bump

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the Chinese version of Harvard. Best university in China. Do you think they care about the nonsense we do. Hint they don’t. All Chinese people.

https://www.tsinghua.edu.cn/en/Campus.htm

Attempting to have a student body racially representative of the US is a woke concept. Most people from other countries aren't even aware that it's a thing.

All these Indian parents complaining about it. India beat the US to affirmative action quotas.

Anonymous wrote:This is the Chinese version of Harvard. Best university in China. Do you think they care about the nonsense we do. Hint they don’t. All Chinese people.

https://www.tsinghua.edu.cn/en/Campus.htm

Attempting to have a student body racially representative of the US is a woke concept. Most people from other countries aren't even aware that it's a thing.

Anonymous wrote:
“Despise” is a strong word to use. Just because you don’t enjoy sports doesn’t mean other people can’t or shouldn’t.

It always seems that people who aren’t into athletics themselves “hate” athletics and want to take athletics out of schools.

I enjoy sports, but I also despise the college sports situation. These are billion dollar industries.

The Big Ten will be getting about a billion dollars a year for their college football TV rights.
SEC was getting $55 million from CBS, but that is going way up and they will get their own billion plus in deals.
The reason for the conference realignments, is because the SEC network and similar channels get more subscriber
payout from cable companies in states where they have teams. So SEC picked up Texas and Oklahoma.

Universities become sports teams combined with hedge funds, and for places with tax avoidance, real estate operations, that happen to teach some classes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Ivy is a sports league

So when people refer to "Ivy League" they are only referring to sports?

Unless they are including Duke, Stanford, MIT, then yes they are.

Anonymous wrote:This is the Chinese version of Harvard. Best university in China. Do you think they care about the nonsense we do. Hint they don’t. All Chinese people.

https://www.tsinghua.edu.cn/en/Campus.htm

So the best way to avoid all the nonsense of a democracy that includes peoples of all backgrounds is to make your country be all one race?

This is the Chinese version of Harvard. Best university in China. Do you think they care about the nonsense we do. Hint they don’t. All Chinese people.

https://www.tsinghua.edu.cn/en/Campus.htm

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only reason liberals support a holistic approach is because it opens the door for schools to have whatever racial makeup they deem appropriate. If AA students were objectively out performing white and asian students, they would be advocating for objective test scores to be the only factor. And if you tried to implement a holistic approach, you would obviously be a racist

Exactly. They’ll be against anything that might stop their social engineering experiment.

Yup, there are tens of millions of liberals keeping the same secret regarding your conspiracy theory, but none are bragging about it or feeling guilty enough about it to spill the beans. It's all about loving blacks and hating Asians.

That makes a lot of sense.

/s

Anonymous wrote:The only reason liberals support a holistic approach is because it opens the door for schools to have whatever racial makeup they deem appropriate. If AA students were objectively out performing white and asian students, they would be advocating for objective test scores to be the only factor. And if you tried to implement a holistic approach, you would obviously be a racist

Exactly. They’ll be against anything that might stop their social engineering experiment.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry but, if you want to increase the number of certain race at competitive colleges, only way is to make them care more about education, put more efforts, and work harder.

Sorry that's the realtiy, and it should be the way.

If you have to work that hard are you really that smart?

I am smart enough to know that working hard gives me better odds of success then relying on good fortune. I suspect you think you are smarter than that. Or maybe- just maybe, you believe you are entitled to success - lack of hard work notwithstanding

Elite schools are not looking for a hard worker. That is great I’m sure your boss is happy you work hard. Elite school want leaders, innovators, actors, athletes, musicians.

Congrats you are a wiz at studying, your state school will probably give you a scholarship so you’ll stay local and work hard for them until you die of a heart attack.

This is the most pathetic feet-licking by an obviously middle-income do-nothing.

Top schools don't care about athletes or musicians, it's simply an easy way in for wealthy full-pay applicants with low scores. They want "innovators" as in entrepreneurs, which doesn't mean much other than comes from wealth, has wealthy parental networks and can afford to screw around while their entrepreneurship fails. And of course they want leaders, it's 6,000 leaders leading themselves and no one else.

Top schools absolutely do care about athletes and musicians, which is why they aggressively recruit them and then bend admissions standards to admit them. They aren't doing this because these students are "full-pay" lol.

A relative of mine is a recruited athlete at an Ivy (what I would consider a minor sport). She was recruited junior year, and told that admission would be secure if she got at least 32 on ACT. Way, way below the score that would be necessary for a non-athlete.

Way lower than somebody with no other skills … you have to be 1% in something not everything. 32 indicates she can do the work and doesn’t need to test prep and take it 5 times.

?? how do you know she did test prep, took it 5 times and got 32??

