JMU and UVA

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no problem with schools financially helping qualified students who come from disadvantaged backgrounds and would make great additions to a university. I have a big problem, however, giving priority to someone solely based on their race.

What’s the difference?

Seriously?

"Here's a break in your tuition because your family is living below the poverty threshold, yet you have excellent grades and test scores." (race-blind)
vs.
"Here's a break in your tuition because your skin is brown."

The student can’t control either of those things, so why do you support helping the poor student but not the student of color?

Omg. You can’t actually be this dense… many “students of color” aren’t poor at all. Why should they get a break on tuition due SOLELY to the color of their skin?? Pell grants are not race-based, nor should they be. Your race is irrelevant.

Why should Pell students get a boost SOLELY because they’re poor?

In part, Pell students are getting a boost because USNWR's formula gives higher scores to schools with a higher percentage of Pell Grant recipients.

The question is for you. Why do you support a boost solely based on being poor but not solely based on race? If the kid can’t control either one, what’s the difference?

I don't support an admissions boost solely on being poor. If someone has demonstrably overcome adversity, that should be factored in my view.

What I was saying in my prior post is that schools are actively pursuing Pell-eligible students because of USNWR's methodology.

So you think that success despite being poor is overcoming adversity but success despite being a minority doesn’t demonstrate overcoming adversity?

That isn't what was said. You may come from a poor family, but have received a scholarship to a high quality secondary school. You could be a member of a minority but could be privileged from a financial and academic standpoint.

Let’s make this very simple. Excluding other factors, do you accept that being poor and being a minority are both solely forms of adversity? Ex: A rich minority still faces racial adversity.

No.

[Anonymous]

The kids are happier at JMU.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The kids are happier at JMU.

These threads are hilarious. Did you poll each student at both schools to come up with the data and conclusion?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no problem with schools financially helping qualified students who come from disadvantaged backgrounds and would make great additions to a university. I have a big problem, however, giving priority to someone solely based on their race.

What’s the difference?

Seriously?

"Here's a break in your tuition because your family is living below the poverty threshold, yet you have excellent grades and test scores." (race-blind)
vs.
"Here's a break in your tuition because your skin is brown."

The student can’t control either of those things, so why do you support helping the poor student but not the student of color?

Omg. You can’t actually be this dense… many “students of color” aren’t poor at all. Why should they get a break on tuition due SOLELY to the color of their skin?? Pell grants are not race-based, nor should they be. Your race is irrelevant.

Why should Pell students get a boost SOLELY because they’re poor?

In part, Pell students are getting a boost because USNWR's formula gives higher scores to schools with a higher percentage of Pell Grant recipients.

The question is for you. Why do you support a boost solely based on being poor but not solely based on race? If the kid can’t control either one, what’s the difference?

I don't support an admissions boost solely on being poor. If someone has demonstrably overcome adversity, that should be factored in my view.

What I was saying in my prior post is that schools are actively pursuing Pell-eligible students because of USNWR's methodology.

So you think that success despite being poor is overcoming adversity but success despite being a minority doesn’t demonstrate overcoming adversity?

That isn't what was said. You may come from a poor family, but have received a scholarship to a high quality secondary school. You could be a member of a minority but could be privileged from a financial and academic standpoint.

Let’s make this very simple. Excluding other factors, do you accept that being poor and being a minority are both solely forms of adversity? Ex: A rich minority still faces racial adversity.

No.

Why?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no problem with schools financially helping qualified students who come from disadvantaged backgrounds and would make great additions to a university. I have a big problem, however, giving priority to someone solely based on their race.

What’s the difference?

Seriously?

"Here's a break in your tuition because your family is living below the poverty threshold, yet you have excellent grades and test scores." (race-blind)
vs.
"Here's a break in your tuition because your skin is brown."

The student can’t control either of those things, so why do you support helping the poor student but not the student of color?

Omg. You can’t actually be this dense… many “students of color” aren’t poor at all. Why should they get a break on tuition due SOLELY to the color of their skin?? Pell grants are not race-based, nor should they be. Your race is irrelevant.

Why should Pell students get a boost SOLELY because they’re poor?

In part, Pell students are getting a boost because USNWR's formula gives higher scores to schools with a higher percentage of Pell Grant recipients.

The question is for you. Why do you support a boost solely based on being poor but not solely based on race? If the kid can’t control either one, what’s the difference?

I don't support an admissions boost solely on being poor. If someone has demonstrably overcome adversity, that should be factored in my view.

What I was saying in my prior post is that schools are actively pursuing Pell-eligible students because of USNWR's methodology.

So you think that success despite being poor is overcoming adversity but success despite being a minority doesn’t demonstrate overcoming adversity?

That isn't what was said. You may come from a poor family, but have received a scholarship to a high quality secondary school. You could be a member of a minority but could be privileged from a financial and academic standpoint.

Let’s make this very simple. Excluding other factors, do you accept that being poor and being a minority are both solely forms of adversity? Ex: A rich minority still faces racial adversity.

No.

