Oct 12, 2012
From Signe Wilkinson…
(via Will Zone)
* * * * *
Category: Funny, Social Issues
I see…another shift of blame. Now socio-economic situations should be where it goes. I’m not really sure how the criticism wouldn’t be in favor of the abolishment of all preferences and privileges other than performance and meeting requirements wouldn’t be the best option for “public education”.
Of course, “son of rich donor” winds up subsidizing the education of those others and the same might apply to a lesser degree of “daughter of alum” (who even the studies opposing legacy preferences suggest is statistically likely to have a higher SAT store and, I’d guess, probably a more supportive environment).
Assuming that “born in distant state” is forced to meet the same admission requirements as anyone else, why object? (and differential tuition fees often more than cover educational costs, again subsidizing other students).
I’d also like to get rid of university athletic teams.
That leaves “minorities” (which strangely enough where Asians are concerns tries to deal with a legacy of discrimination by actively discriminating against one of the groups historically discriminated against). To that I’d add the following – that Californian experience suggests that eliminating the affirmative action significantly reduces the presence of certain minorities on campus, but seems to have no impact on the number of minorities receiving degrees and may even increase dropout rates for minorities. Meaning for that particular group, discriminating in favour of them in the admissions process may actually leave them worse off in the end.
Did you mean *decrease* dropout rates?
No. read the article supplied with the post. (click the underlined words)
(We'll never share your info)