitted!

As the trial progresses, there may be some interesting bits and pieces of information. It is possible that Harvard is found culpable. But based on this “secret” document released, this is not where the evidence will be found.

Photo: huffpost.com

Wow, what commotion the recent 100-day visa-check campaign has created! Granted, it’s unnerving to be spot-checked for the legality of living here (I haven’t endured it yet myself, this time around). If you’re here legitimately and have proof, there is nothing to worry about. But it’s that overall somewhat slimy feeling of being looked at as a foreigner that can be so unsettling. 

There have been a lot of postings online about the current Beijing Municipal PSB (Public Security Bureau) campaign that began on Tuesday. In an attempt to sift out any foreigners who have come here illegally, or who are living and/or working here without proper visas, police will randomly check foreigners’ credentials. Popular areas for expats including Sanlitun and university neighborhoods are expected to be targeted for random checks. Housing compounds may also be affected with police officers asking for paperwork door-to-door.

The U.S. Embassy sent out a notice to their employees/families alerting them of this requirement, for which they need to have diplomatic identity cards with them at all times (most usually do anyway). For those of us without such cards, passports are required instead, as are police registration forms for your housing.

I have always hesitated to carry my passport at all times, even though I know having proper identification with me is required. Instead, I carry photo copies of the most current papers for each of my family members. This way, it’s one less element to worry about in case of a purse snatching.  Is this good enough, however, if I’m stopped for my papers? (If you know the answer to this, please post a comment below.)

News sources from China Daily to the Wall Street Journal have posted articles about this campaign, and not a single one is published without mentioning the recent arrest of a British tourist who allegedly sexually assaulted a woman before being physically assaulted himself by several Chinese men. Most sources suggest that this incredibly disturbing event was not the reason for the campaign, although the timing is questionable. There are very polarized opinions related to this situation and the subsequent campaign; some foreigners feel concern about possible backlash. With a lot of assumptions made about why foreigners might live here – many not true – people can feel threatened even by the random and simple act of checking ID.

So, for the next few months, just carry your proper identification with you, keep mindful of your belongings, and don’t fret. It’s a tiny bump, albeit an irritating one to deal with, and hopefully those who give being a foreigner a bad name will be sent back home so that we who remain here can continue enjoying our lives in our current home of Beijing.

For more information on the campaign and all things related, see The Beijinger blog post here. Other links include China Daily here, and Wall Street Journal here.

Overachieving Chinese students have been a hot topic lately in the Western press and now comes this Op/Ed piece ("Why Chinese Mothers are Superior") in today’s Wall Street Journal from Chinese American Yale law professor Amy Chua.

Some of the ideas expressed within are incendiary, to say the least, and the author sums it all up by stating:

"Western parents try to respect their children’s individuality, encouraging them to pursue their true passions, supporting their choices, and providing positive reinforcement and a nurturing environment. By contrast, the Chinese believe that the best way to protect their children is by preparing them for the future, letting them see what they’re capable of, and arming them with skills, work habits and inner confidence that no one can ever take away."

Over 1,800 comments (and counting) have been left by readers on the WSJ and BeijingKids readers are sounding off here. You can buy Chua’s new book, The Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother, on Amazon here.

Meanwhile, over at the New York Times, resident China pundit Nicholas Kristof writes about Beijing resident Hou Yifan ("China Rises, and Checkmates"), the new women’s world chess champion who many claim is on par with the world’s top male players and whom Kristof cites as yet another example of China’s rising power – a consistent theme in many of his articles (and not unlike those nagging Chinese mothers who ceaselessly compare their kids achievements with those of other families). Check out the reader comments here.

But beyond all this news about Chinese students and educational philosophy, another question comes to mind: just how far will some Americans go in setting up their straw men?