|
Post by XAsstCoach on Apr 9, 2019 20:47:18 GMT -5
It's not just legacies that benefit from the admissions process. Children of "important" people get in because the university deems it imperative to please these "important" people. Here's an example: The university wants to attract a certain renowned scientist to their school as a full professor. This scientist is not an alum of this school. This scientist has a daughter who wants to go to that school. Wink wink. Daughter gets admitted swiftly. This scientist now is a professor at the school. Here's another example: King Abdullah of the oil-rich empire of Gazerbah Arabia (fictional, btw) has two sons (Prince Amal and Prince Kumal) and a daughter (Princess Seraffa). King Abdullah's worth is in the $300Billion range. What are the chances that those three kids get fast-tracked in the Admissions Office? Read several years ago a more-than-qualified California HS Senior was denied admissions to several California state colleges because he alleged the said colleges preferred full-pay International students.
|
|
|
Post by XAsstCoach on Apr 9, 2019 20:53:33 GMT -5
Because they fulfill at least one of the three criteria I listed. I suspect all of them donate lots and lots of $$$. So the cards have always been stacked against those coming from a more...ordinary background, despite Harvard making such a big deal over the token admissions of those who come from a struggling background. Those are still a minority of cases. Asians are fighting back in a class action lawsuit against Harvard admissions for discrimination. Hasn't played out yet, but the judge allowed it to proceed. My nephew was rejected at Harvard despite being a legacy and it didn't bother him. He's quite happy at Berkeley.
|
|
|
Post by ironhammer on Apr 9, 2019 21:16:24 GMT -5
As usual, you are missing the forest from the trees. Pathetic as usual. Most preferences in admissions are not illegal (e.g. legacy, donors, athletics, and sometimes, race). This is clear. Paying someone (a bribe essentially) to gain admission based on fraud is illegal. This is also clear. So, again, to what obvious legality were you referring? When you say people see this as unfair, are you referring to preferences in admissions, or to rich people paying money to get their kids in college illegally through a backdoor? If it's the latter, that's like saying that it's unfair that someone got to rob a bank, and they didn't. This was my point. You conflated those two issues: ... The scandal rub some people the wrong way because it was seen as unfair. How many times does "missing the forest from the trees" do I need to say? Illegality is just a small issue of a bigger problem. You really are thick headed are you? You just confirm my suspicions, you think there is no problem with college admission system? Give me a break. I am not conflating the two issue.
|
|
|
Post by ironhammer on Apr 9, 2019 21:20:25 GMT -5
So the cards have always been stacked against those coming from a more...ordinary background, despite Harvard making such a big deal over the token admissions of those who come from a struggling background. Those are still a minority of cases. Asians are fighting back in a class action lawsuit against Harvard admissions for discrimination. Hasn't played out yet, but the judge allowed it to proceed. My nephew was rejected at Harvard despite being a legacy and it didn't bother him. He's quite happy at Berkeley. Your nephew is smart then. As for the Asian lawsuit, might be a slightly different case since that involves affirmative action, and not preferential treatment based on money, status and prestige.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 9, 2019 21:28:23 GMT -5
Asians are fighting back in a class action lawsuit against Harvard admissions for discrimination. Hasn't played out yet, but the judge allowed it to proceed. My nephew was rejected at Harvard despite being a legacy and it didn't bother him. He's quite happy at Berkeley. Your nephew is smart then. As for the Asian lawsuit, might be a slightly different case since that involves affirmative action, and not preferential treatment based on money, status and prestige. The harvard lawsuit has given everyone a peak inside harvard admissions. 90,000 pages of admission applications and internal admission documents on those applicants were released in the court case. Some websites have summarized them. It is interesting and there does seem to be admissions prejudice against asians on 1 of the 6 admission scores (a personality type scores). If alum did the interview there is no stat signif difference between whites and asians on the rating. If interviewed on campus there is a HUGE difference....
