Reviews

Fact's don't care about your feelings. The data doesn't lie. Every sophisticated mathematical analysis applied to studies of IQ pointed toward a different mean for each race. The SATs, ACTs, LSATs, GMATs, MCATs, PISA scores, the various Regents exams, the Army’s ASVAB test, and the various other civil service exams, all show the same result. Immigration from Latin America and Africa lowers our overall IQ as a society.  

Harvard should be ashamed of approving such racially insensitive--that is an understatement--"research." A full investigation of those involved in the approval process should be launched.

It is no secret that the conservative mind considers insult a form of persuasion-is it not. This is just another piece of "academics used to inflict cultural pain." It will end up just the same as "The Bell Curve" and other such "academic sclerosis."

sad...

The actual dissertation may be found here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/08/jason-richwine-dissertation_n_3240168.html

Facts are stubborn things and sometimes hard to live with. We should just keep the facts out!

The Kennedy School has been a sorry excuse for an institution for decades. this dissertation is yet one more piece of evidence in support of that. If I were Drew Faust, I would look to force a major overhaul or just shut it down. It's just an embarrassment to Harvard.

Well, I have not looked at anything more than the abstract, but as soon as I saw Charles Murray (The Bell Curve is one of the most racist books in the last few decades) I was not surprised. Amazing that this comes out of Harvard. Sad really.

The dissertation committee of Jason Richwine (Harvard, Department of Public Policy) seems to be:
- Charles Murray (primary advisor): http://www.aei.org/scholar/charles-murray/
- George Borjas: http://www.hks.harvard.edu/fs/gborjas/
- Richard Zeckhauser: http://www.hks.harvard.edu/about/faculty-staff-directory/richard-zeckhauser
- Christopher Jencks: http://www.hks.harvard.edu/about/faculty-staff-directory/christopher-jencks 

I have just read this in its entirety and I'm floored that this is the standard of a PhD at Harvard. George Borjas: this shoddy work is on your hands and letting this be published is a shameful mark on the professoriate and has cheapened the PhDs of everyone else.
As a non-systematic review of secondary data, its only novelty is its outrageous claims. Leaving those aside as debatable - if certain parallel-universe prior assumptions are accepted as true - there isn't enough evidence of thoughtful analysis here for this to pass the straight-face test.
I regularly advise MSc and PhD students in my academic work. There is simply no way this sort of work would meet the standard in the academic settings I am familiar with.