Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I think it will vary. Some schools will be happy to just enroll the best students and other will drop aa in favor of economic diversity
You make it sound like wanting diversity is at odds with enrolling the best students. I find these assumptions to be suspect. Like the posters who define merit as whatever benefits them the most.
The way diversity is defined and implemented today, yes, it is absolutely at odds at enrolling the best students. There is such a huge skills gap between the average URM and non URM applicant, that there is a serious shortage of equivalently qualified URM applicants in the application pipeline. If a college insists on getting anything close to proportional representation despite this, then by definition they have to pick lower qualified URM students to fill their class. The only way to claim that diversity does not affect quality today, is to redefine the very meaning of the word merit to something nonsensical, like Harvard did by introducing spurious variables like the personality ratings into the mix.
Also in every country where diversity is actually present, it has led to destruction of social cohesion, social trust and increase in friction. The former Yugoslavia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Myanmar being some examples) Diversity advocate have only recently recognized this because now they are insisting on "inclusion" as being another responsibility of the non URM pool. This is just code for non URM's having to walk on eggshells, so as not to trigger or piss off URM's on campus. It's a fool's errand. Human kind is tribal by nature and just like diversity brought strife all over the world, it is destroying America's campus environment today.