|
|
|
Post by ironhammer on Apr 9, 2019 21:45:23 GMT -5
Your nephew is smart then. As for the Asian lawsuit, might be a slightly different case since that involves affirmative action, and not preferential treatment based on money, status and prestige. The harvard lawsuit has given everyone a peak inside harvard admissions. 90,000 pages of admission applications and internal admission documents on those applicants were released in the court case. Some websites have summarized them. It is interesting and there does seem to be admissions prejudice against asians on 1 of the 6 admission scores (a personality type scores). If alum did the interview there is no stat signif difference between whites and asians on the rating. If interviewed on campus there is a HUGE difference.... True, good point. Some have also pointed to cultural prejudice where Asians are perceived as passive and less willing to take intiatives by college admission and later job interviewers, when in fact it was simply a matter of cultural differences where Asians, some of them anyway, tend to be more reserved in these settings. Still, the Asian lawsuit I think is a little bit more complicated since it involves balancing different ethnicities and races in admission, that is related to, but not exactly the same as admission preference on money and connections.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 9, 2019 21:52:47 GMT -5
The harvard lawsuit has given everyone a peak inside harvard admissions. 90,000 pages of admission applications and internal admission documents on those applicants were released in the court case. Some websites have summarized them. It is interesting and there does seem to be admissions prejudice against asians on 1 of the 6 admission scores (a personality type scores). If alum did the interview there is no stat signif difference between whites and asians on the rating. If interviewed on campus there is a HUGE difference.... True, good point. Some have also pointed to cultural prejudice where Asians are perceived as passive and less willing to take intiatives by college admission and later job interviewers, when in fact it was simply a matter of cultural differences where Asians, some of them anyway, tend to be more reserved in these settings. Still, the Asian lawsuit I think is a little bit more complicated since it involves balancing different ethnicities and races in admission, that is related to, but not exactly the same as admission preference on money and connections. The summary sites also detailed legacy and other issues etc. As I posted above, I do not think legacy helps a huge amount at Harvard because there are so many alumni. The summary I read (a month or so ago) stated that legacy (undergrad) was good for a small percentage, legacy (grad school) was minuscule. If I had the link I would post it but if people are interested you could google. It was a LONG summary...
|
|
|
Post by Mocha on Apr 9, 2019 22:14:55 GMT -5
I'm just glad Frank Gallagher is still in the clear.
|
|
|
Post by Wolfgang on Apr 9, 2019 22:18:11 GMT -5
I'm just glad Frank Gallagher is still in the clear. ... You mean Jerry Lundegaard? "I'm cooperating here!"
|
|
|
Post by Wolfgang on Apr 9, 2019 22:24:31 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by volleyguy on Apr 9, 2019 22:40:05 GMT -5
Most preferences in admissions are not illegal (e.g. legacy, donors, athletics, and sometimes, race). This is clear. Paying someone (a bribe essentially) to gain admission based on fraud is illegal. This is also clear. So, again, to what obvious legality were you referring? When you say people see this as unfair, are you referring to preferences in admissions, or to rich people paying money to get their kids in college illegally through a backdoor? If it's the latter, that's like saying that it's unfair that someone got to rob a bank, and they didn't. This was my point. You conflated those two issues: How many times does "missing the forest from the trees" do I need to say? Illegality is just a small issue of a bigger problem. You really are thick headed are you? You just confirm my suspicions, you think there is no problem with college admission system? Give me a break. I am not conflating the two issue. Well, you confirm my suspicions too.
|
|
|
Post by ironhammer on Apr 9, 2019 22:41:52 GMT -5
True, good point. Some have also pointed to cultural prejudice where Asians are perceived as passive and less willing to take intiatives by college admission and later job interviewers, when in fact it was simply a matter of cultural differences where Asians, some of them anyway, tend to be more reserved in these settings. Still, the Asian lawsuit I think is a little bit more complicated since it involves balancing different ethnicities and races in admission, that is related to, but not exactly the same as admission preference on money and connections. The summary sites also detailed legacy and other issues etc. As I posted above, I do not think legacy helps a huge amount at Harvard because there are so many alumni. The summary I read (a month or so ago) stated that legacy (undergrad) was good for a small percentage, legacy (grad school) was minuscule. If I had the link I would post it but if people are interested you could google. It was a LONG summary... Legacies may not be the majority of alumni children, but they do form a sizable chunk as the cnbc article says. Just as I am sure illegal means like admission by bribery is not the majority of total cases. But each of those case may still have taken the spot of an otherwise honest and worthy applicant.
|
|
|
Post by ironhammer on Apr 9, 2019 22:42:23 GMT -5
How many times does "missing the forest from the trees" do I need to say? Illegality is just a small issue of a bigger problem. You really are thick headed are you? You just confirm my suspicions, you think there is no problem with college admission system? Give me a break. I am not conflating the two issue. Well, you confirm my suspicions too. Yeah....whatever. I see the big picture.
|
|
|
Post by Mocha on Apr 9, 2019 23:32:35 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by trainermch on Apr 10, 2019 7:19:41 GMT -5
Well, you confirm my suspicions too. Yeah....whatever. I see the big picture.
|
|