Reply to Update on Harvard Lawsuit

Forum Index » College and University Discussion

Reply to "Update on Harvard Lawsuit"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]

[b]About top tier colleges NEVER admitting based solely on academic achievement[/b] - until they started admitting women, they NEVER admitted women before, until they started admitting Blacks, they NEVER admitted before.  After all this practice is not like written in the constitution and should not be violated!  So this argument is moot.  Times have changed.  About CalTech being boring - ask the students who knowingly and willingly studying there.  Students interested in academic excellence will select top tier colleges when such colleges admit solely based on academics.  Students interested in academics and sports (even those wanting to have fun tailgating etc., not necessarily being on sports teams) can choose those colleges that have greater than 10% admit rate and practice current system of preferences.  The colleges that boast less than 10% admit rate and every year make great marketing effort to attract even more students to bring down the admit rate to 5% and below (20 applicants to choose from to fill one seat) should not be allowed to apportion precious few seats to nonacademic preferences - except on the basis of first gen or economically poor families.

I don't even know how many Asians are among admitted athletes at Harvard and I am not concerned about that.[/quote]

So by "academic achievement" you mean test scores?

Also, as someone asked before -- why should they admit based on criteria YOU select.  They had good reasons to admit African Americans and women.  What is their reason to change to admit based on test scores now?

I can think of many why they should not.  For instance, you can make a strong case that someone who can get a 3.8/32 while playing sports is a better admit than one with a 4.0/35 with less time on ECs.  It's not for me to judge which is better for Harvard to take based on what helps them acieve their institutional goals. And what about majors?  That data point is often left out of any analysis...[/quote]

Any employer, investor, potential partner, spouse--almost anybody--would prefer the former. Someone who can achieve academic success, while also being emotionally and socially successful with an ability to understand social cues, react to stressful work situations, make emotional connections. The very smart people at Harvard understand that those students who have one single, sole focus, do not wind up being the most successful leaders in this world. To the PP with his lame brained scheme, please, get your DC to a social skills class and have them play some sports. Let them have fun in life and learn how to connect with people. [/quote]

OMG!  What makes you think someone who is focused on developing academic excellence has no time or opportunity to develop social and emotional skills, will not be able to react to stressful work situations, and make emotional connections?  It isn't this or that situation.  Don't think one has to be involved in sports to the extent of colleges competing with one another to recruit them in preference category to develop the skills you point out.  There are avenues like charity work, play team sports for fun, do part time job, work at summer camps, be involved and organize for social causes, be active in politics and canvass, etc.  You can make friends, interact with strangers, face varied situations without playing travel sports, pay lots of money to private sports coaches, attend expensive sports camps to develop to be a recruited athlete to be a social being of admirable qualities.  Just grow up will you!  [/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