Scores are scores. Actually, I think that admissions boards shouldn't include face-to-face interviews with potential applicants, as it may unduly sway the pendulum.
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court drew new limits on colleges' use of affirmative action Monday, saying that although racial preferences remain constitutional, they are permissible only if schools can first show that there are "no workable race-neutral alternatives." The court's 7-1 decision, written by Justice Anthony Kennedy, suggests that public schools can use affirmative action only as a last resort for creating a diverse student body, and raises the prospect that colleges will face a tougher burden of justifying them in the future. But the justices stopped short of issuing a broader decision either fully cementing or eliminating schools' ability to take account of an applicant's race. Instead, Kennedy wrote that public universities could adopt affirmative action plans only if they can demonstrate that there is "no workable race-neutral alternatives would produce the benefits of educational diversity."
Court calls for tougher scrutiny of affirmative action
Всем нужен мир.
Many jobs shouldn't require face-to-face interviews as well. I'd make that argument with public sector/civil service jobs. Private sector - go ahead.Of course face to face should be required. Jobs require interviews why shouldnt competitive schools?
“We do not believe any group of men adequate enough or wise enough to operate without scrutiny or without criticism. We know that the only way to avoid error is to detect it, that the only way to detect it is to be free to inquire. We know that in secrecy error undetected will flourish and subvert”. – J Robert Oppenheimer.