Which do you not accept, racism or classism? Why do you think they have to be paired to be considered adversity?

[Anonymous]

The closest thing that exists to any sort of scientific study on satisfaction is the report below, pages 94-96. There are different measures, with different leaders (but generally small differences), but the report concludes that "Graduates showing the greatest appreciation across these measures tended to be from the
William & Mary, the University of Virginia, Virginia Military Institute, the University of
Virginia's College at Wise, Virginia Tech and James Madison University."

https://www.schev.edu/home/showpublisheddocument/838/637811238245600000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no problem with schools financially helping qualified students who come from disadvantaged backgrounds and would make great additions to a university. I have a big problem, however, giving priority to someone solely based on their race.

What’s the difference?

Seriously?

"Here's a break in your tuition because your family is living below the poverty threshold, yet you have excellent grades and test scores." (race-blind)
vs.
"Here's a break in your tuition because your skin is brown."

The student can’t control either of those things, so why do you support helping the poor student but not the student of color?

Omg. You can’t actually be this dense… many “students of color” aren’t poor at all. Why should they get a break on tuition due SOLELY to the color of their skin?? Pell grants are not race-based, nor should they be. Your race is irrelevant.

Why should Pell students get a boost SOLELY because they’re poor?

In part, Pell students are getting a boost because USNWR's formula gives higher scores to schools with a higher percentage of Pell Grant recipients.

The question is for you. Why do you support a boost solely based on being poor but not solely based on race? If the kid can’t control either one, what’s the difference?

The poor student needs access and opportunity - no matter what they look like.
The minority student doesn't necessarily need that same boost.
You want to eliminate DEI and discrimination - Pell grants are the example of how to do it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no problem with schools financially helping qualified students who come from disadvantaged backgrounds and would make great additions to a university. I have a big problem, however, giving priority to someone solely based on their race.

What’s the difference?

Seriously?

"Here's a break in your tuition because your family is living below the poverty threshold, yet you have excellent grades and test scores." (race-blind)
vs.
"Here's a break in your tuition because your skin is brown."

The student can’t control either of those things, so why do you support helping the poor student but not the student of color?

Omg. You can’t actually be this dense… many “students of color” aren’t poor at all. Why should they get a break on tuition due SOLELY to the color of their skin?? Pell grants are not race-based, nor should they be. Your race is irrelevant.

Why should Pell students get a boost SOLELY because they’re poor?

In part, Pell students are getting a boost because USNWR's formula gives higher scores to schools with a higher percentage of Pell Grant recipients.

The question is for you. Why do you support a boost solely based on being poor but not solely based on race? If the kid can’t control either one, what’s the difference?

The poor student needs access and opportunity - no matter what they look like.
The minority student doesn't necessarily need that same boost.
You want to eliminate DEI and discrimination - Pell grants are the example of how to do it.

Why wouldn’t the minority student need the same boost?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no problem with schools financially helping qualified students who come from disadvantaged backgrounds and would make great additions to a university. I have a big problem, however, giving priority to someone solely based on their race.

What’s the difference?

Seriously?

"Here's a break in your tuition because your family is living below the poverty threshold, yet you have excellent grades and test scores." (race-blind)
vs.
"Here's a break in your tuition because your skin is brown."

The student can’t control either of those things, so why do you support helping the poor student but not the student of color?

Omg. You can’t actually be this dense… many “students of color” aren’t poor at all. Why should they get a break on tuition due SOLELY to the color of their skin?? Pell grants are not race-based, nor should they be. Your race is irrelevant.

Why should Pell students get a boost SOLELY because they’re poor?

In part, Pell students are getting a boost because USNWR's formula gives higher scores to schools with a higher percentage of Pell Grant recipients.

The question is for you. Why do you support a boost solely based on being poor but not solely based on race? If the kid can’t control either one, what’s the difference?

You're talking to different posters. And I, for one, am done engaging with a deliberately obtuse troll.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no problem with schools financially helping qualified students who come from disadvantaged backgrounds and would make great additions to a university. I have a big problem, however, giving priority to someone solely based on their race.

What’s the difference?

Seriously?

"Here's a break in your tuition because your family is living below the poverty threshold, yet you have excellent grades and test scores." (race-blind)
vs.
"Here's a break in your tuition because your skin is brown."

The student can’t control either of those things, so why do you support helping the poor student but not the student of color?

Omg. You can’t actually be this dense… many “students of color” aren’t poor at all. Why should they get a break on tuition due SOLELY to the color of their skin?? Pell grants are not race-based, nor should they be. Your race is irrelevant.

Why should Pell students get a boost SOLELY because they’re poor?

In part, Pell students are getting a boost because USNWR's formula gives higher scores to schools with a higher percentage of Pell Grant recipients.

The question is for you. Why do you support a boost solely based on being poor but not solely based on race? If the kid can’t control either one, what’s the difference?

You're talking to different posters. And I, for one, am done engaging with a deliberately obtuse troll.

You can’t acknowledge that race alone is adversity? Wow, keep calling people trolls if that helps you avoid something you don’t want to acknowledge.