Anonymous wrote:Most first generation American kids aren't necessarily poor but their parents have no idea of how to navigate grade school or college here in US.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If you don’t like the admissions preferences of a particular school, don’t send your kid there.
how does that relate to OP's thread topic?
OP seems to be trying to make this thread about affirmative action & disagrees with colleges having preferences for FGLI students. She is free to send her kids elsewhere if she disagrees with those preferences!
This.
+1 and trying to add race to the conversation by equating FGLI to URM when research has shown that most URMs at elite schools are not FGLI. Look at what was revealed from the Harvard SC case.
Anonymous wrote:If you don’t like the admissions preferences of a particular school, don’t send your kid there.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It really means many of them were academically less qualified to get into Princeton in the first place. They took advantage of the rest of the applicants, got a free ride (FA and more), and now they're asking for more free rides?
Your comment indicates that you have no understanding of what it means to be from a family where no one has gone to college and there is no money for anything but necessities.
I do understand. But where does it end in terms of giving them free rides?
+1 👍
Princeton is not a government welfare office. It’s not meals-on-wheels. It’s not Salvation Army. Got it?
It’s a private institution. Barring discriminating against protected classes, it can admit & give FA to whomever it pleaaes.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If you don’t like the admissions preferences of a particular school, don’t send your kid there.
how does that relate to OP's thread topic?
OP seems to be trying to make this thread about affirmative action & disagrees with colleges having preferences for FGLI students. She is free to send her kids elsewhere if she disagrees with those preferences!
This.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Key point: these students are of lower caliber because they are beneficiaries of affirmative action/preferences. Why would anyone be surprised they don’t perform as well? The gap is likely even bigger than reported in that the FGLI kids may have less rigorous majors (think African American studies vs STEM)
Um, in my experience rich kids who went to private school are majoring in English, History, Government, Philosophy etc. Not kids who went to public school.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If you don’t like the admissions preferences of a particular school, don’t send your kid there.
how does that relate to OP's thread topic?
OP seems to be trying to make this thread about affirmative action & disagrees with colleges having preferences for FGLI students. She is free to send her kids elsewhere if she disagrees with those preferences!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:There was a senior survey at Princeton which had a breakdown for GPA across income levels, first-gen status, etc: https://projects.dailyprincetonian.com/senior-survey-2022/academics.html
50% of first-gen students had a 3.6 GPA or higher, compared to 69% of non-first gen students.
The lowest income students by family household (below 40K) at Princeton had an average GPA of a 3.5, while the highest income students had a 3.72.
32% of the lowest income students reported cheating on an assignment or exam, compared to 21% of students overall.
Only 49% of students on financial aid reported having a job lined up for graduation, compared to 62% of those not on FA. Expected income for those on FA was 84K one year after graduating, compared to 124K for those not on FA. Students on all household income levels below 125K reported expected earnings under 84K, while all those over that level reported at least 115K.
These are considerable gaps. If higher ed is supposed to be the great equalizer, why are Princeton grads seeing such discrepancies corresponding with their background?
These "discrepancies" demonstrate what should be extremely obvious to everyone, which is that the "elite" schools are admitting low-income / first-gen students who are not academically qualified, and are doing so for ideological reasons.
Disagree. I work with low-income, first-gen students in one of the most dysfunctional school districts in the country. If, and this is a real life example of a student in our program, a young person who speaks four languages, spent several years in a refugee camp with minimal schooling, worked two jobs in high school goes to an elite college an earns a 3.0 they have more natural ability and tenacity than any prep school kid who rolls in and gets a 3.8.
x1000000
dp.. very true... however, recruiters at companies won't care about the fact that this person was a refugee, and will only look at their GPA, and internships. Companies don't care about sob stories.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If you don’t like the admissions preferences of a particular school, don’t send your kid there.
how does that relate to OP's thread topic?
Anonymous wrote:Key point: these students are of lower caliber because they are beneficiaries of affirmative action/preferences. Why would anyone be surprised they don’t perform as well? The gap is likely even bigger than reported in that the FGLI kids may have less rigorous majors (think African American studies vs STEM)
Anonymous wrote:If you don’t like the admissions preferences of a particular school, don’t send your kid there.