Not a good article at all. It's very brief, and the content doesn't appear to match the "academics alone" blurb.
The article is mainly about elite colleges reinstating or not reinstating requiring an SAT score for admissions. I'll admit to taking both the ACT and the SAT in 1978 or 1979 and getting rejected by MIT. But I doubt there's a connection between a single, 4-hour test and "academics".
The SAT has been shown, in conjunction with high school grades, to predict college grades, as the article mentions. That's the connection with academics.
With how far away from academics most college admissions have strayed, I wonder whether we will see a new round of institutions founded to actually do academics.
Quite far, as the folks who replied below have demonstrated. College admissions today have almost nothing to do with academics, and once enrolled, the programs themselves are as much about grievance and political nonsense as they are about learning.
We started with this idea that everyone should go to college to learn useful knowledge and skills, but ended up with just a huge population going to these expensive institutions just to party and protest.
Now that college doesn't teach things of any value, we are in need of new institutions that do what college was meant to do.
> Quite far, as the folks who replied below have demonstrated.
With a single infographic about Harvard? No.
Nothing in your comment rises above the level of a hyperbolic rant about - given your lack of citations and mind-bogglingly loose definition of "demonstrate" - something you don't seem to actually believe.
The comparison with Caltech (besides the population of college-aged Asisan-Amercians) is because in California, due to Proposition 209 [2], public universities are legally prohibited from using direct racial criteria in admissions.
[1]: Brown, Yale, Penn, Dartmouth, Cornell, Princeton, and Columbia
Since other colleges mouth the same platitudes about the benefits of diversity and the systemic racism they must atone for, Occam's razor demands we assume their admissions are similar unless proven otherwise.
If we disagree on what fundamental concepts such as "evidence" and "assertion" mean, and disagree on how burden of proof works, then we wouldn't be having a discussion so much as writing words at each other.
The article is mainly about elite colleges reinstating or not reinstating requiring an SAT score for admissions. I'll admit to taking both the ACT and the SAT in 1978 or 1979 and getting rejected by MIT. But I doubt there's a connection between a single, 4-hour test and "academics".