Reply to Turns out, Harvard students aren’t that smart after all

Forum Index » College and University Discussion

Reply to "Turns out, Harvard students aren’t that smart after all"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Entitlement is when you are less qualified and feel you have to bring in non-merit characteristics to demand you be admitted.
[/quote]

"non-merit characteristics".  Why do you get to decide what constitutes merit to Harvard?

That, right there, is my definition of "entitlement".[/quote]

DP  Because being a particular race inherently has no merit.
[/quote]

Then being a relatively mediocre athlete or the kid of an alum has no merit either. [/quote]

“Relatively mediocre athlete”?  Are you speaking of Division 1 Harvard?  Those kids are not “relatively mediocre” even if most of them are not good enough to play basketball at Duke or Kentucky.

Giving a preference to legacy is done to support endowment growth, the lifeblood of a college and primary job of a college president.

You clearly have no idea what you are talking about.[/quote]

Yes, I am. If you stop bootlicking athletes and actually look at them, they aren't at the top of the recruiting lists. They aren't the best athletes of their year. They're fine compared to the average non-athlete, but they're being rewarded for a skill level that no other applicant is rewarded. The average violinist who make all-state orchestra doesn't get a second look. You make all-county in baseball and Harvard will look at you because that's who they can get.

You don't know that legacy preference actually supports endowment growth. It's a cute story, but we have evidence that removing legacy would not hamper it. MIT has a $27 billion endowment and doesn't give a legacy preference. UT Austin has has a $30 billion endowment and doesn't give a legacy preference. If anything, eliminating legacy preference would increase donations because you're broadening your alumni base.[/quote]

No, you clearly do not know what you are talking about, or your are being dishonest.  Your reliance on use of pejorative terminology is also indicative of the weakness of your position.

To dispense your points quickly:

- Around 7% of high school athletes play a sport in college.  I am sure your understanding of math informs that 7% is not "mediocre":

https://scholarshipstats.com/varsityodds#:~:text=Overall%20a%20little%20over%207,at%20NCAA%20Division%20I%20schools.

- Mentioning large endowments of schools that don't currently give legacy preference offers zero proof that it does not benefit those that do.  That's a strawman fallacy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

You clearly do not know what you are talking about.

PS - no family member is an athlete or a legacy, I do have a kid at an Ivy solely on academics, so no dog in this fight.[/quote]

So you only need to be in the 93rd percentile to play sports in college? I had no idea the number was that high. Thanks for making my point. Do you only need to be in the 93rd percentile on your SAT (that's a 1360)?

So, on the legacy admissions, let me understand this since I don't know what I'm talking about.

The argument (with no support whatsoever) is that legacy preference leads to higher donations leads to greater endowment and that is the sole and overriding concern of a college president.

I've seen nothing that makes me think this is true and the actual data may be hard to come by. But you know who does have the data? College presidents.

I note that MIT and Texas, both colleges with presidents, who supposedly care about the endowment over everything else, choose to leave all this money on the table and not give a preference to legacies. Seems to me to be a real world example that someone out there doesn't think the two are tied. And they're not the only ones. Amherst just said they were doing away with legacy admissions. I would think the president of Amherst (or CalTech or Johns Hopkins) would consider this point with the reams of donation data and surveys that they have of their alumni. And they decided to eliminate it.

Look I'm just a stupid person, but at least I try to think through the problem, rather than just asserting my gut feeling and claiming that I'm right.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics