Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:They can’t get rid of athletic preferences or they won’t be able to field a team. It makes no sense.
I still don’t see how colleges won’t be able to still keep doing it with.holistic admissions . The whole process is such a random crapshoot anyway,
Maybe sports really shouldn't be that important to colleges. Much better things to spend the money on.
It's customer-driven, and you don't get to decide where I should spend my money.
what customer? if they want to be business, they should pay taxes like businesses and don't get any State/Federal supports
I am the customer. I am full-pay for multiple kids. I get to choose who gets my money. Others have the same choice. If a school wants that money, they better provide the product I want. Otherwise that money goes to their competitor.
Ok, how much are you paying per year. How much is a football team making from season ticket holders, their conference's TV deal, even donors who only care about football or basketball?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:They can’t get rid of athletic preferences or they won’t be able to field a team. It makes no sense.
I still don’t see how colleges won’t be able to still keep doing it with.holistic admissions . The whole process is such a random crapshoot anyway,
Maybe sports really shouldn't be that important to colleges. Much better things to spend the money on.
It's customer-driven, and you don't get to decide where I should spend my money.
what customer? if they want to be business, they should pay taxes like businesses and don't get any State/Federal supports
This is a great idea. Make colleges pay taxes on their property and their endowments.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I am fine with that. College admissions needs a massive overhaul.
Depending on what the Supreme Court says, one of the biggest changes will be elimination of any sort of “Women in STEM” outreach programs, preferences, or scholarships.
Be careful what you (ignorantly) wish for.
Sure. Unless you are an Asian American woman. What this article fails to mention is that the whole college admissions process has been blatantly racist against Asians. Also since we are talking about women girls in general are disadvantaged under admissions to make way for more males that are less qualified. Again college admission here needs an overhaul. Many other countries rely on other meritocratic measures for competitive college admissions and I am all for that.
Curious which countries you are referring that have meritocratic methods?
China, Japan, and South Korea. And those kids literally kill themselves if they don’t gain admission. Suicide and depression rates among teens are off the chart in those countries. It’s collective trauma.
Cheating on tests in these countries is rampant, and politically-connected and wealthy families can very easily buy their way into the top universities. I figured these would be examples of the countries offered...add India as another country where the admissions process is a mess.
Asians and South Asians cheat on standardized tests? Really?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:They can’t get rid of athletic preferences or they won’t be able to field a team. It makes no sense.
I still don’t see how colleges won’t be able to still keep doing it with.holistic admissions . The whole process is such a random crapshoot anyway,
Maybe sports really shouldn't be that important to colleges. Much better things to spend the money on.
It's customer-driven, and you don't get to decide where I should spend my money.
what customer? if they want to be business, they should pay taxes like businesses and don't get any State/Federal supports
This is a great idea. Make colleges pay taxes on their property and their endowments.
and profit from the sports
Certainly!! What colleges are doing is obvious tax fraud.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:They can’t get rid of athletic preferences or they won’t be able to field a team. It makes no sense.
I still don’t see how colleges won’t be able to still keep doing it with.holistic admissions . The whole process is such a random crapshoot anyway,
Maybe sports really shouldn't be that important to colleges. Much better things to spend the money on.
It's customer-driven, and you don't get to decide where I should spend my money.
what customer? if they want to be business, they should pay taxes like businesses and don't get any State/Federal supports
This is a great idea. Make colleges pay taxes on their property and their endowments.
and profit from the sports
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:They can’t get rid of athletic preferences or they won’t be able to field a team. It makes no sense.
I still don’t see how colleges won’t be able to still keep doing it with.holistic admissions . The whole process is such a random crapshoot anyway,
Maybe sports really shouldn't be that important to colleges. Much better things to spend the money on.
It's customer-driven, and you don't get to decide where I should spend my money.
what customer? if they want to be business, they should pay taxes like businesses and don't get any State/Federal supports
I am the customer. I am full-pay for multiple kids. I get to choose who gets my money. Others have the same choice. If a school wants that money, they better provide the product I want. Otherwise that money goes to their competitor.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Additionally, I think a by-product of the Supreme Court ruling will be the dismantlement of the historically black colleges and universities. They will no longer qualify for federal funding because that would be “racist” under the SC’s twisted logic. I give HCBUs maybe a decade before the vast majority are shut down due to disqualification for federal funds and programs.
The consequences of this decision will be Orwellian.
Trump wholeheartedly supported HBCUs.
