71–80 of 187 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Find a community college with a 2-2 combo program with a school with a good name. Buy your daughter a nice car. She’ll get a better education, have a car at graduation and you will save a lot of money.
What are some examples of those? I can think of only one: UCLA is a popular transfer school for folks with 2 years of CC.
Wow.. I chose the wrong career track.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The article also mentions gender and discrimination based upon nationality which could be suggestive of racial discrimination as well. Women are biased over men, foreign over domestic. This is not uncommon and likely legal ( see: Fisher vs University of Texas 2016 [1]) for now, but I also would like to see universities required to acknowledge the discrimination. Calling things equal or need based and then actively en…
The article does say gender discrimination and foreign discrimination but it doesn't mention racial discrimination.
One of my favorite realizations is that more things are free when you have money. People just want your business. It’s expensive being poor.
We should be drumming into heads from an early age the real cost of debt, the value of saving, time value of money, when debt makes sense and when it doesn't, etc.
Anyone can open an online account at Vanguard. Imagine what could be done in a generation or two if people would participate in the markets instead of buying lottery tickets and being bitter and envious about "the rich"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How is it a downside of diversity out inclusion? Sends more a downside of lying.
Sure, I think we are saying the same thing? It's easier to lie about diversity and inclusion now that it has become popular. Maybe even mandatory because many people want to attend a school or work at a company that values diversity. I remember during orientation they showed a Pride video. I thought it was unrelated but my co-workers teared up. Previously, companies wouldn't have bothered or knew how to.
It seems like you're faulting society's wish to increase diversity for lies about diversity. And, sure, that's true in the sense that being ask about the issue is necessary for an untruthful answer–but that's just a meaningless truism.
Large changes take time, and there are always setbacks on the way. The environmental movement created the concept of "greenwashing", which seems similar. But even that is progress of sorts, because it's literally "PR for environmentalism". When it's exposed, it promotes schemes such as certifications. And even when not exposed, it establishes good practices as the new norm for next generation.
The central problem here is that Stanford is saying one thing and doing another. The central question, which isn't asked in the article, is why. Stanford is creating an exclusive, private club, as is their right, but not being upfront about the rules of exclusion. More importantly, the reasons for exclusion.
I was thinking about this myself. In addition to the PR benefit when soliciting alumni donations ("This money is helping needy students") I think there could be a more immediate business reason: I bet a lot of finance types (or otherwise wealthier applicants) don't apply for financial aid (and don't feel bad about not receiving an offer) because there's this myth about it being need based. Now it seems like everyone…
My daughter is applying for colleges. When a college says that they only offer need-based aid, what it means is that we can't afford it. Yet I've encouraged her to apply to a few of those colleges anyway, based on the assumption that they don't only offer need based aid.
Instead of need-based aid, try need-blind colleges. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Need-blind_admission
My daughter is applying for colleges. When a college says that they only offer need-based aid, what it means is that we can't afford it. Yet I've encouraged her to apply to a few of those colleges anyway, based on the assumption that they don't only offer need based aid.
Find a community college with a 2-2 combo program with a school with a good name. Buy your daughter a nice car. She’ll get a better education, have a car at graduation and you will save a lot of money.
Stanfurd can favor students born on a blue moon with an extra nipple for all I care. But claiming all scholarships are need based, giving them to rich students, and then telling students to not discuss their aid is disgusting. In my book this is on par with the wage fixing between Apple and the other tech giants. This is the downside of diversity and inclusion. Companies and schools have gotten so good at paying lip…
How is it a downside of diversity out inclusion? Sends more a downside of lying.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> shitty security is at virtually all universities. Shitty compared to whom? Who are the examplars of information security universities aren't matching? Academia security doesn't look so bad compared to governmental or corporate security. Security involves trade-offs and some of universities' lower security is a conscious choice to not impair academic freedom or collaboration. > apparently doesn't hire any. If their…
I’ve done some consulting with higher education, but am not an expert in the vertical. My opinion, based on my observation at a half dozen campuses is that academic computing is ok, but the central services type stuff (payroll, admissions, accounting, HR) is often underfunded and struggling to meet mushrooming compliance requirements. Compared to a similar sized organization in another sector, they aren’t as good as…
Our security team is relatively new. When I first started back in 2013 we didn't really have one. So if you had a few programmers that didn't understand security, many things got through. We do a much better job now, but I can see how other universities can really struggle.