Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Swartz
100% disagree. Treating people unfairly is treating people unfairly, no matter who it is. If we can improve the situation vis a vis the influence of money let's do so, but it doesn't at all justify this approach.
|
I guess it depends on how one defines treating people "unfairly".
As I mentioned before, it's not a pure zero-sum game but for all practical purposes, it is due to very limited ivy slots. Someone wins, someone else loses. For someone it's fair, for someone else it's not. The ivy system right now advantages legacies, generous donors, and because ...
... smart american-asian kids have advantageous that other minorities have less of due to various reasons (see Pew poll I quoted) and it's not going to change anytime soon. So the way I see it, we need to change the acceptance criteria/process to give a temporary leg up.
5% of population, 22% of Harvard's freshman class. I'm not saying reduce it down to 5% but how about something like 10-15%.
Interestingly, international students are approx 23% of Harvard (GA Tech is also about 23%). Diversity from international students is definitely important but I'm all for reducing those high % to benefit more US minority enrollment.