Anonymous wrote:I wonder if its fair to discriminate against young applicants for not being exposed to more opportunities.
For example, if a kid with parents focused on academics or athletics not letting them experience other things?
Usually a lot of extracurricular activities are only affordable for wealthy or poor with aid and waivers, middle class can't afford it, upper middle class can on paper but with full or high college cost, practically they can't spend much.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:no one, esp a 17/18 yo senior (or if you are DCUM 19/20 yo senior), that gets into a test score only school is picking it over a school that curates a class a la IVY+
Exacly. Which is why there is exactly one school in the US doing this--MIT. And only a very specific kind of student wants to go there, and a very specific kind of student comes out. More international students come to the US for college than anywhere else on earth, because colleges in the US do it right. All of you who think top colleges should be for 1600-only kids need to get out more.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:so everyone isn't the same robot STEM kid.
seriously......
balance. a great American college experience is based on diversity of life experiences, thought, interests, background, majors, etc.
also, it allows them to pick students they KNOW will succeed (get jobs, not drop out, etc)
lastly, holistic admissions allows them to make sure they have students in ALL departments.
But why does this matter? I ask this as a engineering graduate from a large university. They didn't care about a holistic class.
Of course they did. They offer way more than just engineering...you have to admit kids that want to study all the things they offer. They also need kids that can play in the marching band, play sports, participate in theatre, etc.
This. A university needs students in a variety of majors that do a variety of things.
Anonymous wrote:All the TO talk makes me wonder - what's the point of creating a specific class to your standards, whatever those standards are? Just a prestige thing?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:so everyone isn't the same robot STEM kid.
seriously......
balance. a great American college experience is based on diversity of life experiences, thought, interests, background, majors, etc.
also, it allows them to pick students they KNOW will succeed (get jobs, not drop out, etc)
lastly, holistic admissions allows them to make sure they have students in ALL departments.
But why does this matter? I ask this as a engineering graduate from a large university. They didn't care about a holistic class.
so maybe you weren't at a selective school (yes, i get a selective major)....but a large flagship doesn't care about "holistic" admissions bc their mission is to educate the state's people.
private colleges have different missions.
Anonymous wrote:so everyone isn't the same robot STEM kid.
seriously......
balance. a great American college experience is based on diversity of life experiences, thought, interests, background, majors, etc.
also, it allows them to pick students they KNOW will succeed (get jobs, not drop out, etc)
lastly, holistic admissions allows them to make sure they have students in ALL departments.
Anonymous wrote:To promote inquiry with exposure to different perspectives and lived experiences.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:One thing that’s missing- most elite schools can’t support 100% of their classes being the same 3 majors. They need people to subscribe to their other departments.
It’s also good to have students with excellence in a lot of different areas. To be Frank, few people get famous off of engineering or science even at the elite level, so you wanna cast the net wide for the highest probability of getting an impactful, important alum
Holistic admissions doesn't mean not admitting to the same 3 majors. It means admitting a variety of students to those 3 majors.
No it’s also a population control element. Someone has to be in the classics department, even if they’re lower tier than the CS majors. Same with area studies.
"Lower tier"?
Worse student. The CS and engineering students are some of the best students across most universities. The humanities students…eh
lol
this is why you went to a state school
I went to Amherst and Yale buddy, but good try.
Anonymous wrote:Ironically holistic admissions developed in the early 20th century at elite American universities, particularly at Harvard and Columbia, partly in response to the growing number of Jewish and Catholic students entering these traditionally WASP institutions at rates that the traditional American aristocracy viewed as a threat to their power. During this time, the percentage of Jewish students at Harvard exceeded 20%, and at Columbia 40%. So Ivy League deans decided to adopt a more holistic approach to admissions that emphasized traits like legacy, athleticism, character, and other non-academic traits partly as a way to justify admitting more "traditional" (i.e. WASP) applicants over Jewish and Catholic students. Some schools even asked applicants to list their mother's maiden names, and provide photographs in order to filter out which applicants were Jewish. Even after the end of the Jewish quotas in the 1950s, this system carried over into the present. It's a bit shocking that universities continue to practice holistic admissions since its origins are blatantly racist and anti-Semitic.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:All the TO talk makes me wonder - what's the point of creating a specific class to your standards, whatever those standards are? Just a prestige thing?
Because for financial and logistical reasons they need a certain % of the class to be “… studies” majors. It costs way more to run labs and educate STEM majors, and since tuition doesn’t vary by major, they need to balance it out. They need a way to attract and keep the rich donor and otherwise connected kids who can’t keep up with more rigorous courses. They need to enrich the said kids’ experiences by providing structured but very low pressure interactions with the slice of population they will never encounter on their own. They want to be able to field a bunch of sports teams (big money there). Etc, etc.
No, the “diverse” class is not for your benefit.