The Squeaky wheels are at it again.
It’s seems like a bunch of comatose education reformers suddenly woke up and discovered legacy admissions in higher education, especially the more prestigious schools. Now this “reformers” claim that this is unfair that there are set asides for legacy students and the children of large donators.
Now think about this, many of the poorer students are subsidized by the endowments of these prestigious schools. Can the poorer students black and brown afford to go to these prestigious schools even with Pell Grants.
Can these prestigious schools hirer prestigious professors with only tuition.
Can these prestigious schools do research that benefit’s mankind without these large endowments that mostly only bring prestige to these schools.
Isn’t one of the major importance of going to a prestigious school is to net work with the children of the powerful.
Now if these so called reformers can explain to me why the rich alumni should give to the school without some sort of guarantee that their off slings could get a leg up I’m all ears.
*** Do most black, brown and Asian students intermingle with white students, if not then why not.
***These prestigious universities are private institutions, it’s a slippery slope( please don’t equate that statement with can’t eat at lunch counters, or sleep in private hotels, it’s not the same) if the government tells that a school can’t set aside seats.
*** Asians are suing some Ivy League school for limiting their number because of set asides for black and brown students.
******Do a mental exercise, let’s assume that the incoming class of 1,000 students and 100 ( or 10%) are set aside for legacy students and students of large donors. That leaves 900 seats for every other applicants.
If that is an almost yearly occurrence, the real class is 900 students. If one figures it that way there really is no discrimination in class selection because of legacy and donations.