Someone scoring a 32 is scoring in the 97th or 98th percentile and can do just fine. As stated in other threads, these schools weren't established to admit only the absolute smartest people possible.

I think this is the thing that throws people off. College admissions in the US is not and was never supposed to be a test and GPA only. That is France. Why? Best grades does not make the best person. And all the same person at one school does not help anyone.

If you get a 32 you can handle an Ivy.

Yea those easy bs majors. That’s why they have those.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry but, if you want to increase the number of certain race at competitive colleges, only way is to make them care more about education, put more efforts, and work harder.

Sorry that's the realtiy, and it should be the way.

If you have to work that hard are you really that smart?

I am smart enough to know that working hard gives me better odds of success then relying on good fortune. I suspect you think you are smarter than that. Or maybe- just maybe, you believe you are entitled to success - lack of hard work notwithstanding

Elite schools are not looking for a hard worker. That is great I’m sure your boss is happy you work hard. Elite school want leaders, innovators, actors, athletes, musicians.

Congrats you are a wiz at studying, your state school will probably give you a scholarship so you’ll stay local and work hard for them until you die of a heart attack.

This is the most pathetic feet-licking by an obviously middle-income do-nothing.

Top schools don't care about athletes or musicians, it's simply an easy way in for wealthy full-pay applicants with low scores. They want "innovators" as in entrepreneurs, which doesn't mean much other than comes from wealth, has wealthy parental networks and can afford to screw around while their entrepreneurship fails. And of course they want leaders, it's 6,000 leaders leading themselves and no one else.

Top schools absolutely do care about athletes and musicians, which is why they aggressively recruit them and then bend admissions standards to admit them. They aren't doing this because these students are "full-pay" lol.

A relative of mine is a recruited athlete at an Ivy (what I would consider a minor sport). She was recruited junior year, and told that admission would be secure if she got at least 32 on ACT. Way, way below the score that would be necessary for a non-athlete.

Way lower than somebody with no other skills … you have to be 1% in something not everything. 32 indicates she can do the work and doesn’t need to test prep and take it 5 times.

?? how do you know she did test prep, took it 5 times and got 32??

Someone scoring a 32 is scoring in the 97th or 98th percentile and can do just fine. As stated in other threads, these schools weren't established to admit only the absolute smartest people possible.

I think this is the thing that throws people off. College admissions in the US is not and was never supposed to be a test and GPA only. That is France. Why? Best grades does not make the best person. And all the same person at one school does not help anyone.

If you get a 32 you can handle an Ivy.

Yep. Elite colleges were always going to make room for wealthy students from prominent families, regardless of GPA and test score.

The only reason liberals support a holistic approach is because it opens the door for schools to have whatever racial makeup they deem appropriate. If AA students were objectively out performing white and asian students, they would be advocating for objective test scores to be the only factor. And if you tried to implement a holistic approach, you would obviously be a racist

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry but, if you want to increase the number of certain race at competitive colleges, only way is to make them care more about education, put more efforts, and work harder.

Sorry that's the realtiy, and it should be the way.

If you have to work that hard are you really that smart?

I am smart enough to know that working hard gives me better odds of success then relying on good fortune. I suspect you think you are smarter than that. Or maybe- just maybe, you believe you are entitled to success - lack of hard work notwithstanding

Elite schools are not looking for a hard worker. That is great I’m sure your boss is happy you work hard. Elite school want leaders, innovators, actors, athletes, musicians.

Congrats you are a wiz at studying, your state school will probably give you a scholarship so you’ll stay local and work hard for them until you die of a heart attack.

This is the most pathetic feet-licking by an obviously middle-income do-nothing.

Top schools don't care about athletes or musicians, it's simply an easy way in for wealthy full-pay applicants with low scores. They want "innovators" as in entrepreneurs, which doesn't mean much other than comes from wealth, has wealthy parental networks and can afford to screw around while their entrepreneurship fails. And of course they want leaders, it's 6,000 leaders leading themselves and no one else.

Top schools absolutely do care about athletes and musicians, which is why they aggressively recruit them and then bend admissions standards to admit them. They aren't doing this because these students are "full-pay" lol.

A relative of mine is a recruited athlete at an Ivy (what I would consider a minor sport). She was recruited junior year, and told that admission would be secure if she got at least 32 on ACT. Way, way below the score that would be necessary for a non-athlete.

Way lower than somebody with no other skills … you have to be 1% in something not everything. 32 indicates she can do the work and doesn’t need to test prep and take it 5 times.

?? how do you know she did test prep, took it 5 times and got 32??

Someone scoring a 32 is scoring in the 97th or 98th percentile and can do just fine. As stated in other threads, these schools weren't established to admit only the absolute smartest people possible.

I think this is the thing that throws people off. College admissions in the US is not and was never supposed to be a test and GPA only. That is France. Why? Best grades does not make the best person. And all the same person at one school does not help anyone.

