http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-02/harvard-targeted-in-u-s-asian-american-discrimination-probe

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:no way plaintiffs can win this. Harvard can shape its undergraduate class anyway it wants. One year they may be looking for Russian speaking bagpipe players. Nothing anywhere says they have to go by grades, SAT's and extra-curricular activities. They also have every right to deny "packaged" applicants and that is what I suspect the plaintiff was.

That is why Harvard is no longer the top in everything.
Best students in the nation do not study there

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Its a private school for the ruling class
The rest can go elsewhere

This.

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/american-dream-myth-joseph-stiglitz-price-inequality-124338674.html

- a parent's level of income and education is two of the biggest factors determining in a child's success; not a classless society

- slackers from the elite class will do better than hard workers from a lower class

- less than 8% of the class is from the bottom 50% of economic rung

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Its a private school for the ruling class
The rest can go elsewhere

This.

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/american-dream-myth-joseph-stiglitz-price-inequality-124338674.html

- a parent's level of income and education is two of the biggest factors determining in a child's success; not a classless society

- slackers from the elite class will do better than hard workers from a lower class

- less than 8% of the class is from the bottom 50% of economic rung

US has less upward mobility than Germany. It is all about class. I am tired of all the race talks. It is used to divide and conquer the mass.

[Anonymous]

Asians are the superior race

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Asians are the superior race

If true then why are there more whites in more powerful positions worldwide?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Asians are the superior race

If true then why are there more whites in more powerful positions worldwide?

Asian is the new white

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:no way plaintiffs can win this. Harvard can shape its undergraduate class anyway it wants. One year they may be looking for Russian speaking bagpipe players. Nothing anywhere says they have to go by grades, SAT's and extra-curricular activities. They also have every right to deny "packaged" applicants and that is what I suspect the plaintiff was.

That is why Harvard is no longer the top in everything.
Best students in the nation do not study there

o.k., i'll bite. where do they study?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:no way plaintiffs can win this. Harvard can shape its undergraduate class anyway it wants. One year they may be looking for Russian speaking bagpipe players. Nothing anywhere says they have to go by grades, SAT's and extra-curricular activities. They also have every right to deny "packaged" applicants and that is what I suspect the plaintiff was.

I'm trying to understand this better. Does the courts' latitude to impose admissions requirements depend on whether Harvard takes any federal money? So because most Ivies are "private" institutions, they aren't held to the same standards as, say, the University of Michigan? And the fact that some Ivies have large research departments that take federal money wouldn't change this?

[Anonymous]

15:55 again, maybe I should have said "Michigan State" in my example, instead of University of Michigan....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:no way plaintiffs can win this. Harvard can shape its undergraduate class anyway it wants. One year they may be looking for Russian speaking bagpipe players. Nothing anywhere says they have to go by grades, SAT's and extra-curricular activities. They also have every right to deny "packaged" applicants and that is what I suspect the plaintiff was.

That is why Harvard is no longer the top in everything.
Best students in the nation do not study there

o.k., i'll bite. where do they study?

They study where PP studied, or where her kids now study.

[Anonymous]

There are no objective criteria for admission to these schools which is why I suspect plaintiffs will lose. If they could actually prove quotas, say that there is a cap on Asians, that would be one thing. But I highly doubt thats what is going on. And its not as if Asians are underrepresented compared to their percentage in the general population. If anything, they are overrepresented. So the claim comes down to "we are more qualified than people who got in" which isn't going to go anywhere because there is no way to measure who is qualified. I suspect these schools would prefer original thinkers over kids who have been packaged all their lives and get the grades/scores. There are several such kids at my daughter's school, and they do very well academically and participate in all the extra-curricular activities their parents have told them will help them get into an Ivy. There are a bazillion kids like that out there and probably most don't get into the top Ivies.

I guess I resent this sense of entitlement -- my child deserve to be admitted because of her scores and grades and that other child doesn't. That other child may just be a lot more interesting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:no way plaintiffs can win this. Harvard can shape its undergraduate class anyway it wants. One year they may be looking for Russian speaking bagpipe players. Nothing anywhere says they have to go by grades, SAT's and extra-curricular activities. They also have every right to deny "packaged" applicants and that is what I suspect the plaintiff was.

That is why Harvard is no longer the top in everything.
Best students in the nation do not study there

o.k., i'll bite. where do they study?

Have you not followed the news
Most of the researchers in the US are immigrants. US cannot produce the folks to do the research, so the top brains from universities in Europe are coming here to do that work.
There has been quite a lot of talk about it.

[Anonymous]

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,574849,00.html

Oh, harvaaard has lost its first place. The top university in the Whole Wide World is not Cambridge

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,574849,00.html

Oh, harvaaard has lost its first place. The top university in the Whole Wide World is not Cambridge

So many non sequiturs. This link doesn't rank universities. Instead it talks about Europeans coming to the US. But the article says nothing to substantiate what you said above, about the US not producing researchers (although it's true not as many US college students choose engineering). Instead, your own article focuses on how Europeans come to the US because (a) we give more money to research and (b) we don't tie research up with endless bureaucracy.

Next time, read your links before you post them. Don't post utter cr@p and assume nobody will click and find out you're bluffing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:no way plaintiffs can win this. Harvard can shape its undergraduate class anyway it wants. One year they may be looking for Russian speaking bagpipe players. Nothing anywhere says they have to go by grades, SAT's and extra-curricular activities. They also have every right to deny "packaged" applicants and that is what I suspect the plaintiff was.

That is why Harvard is no longer the top in everything.
Best students in the nation do not study there

o.k., i'll bite. where do they study?

Have you not followed the news
Most of the researchers in the US are immigrants. US cannot produce the folks to do the research, so the top brains from universities in Europe are coming here to do that work.
There has been quite a lot of talk about it.

Are you on the wrong thread? The question was, where do the "best" students study? And your answer is ... a rant about immigrants in US research. Maybe you meant to post this point somewhere else?