Trump never wholehearted supported anything but Trump and KFC.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:They can’t get rid of athletic preferences or they won’t be able to field a team. It makes no sense.
I still don’t see how colleges won’t be able to still keep doing it with.holistic admissions . The whole process is such a random crapshoot anyway,
Maybe sports really shouldn't be that important to colleges. Much better things to spend the money on.
It's customer-driven, and you don't get to decide where I should spend my money.
what customer? if they want to be business, they should pay taxes like businesses and don't get any State/Federal supports
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:They can’t get rid of athletic preferences or they won’t be able to field a team. It makes no sense.
I still don’t see how colleges won’t be able to still keep doing it with.holistic admissions . The whole process is such a random crapshoot anyway,
Maybe sports really shouldn't be that important to colleges. Much better things to spend the money on.
It's customer-driven, and you don't get to decide where I should spend my money.
what customer? if they want to be business, they should pay taxes like businesses and don't get any State/Federal supports
This is a great idea. Make colleges pay taxes on their property and their endowments.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:They can’t get rid of athletic preferences or they won’t be able to field a team. It makes no sense.
I still don’t see how colleges won’t be able to still keep doing it with.holistic admissions . The whole process is such a random crapshoot anyway,
Maybe sports really shouldn't be that important to colleges. Much better things to spend the money on.
It's customer-driven, and you don't get to decide where I should spend my money.
what customer? if they want to be business, they should pay taxes like businesses and don't get any State/Federal supports
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I am fine with that. College admissions needs a massive overhaul.
Depending on what the Supreme Court says, one of the biggest changes will be elimination of any sort of “Women in STEM” outreach programs, preferences, or scholarships.
Be careful what you (ignorantly) wish for.
Good riddance.
I wouldn't mind either, but the bolded claim is false, it's supposed to scare us into maintaining institutionalized racism forever,
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:They can’t get rid of athletic preferences or they won’t be able to field a team. It makes no sense.
I still don’t see how colleges won’t be able to still keep doing it with.holistic admissions . The whole process is such a random crapshoot anyway,
Maybe sports really shouldn't be that important to colleges. Much better things to spend the money on.
It's customer-driven, and you don't get to decide where I should spend my money.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I am fine with that. College admissions needs a massive overhaul.
Depending on what the Supreme Court says, one of the biggest changes will be elimination of any sort of “Women in STEM” outreach programs, preferences, or scholarships.
Be careful what you (ignorantly) wish for.
Good riddance.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I am fine with that. College admissions needs a massive overhaul.
This.
Test everyone based on same criteria. No double standands based on bs this or bs that.
BS like in-state versus OOS?
No. State colleges (esp. land grant colleges) exist primarily to serve the students of the state. And are supported by the taxpayers of the state, who also subsidize in state tuition. There are legit policy reasons that have nothing to do with a protected class to give an in state preference. This argument is over protected classes, like race, gender, region and national origin. State of residency is not a protected class.
Exactly. Of course. So, right off the bat you’ve conceded that schools shouldn’t be obliged to “test everyone based on the same criteria,” as the PP said.
Here’s another institutional priority I feel sure passes constitutional muster: solvency.
I’m feeling confident football also passes the test, at least at schools with a long football tradition. (Not so sure about Chicago.)
There’s a long list of institutional priorities that may have a disparate impact on Asian (or Black) enrollment, that will nevertheless pass constitutional muster. We are not headed to a “test everyone the same” world, not now and not any time soon.
In fact, with the rise in popularity of TO, we are headed in the opposite direction at many schools.
I also want to add that no one is looking at root cause. The answer is really in K-12 education and pushing equal opportunities from the beginning. But that is too hard and too expensive so we are all going to navel gaze about college admissions.
Nope. I taught first grade. Kids arrive at elementary school with profound differences. The answer is birth to age five, and more probably birth to age three.
You're too far in the future about about 3 years. Try -50 years from conception to third trimester. THese kids are born stupid.
No way. My sister was adopted at birth from a low income parent. A lot of relatives in prison, died early from drugs, and no one went to college. My sister was salutatorian and has her PhD.
It's definitely how kids are being raised (or at least 90%).
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:They can’t get rid of athletic preferences or they won’t be able to field a team. It makes no sense.
I still don’t see how colleges won’t be able to still keep doing it with.holistic admissions . The whole process is such a random crapshoot anyway,
Maybe sports really shouldn't be that important to colleges. Much better things to spend the money on.