Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If they prioritize economic diversity over race black / Hispanic numbers return to pre affirmative action while increasing the Asian numbers to 50%, but the white numbers take a 12% hit, it this happens Blum will say universities are using economics as a proxy for race to discriminate against whites

The reason they never wanted to do income based affirmative action is because the majority of smart poor kids are rural whites. Those are the absolute last group of people that college administrators want to help.

It gave us JD Vance.

He went to Ohio State on the GI Bill, did really well there, & got in Yale Law based on grades & LSAT. Where was the Affirmative Action?

Doing well at Ohio State during the time Vance attended was not hard. It was not a particularly academic school at the undergrad level.

Anonymous wrote:My kid is at a title 1 high school, but we would be full pay. We live in a. Urban area, and our zip code includes houses that are $50k and houses that are $2 mil. Assuming schools are need blind, and the parents profession is not something like orthopedic surgeon, how can they tell if we are low income or not?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With AI progressing so quickly, college prestige may matter less and less. People won’t need a degree to prove their abilities. Seeing so many Gen Z job struggles—unemployment, low wages, outsourcing, H-1B competition—makes it feel like our kids are just fighting to survive. It’s hard to know whether a college degree still makes a difference.

Social media and AI were the worst creations in history

Woke and humanities majors are worse.

The way white people use woke needs to stop, just go back to social justice warrior, because woke actually means to be aware of the deep state and the tricks that they play, sounds alot like maga , doesn't it

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If they prioritize economic diversity over race black / Hispanic numbers return to pre affirmative action while increasing the Asian numbers to 50%, but the white numbers take a 12% hit, it this happens Blum will say universities are using economics as a proxy for race to discriminate against whites

The reason they never wanted to do income based affirmative action is because the majority of smart poor kids are rural whites. Those are the absolute last group of people that college administrators want to help.

It gave us JD Vance.

He went to Ohio State on the GI Bill, did really well there, & got in Yale Law based on grades & LSAT. Where was the Affirmative Action?

Anonymous wrote:My kid is at a title 1 high school, but we would be full pay. We live in a. Urban area, and our zip code includes houses that are $50k and houses that are $2 mil. Assuming schools are need blind, and the parents profession is not something like orthopedic surgeon, how can they tell if we are low income or not?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If they prioritize economic diversity over race black / Hispanic numbers return to pre affirmative action while increasing the Asian numbers to 50%, but the white numbers take a 12% hit, it this happens Blum will say universities are using economics as a proxy for race to discriminate against whites

The reason they never wanted to do income based affirmative action is because the majority of smart poor kids are rural whites. Those are the absolute last group of people that college administrators want to help.

It gave us JD Vance.

He went to Ohio State on the GI Bill, did really well there, & got in Yale Law based on grades & LSAT. Where was the Affirmative Action?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With AI progressing so quickly, college prestige may matter less and less. People won’t need a degree to prove their abilities. Seeing so many Gen Z job struggles—unemployment, low wages, outsourcing, H-1B competition—makes it feel like our kids are just fighting to survive. It’s hard to know whether a college degree still makes a difference.

Social media and AI were the worst creations in history

Woke and humanities majors are worse.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a child who is now a freshman at an Ivy and attended a private feeder and is ending the semester with 99-100% across the board in all classes, frankly without studying. There are kids who routinely get 15-20% on the exams and they aren't the athletes who they say are primarily the private school kids and/or kids from areas like the DMV.

I get that colleges want to extend opportunities to kids who otherwise would never get a leap up in life and I think this is probably a very good institutional priority. But a result you have many, many kids who are very average at these schools (and again, they've generally not the athletes). My kid says the kids in their private school classes were far more impressive than the kids in their Ivy classes. This is NOT a private/public school debate as I'm sure it would be the same if he/she went to a magnet or high performing public.

my kid is at yale and went to one of the most rigorous private high schools. he's studying his ass off.

any kid, at any college, can skate through. you pick your classes, your professors, your major. and if you want to take the easiest road, it's available to you. or you can make other choices. I can honestly see the benefits of either way, assuming kids who are not going to classes are taking advantage of other things happening on campus instead, not just drinking and scrolling

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With AI progressing so quickly, college prestige may matter less and less. People won’t need a degree to prove their abilities. Seeing so many Gen Z job struggles—unemployment, low wages, outsourcing, H-1B competition—makes it feel like our kids are just fighting to survive. It’s hard to know whether a college degree still makes a difference.

Social media and AI were the worst creations in history

Woke and humanities majors are worse.

People who ignorantly regurgitate MAGA dogma from Fox News are the worst.

Note that I don't love extreme wokeness and believe DEI went overboard. But MAGA virtue signaling that you are falling in line with the party line is worse. If Trump told you to stick your head up your butt you would do it. No questions asked.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If they prioritize economic diversity over race black / Hispanic numbers return to pre affirmative action while increasing the Asian numbers to 50%, but the white numbers take a 12% hit, it this happens Blum will say universities are using economics as a proxy for race to discriminate against whites

The reason they never wanted to do income based affirmative action is because the majority of smart poor kids are rural whites. Those are the absolute last group of people that college administrators want to help.

It gave us JD Vance.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a child who is now a freshman at an Ivy and attended a private feeder and is ending the semester with 99-100% across the board in all classes, frankly without studying. There are kids who routinely get 15-20% on the exams and they aren't the athletes who they say are primarily the private school kids and/or kids from areas like the DMV.

I get that colleges want to extend opportunities to kids who otherwise would never get a leap up in life and I think this is probably a very good institutional priority. But a result you have many, many kids who are very average at these schools (and again, they've generally not the athletes). My kid says the kids in their private school classes were far more impressive than the kids in their Ivy classes. This is NOT a private/public school debate as I'm sure it would be the same if he/she went to a magnet or high performing public.

The gulf in the classroom at these Ivies is now HUGE in 2025. You have kids (mine and other from high performing privates/publics) who are doing next to no work and getting perfect grades and others who are really, really struggling. It's striking. Ask any kid who is a freshman at one.

My son isn’t seeing that. His course sizes are small and every kid he meets is highly intelligent (per him). He loves it. Catholic school kid- very prepared for the rigor- won a departmental award 1st year. Maybe they aren’t taking the sane courses- but he’s not seeing what you describe.

+1 and certainly not seeing everyone getting all As. Grading isn’t cake anymore. They work hard.

People just make sh@t up on this board like it’s gospel.

Anonymous wrote:I have a child who is now a freshman at an Ivy and attended a private feeder and is ending the semester with 99-100% across the board in all classes, frankly without studying. There are kids who routinely get 15-20% on the exams and they aren't the athletes who they say are primarily the private school kids and/or kids from areas like the DMV.

I get that colleges want to extend opportunities to kids who otherwise would never get a leap up in life and I think this is probably a very good institutional priority. But a result you have many, many kids who are very average at these schools (and again, they've generally not the athletes). My kid says the kids in their private school classes were far more impressive than the kids in their Ivy classes. This is NOT a private/public school debate as I'm sure it would be the same if he/she went to a magnet or high performing public.