Anonymous wrote:The full pay pay for the merit and financial aid. How else can you run a place?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Not surprising at all - there is a lowered requirement for those kids that does not apply to the rest of the world.
Not sure about Penn and Georgetown, but if you are "unqualified" at MIT you are going to get destroyed. Your life will be miserable. Unlikely you will graduate.
Seeing as almost every person who enters MIT’s halls exits in 4 years, this just isn’t true
"Almost every person" isn't an unqualified rich kid who bought their way in, idiot.
Anonymous wrote:Athletes should be next
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Not surprising at all - there is a lowered requirement for those kids that does not apply to the rest of the world.
Not sure about Penn and Georgetown, but if you are "unqualified" at MIT you are going to get destroyed. Your life will be miserable. Unlikely you will graduate.
Seeing as almost every person who enters MIT’s halls exits in 4 years, this just isn’t true
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Not surprising at all - there is a lowered requirement for those kids that does not apply to the rest of the world.
Not sure about Penn and Georgetown, but if you are "unqualified" at MIT you are going to get destroyed. Your life will be miserable. Unlikely you will graduate.
Anonymous wrote:Not surprising at all - there is a lowered requirement for those kids that does not apply to the rest of the world.
Anonymous wrote:Rich/poor is not a constitutionally protected class. Schools give priority to poor kids (at the expense of middle class kids) - I do not get the objection to admitting rich kids who actually pay full tuition and then some.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Behind the paywall, what does the article say exactly? Simply demonstrating the admission rate difference among income tiers isn't a good enough argument without controlling for merit factors.
It isn’t a good enough factor, period. It isn’t illegal to favor wealthy people, just as it isn’t illegal to favor low income people.
Anonymous wrote:Rich/poor is not a constitutionally protected class. Schools give priority to poor kids (at the expense of middle class kids) - I do not get the objection to admitting rich kids who actually pay full tuition and then some.
Anonymous wrote:Behind the paywall, what does the article say exactly? Simply demonstrating the admission rate difference among income tiers isn't a good enough argument without controlling for merit factors.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Behind the paywall, what does the article say exactly? Simply demonstrating the admission rate difference among income tiers isn't a good enough argument without controlling for merit factors.
They're in discovery now:
"At M.I.T., two children recommended by a wealthy banker with ties to a university board member got special treatment, according to the documents. In a deposition, the school’s director of admissions said the two children, who appeared on a “cases of interest” list, were among those who “we would really have not otherwise admitted.”
...
"Penn’s former associate dean of admissions, Sara Harberson, testified last year in a deposition in the case that a B.S.I. tag meant the student’s family was a big donor or had connections to the board. Those students “were untouchable,” Ms. Harberson said, and “would get in almost 100 percent of the time.”
Ms. Harberson said the admissions office was powerless to deny the student “even if the student was incredibly weak, even if the student had a major issue in the application.”"
Seems like they have more than different rates of admission