If you get a 32 you can handle an Ivy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry but, if you want to increase the number of certain race at competitive colleges, only way is to make them care more about education, put more efforts, and work harder.

Sorry that's the realtiy, and it should be the way.

If you have to work that hard are you really that smart?

I am smart enough to know that working hard gives me better odds of success then relying on good fortune. I suspect you think you are smarter than that. Or maybe- just maybe, you believe you are entitled to success - lack of hard work notwithstanding

Elite schools are not looking for a hard worker. That is great I’m sure your boss is happy you work hard. Elite school want leaders, innovators, actors, athletes, musicians.

Congrats you are a wiz at studying, your state school will probably give you a scholarship so you’ll stay local and work hard for them until you die of a heart attack.

This is the most pathetic feet-licking by an obviously middle-income do-nothing.

Top schools don't care about athletes or musicians, it's simply an easy way in for wealthy full-pay applicants with low scores. They want "innovators" as in entrepreneurs, which doesn't mean much other than comes from wealth, has wealthy parental networks and can afford to screw around while their entrepreneurship fails. And of course they want leaders, it's 6,000 leaders leading themselves and no one else.

Top schools absolutely do care about athletes and musicians, which is why they aggressively recruit them and then bend admissions standards to admit them. They aren't doing this because these students are "full-pay" lol.

A relative of mine is a recruited athlete at an Ivy (what I would consider a minor sport). She was recruited junior year, and told that admission would be secure if she got at least 32 on ACT. Way, way below the score that would be necessary for a non-athlete.

Way lower than somebody with no other skills … you have to be 1% in something not everything. 32 indicates she can do the work and doesn’t need to test prep and take it 5 times.

?? how do you know she did test prep, took it 5 times and got 32??

Someone scoring a 32 is scoring in the 97th or 98th percentile and can do just fine. As stated in other threads, these schools weren't established to admit only the absolute smartest people possible.

so test prep or taking it 5 times has nothing to do with it

This is why I like how Georgetown requires ALL scores. I might be wrong, but I think I had to submit both my SAT scores when I applied way back in the 80s AND there was NO superscore.

Why, so they can make sure they only let in the RIGHT people?

Like, what is wrong with scoring a progressively higher score? No one said you have to be one and done.

It definitely tells a different story to score 32 the 1st time than the 5th time.

Ummm...the untold story could be that the person scoring the 32 the first time took tons of practice tests and did tons of prep work and tutoring before taking an official test.
It. Doesn't. Matter. The school sets the standard.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry but, if you want to increase the number of certain race at competitive colleges, only way is to make them care more about education, put more efforts, and work harder.

Sorry that's the realtiy, and it should be the way.

If you have to work that hard are you really that smart?

I am smart enough to know that working hard gives me better odds of success then relying on good fortune. I suspect you think you are smarter than that. Or maybe- just maybe, you believe you are entitled to success - lack of hard work notwithstanding

Elite schools are not looking for a hard worker. That is great I’m sure your boss is happy you work hard. Elite school want leaders, innovators, actors, athletes, musicians.

Congrats you are a wiz at studying, your state school will probably give you a scholarship so you’ll stay local and work hard for them until you die of a heart attack.

This is the most pathetic feet-licking by an obviously middle-income do-nothing.

Top schools don't care about athletes or musicians, it's simply an easy way in for wealthy full-pay applicants with low scores. They want "innovators" as in entrepreneurs, which doesn't mean much other than comes from wealth, has wealthy parental networks and can afford to screw around while their entrepreneurship fails. And of course they want leaders, it's 6,000 leaders leading themselves and no one else.

Top schools absolutely do care about athletes and musicians, which is why they aggressively recruit them and then bend admissions standards to admit them. They aren't doing this because these students are "full-pay" lol.

A relative of mine is a recruited athlete at an Ivy (what I would consider a minor sport). She was recruited junior year, and told that admission would be secure if she got at least 32 on ACT. Way, way below the score that would be necessary for a non-athlete.

Way lower than somebody with no other skills … you have to be 1% in something not everything. 32 indicates she can do the work and doesn’t need to test prep and take it 5 times.

?? how do you know she did test prep, took it 5 times and got 32??

Someone scoring a 32 is scoring in the 97th or 98th percentile and can do just fine. As stated in other threads, these schools weren't established to admit only the absolute smartest people possible.

so test prep or taking it 5 times has nothing to do with it

This is why I like how Georgetown requires ALL scores. I might be wrong, but I think I had to submit both my SAT scores when I applied way back in the 80s AND there was NO superscore.

Why, so they can make sure they only let in the RIGHT people?

Like, what is wrong with scoring a progressively higher score? No one said you have to be one and done.

It definitely tells a different story to score 32 the 1st time than the 5th time.