The Jordan B. Peterson Podcast – 384. Interviewing the Man Who Ended Affirmative Action | Dr. Peter Arcidiacono

Intro

In this episode of “The Jordan B. Peterson Podcast,” Jordan Peterson interviews Dr. Peter Arcidiacono, a professor whose research played a crucial role in the recent Supreme Court decision to end race-based affirmative action. They discuss the complexities of the admissions process for universities and the quest for diversity without explicit use of race. They also delve into the advantages and disadvantages of objective testing and the impact of athletic preferences on college admissions.

Main Takeaways

Research and the Supreme Court Decision

• The recent landmark decision by the Supreme Court ended race-based affirmative action, and Professor Peter Arcidiacono’s research was instrumental in that outcome.
• Universities typically hide their data, but Professor Arcidiacono got the opportunity to see Harvard’s admissions files and examine the actual applications themselves, reader comments, and alumni interviews.
• The Harvard case had a lot to do with Asian discrimination, and the UNC case focused on how large the racial preferences were coupled with race-neutral alternatives.
• The Supreme Court has said that universities should look for ways to get diversity without using race explicitly, and the question is, how formulaic were the admissions?

Objective Testing and Merit

• Merit has repeatedly proven to be the best indicator of success, and understanding what merit is can help in thinking about optimal policy.
• If the admission process is random, there may be surprising successes, but it can also be inefficient and difficult for those who fail.
• Objective selection mechanisms for academic, creative, and managerial positions are well-documented and relatively objective, but the admissions process remains politically charged.
• Objective testing of personality and cognitive abilities can identify people from disadvantaged economic backgrounds who have the ability to succeed academically and professionally.
• Objective tests are better than any other method for identifying talent and producing fair outcomes.

Athletic Preferences and Unfair Outcomes

• Large preferences are given across the board, not just on race, but also on legacies, athletics, and potential donors.
• The current admissions process at universities includes preferential access for children of faculty members, donors, and athletes, which can result in unfair outcomes.
• Athletic preference is the biggest advantage in college admissions, with an over 85% admit rate for athletes and lower academic characteristics than the average applicant.
• Sports such as sailing can favor people of means and small private schools, despite being seen as an equalizer.

Challenges and Solutions

• The admissions process for universities is a complex issue, with questions about how to achieve diversity without using race explicitly.
• Test-based admissions could be an alternative solution to the current system.
• Universities need to be more specific about their objective function and use data to measure outcomes and improve policies.
• Universities should capitalize on their expertise in social sciences research to improve their own policies and practices.

Summary

Research and the Supreme Court Decision

Professor Peter Arcidiacono’s research played a significant role in the recent Supreme Court decision to end race-based affirmative action. By examining Harvard’s admissions files, he uncovered evidence of Asian discrimination and the use of large racial preferences. The Supreme Court’s emphasis on finding ways to achieve diversity without using race explicitly raises questions about the formulaic nature of admissions.

Objective Testing and Merit

Objective testing has proven to be the most reliable method for identifying talent and producing fair outcomes. Professor Arcidiacono argues that objective selection mechanisms for academic, creative, and managerial positions are well-documented and relatively objective. Objective tests of personality and cognitive abilities can also identify individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds who have the potential to succeed academically and professionally.

Athletic Preferences and Unfair Outcomes

The current admissions process at universities includes preferential access for children of faculty members, donors, and athletes. Athletic preference is the biggest advantage in college admissions, with a significantly higher admit rate for athletes and lower academic characteristics than the average applicant. This preference can result in unfair outcomes, especially for sports that favor people of means and small private schools.

Challenges and Solutions

The admissions process for universities is complex, with the challenge of achieving diversity without using race explicitly. Test-based admissions could be an alternative solution to the current system. Universities need to be more specific about their objective function and use data to measure outcomes and improve policies. Additionally, universities should leverage their expertise in social sciences research to enhance their own policies and practices.

Conclusion

The conversation between Jordan Peterson and Dr. Peter Arcidiacono sheds light on the complexities of the admissions process for universities and the quest for diversity without explicit use of race. The use of objective testing, the impact of athletic preferences, and the challenges faced by universities in creating fair admissions policies are all important considerations. Ultimately, the goal should be to achieve merit-based admissions that provide equal opportunities for all students.