Umm.. hmm.. well I thought this was obvious and think there is benefit to the students who don't come from elite backgrounds. The point of these universities is to not only give an education but socially connect students. If you are a student without a family that has powerful connections you could potentially meet one of these students and become friends, thus increasing your social power. Going to a top notch University is not just about learning. I learned more and had better instructors at city college, because they cared more and were more available. Speaking with busy TAs at a top notch school weren't nearly as helpful. Going to a top notch school is about socially enriching yourself with others who are ambitious and connected. It's about synergy and having a diverse student body only increases that synergy.
UC Berkeley inappropriately admitted students as favors to donors
221–230 of 456 posts
Re: UC Berkeley inappropriately admitted students as favors to donors
#222I have failed to be outraged. 1/3 of them were admitted as student athletes. Everyone knows that it is official policy at most schools to accept people with athletic ability who would not qualify academically. Why? Because those athletic programs make the university a lot of money! How is admitting someone because their family gave a lot of money any different in principle? It is just a question of reducing how many…
That's an excellent point. I'd be perfectly fine with eliminating both legacy admissions and athletic scholarships at public universities. It reminds me of the Lori Loughlin case, where she was arrested not because bribing a university to admit your child is unfair to other applicants and sullies the ideal of an academic meritocracy, but because she didn't follow the university's established process for bribery. (Mat…
But why? What if one {football player|kid-with-rich-parents} can subsidize 10 other need-based students who otherwise would not have been offered a premier education? In terms of reputation, imposters tend to fade into obscurity in time while those 10 will go on to build the schools brand.
Re: UC Berkeley inappropriately admitted students as favors to donors
#223Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm generally opposed to this kind of acceptance-of-bad-things but in this case I kinda agree. If people are willing to pay millions to go to college, that's potentially a great advantage to students who otherwise have trouble affording it -- let the rich kids subsidize it for everyone else. By not funneling the donations through weird under-the-table transactions it can be more directly used for a net good for the s…
Is grade inflation for rich students really an issue at many colleges? Most majors at most colleges are honestly not that hard. Anyone who shows up and does a modicum of work can skate by with a gentleman's C. At D1 schools the football and basketball programs generate huge revenue, which is used to subsidize less popular sports (particularly women's teams under Title IX). For better or worse a lot of prospective stu…
Grade inflation for everyone is an issue at most colleges. Grades should reflect your credibility in a subject, and should be roughly normalized across subjects. But because they are so important for the rest of one's career, they end up being heavily pressured towards A's -- which results in careers not paying as much attention to them because they're widely understood to be not meaningful. A better world would see the degree itself as marking credibility in the subject, and grades + GPAs not mattering outside of admissions into higher-education or honor programs -- and 'blow-off' degrees removed entirely.
and --
Lots of people care about sports but that's partly cause lots of people in the past cared and baked it into our culture. It's still a perverse misalignment of incentivizes -- education should be about education; university should be about education + social development + various other forms of development. The American university system is largely about sports and partying for lots of people and I hope no one thinks that's healthy. I don't necessarily think the big sports should be cut, but there's no reason in 2020 that a university should regularly have people who are there on, like, golf scholarships. Universities should certainly take remarkable people of all walks of life -- but the emphasis on sports is insanely beyond what is appropriate.
Re: UC Berkeley inappropriately admitted students as favors to donors
#224People are always going to use their money to buy status. So as long as these college offer prestige & status, people with money are going to use it to get in. Much like doping in sports, you have two paths you can take: try to combat cheating, or accept the cheating as part of the game. I think these universities should accept that they are providing an education, but they are selling prestige, and split their admis…
"Providing an education" and "selling prestige" are going to decouple more and more as remote education gets better, which it will since right now there's no choice but to invest in it.
Re: UC Berkeley inappropriately admitted students as favors to donors
#225Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm generally opposed to this kind of acceptance-of-bad-things but in this case I kinda agree. If people are willing to pay millions to go to college, that's potentially a great advantage to students who otherwise have trouble affording it -- let the rich kids subsidize it for everyone else. By not funneling the donations through weird under-the-table transactions it can be more directly used for a net good for the s…
> let the rich kids subsidize it for everyone else The state schools already do this. It's called "out of state tuition". For example, UC Berkeley charges California residents $14k/yr tuition while everyone else pays $44k/yr. Not surprisingly, the number of out of state students admitted to the UC system is increasing every year. [0] [0] https://www.ucop.edu/institutional-research-academic-plannin...
I am picturing the same thing but 14k vs, say, 500k.
Re: UC Berkeley inappropriately admitted students as favors to donors
#226Sigh, this again. This is a solved issue. Many countries, large countries, with lots of rich people and smart kids have figured this out. Standardized tests for every single student at the same time. Once per year, no exceptions. Best graded students have first pick, nationwide, to all universities in the country. No other factor in place. Yes, rich kids will on average have the advantage because they are more likely…
The college admissions process is actually moving away from weighing the SAT or ACT as heavily as it has in the past -- for this year's admissions cycle, most schools are going test-optional. The best correlation for American standardized testing scores isn't study habits, but zip code.
I personally don't believe that moving to a system like China's gaokao would solve any of the issues to do with wealth, because the American university system is more than an academic system. It can't simply test for academics (although GPA is the #1 factor considered in admissions across the board), because the strength of American universities is also in community and intellectual diversity. Most applicants to top schools are academically qualified to attend.
Re: UC Berkeley inappropriately admitted students as favors to donors
#227People are always going to use their money to buy status. So as long as these college offer prestige & status, people with money are going to use it to get in. Much like doping in sports, you have two paths you can take: try to combat cheating, or accept the cheating as part of the game. I think these universities should accept that they are providing an education, but they are selling prestige, and split their admis…
Imagine seeing that type of perverse qualification for sports teams? Some players that pay for the privilege to play, others through dedication and skill. Is this the type of spectacle you would want to watch? Actually, maybe seeing some spoilt rich brat getting creamed on a football field would be worth admission.
This is how quite a few high school football teams work... It's usually done through booster clubs.
Re: UC Berkeley inappropriately admitted students as favors to donors
#228Earlier quoted context omitted.
Probably depends on the portion of donor vs. merit positions though doesn't it? As long as the overwhelming majority is merit-based, the academic reputation of the school should be maintained.
This also completely ignores the effect on the other pupils. It's like any form of corruption, it lowers morale and makes people view their situation in a reductive and transactional manner. Ultimately it fosters an attitude which is characterised by a desire to game, control and exploit as opposed to learn, understand and engage.
I did a bit of research work at the University of Ottawa, which by necessity ends up having a sizeable contingent of diplomats' offsprings.
A guy walked up to me and straight up offered to pay me to do his senior project for him. I reported him to his academic advisor. She told me "Thanks for telling me, but there's not much we can do about it without causing an international accident." So next time we saw each other, I agreed to help him with his senior project if I got to go a few rounds with him. He didn't take me up on it.
Re: UC Berkeley inappropriately admitted students as favors to donors
#229In this day and age, with all the fierce competition, it's a real problem that elite universities are admitting rich kids on such unfair and uneven grounds. Going to the "correct" school can transform the life of some people, essentially pulling them up from the lower working classes, and opening up the doors to middle, or even upper-middle classes. And what's even worse, a lot of these rich kids could go pretty much…
And just in case anyone thinks the idea that an elite school won't help a rich kid, there have been studies indicating that is the case. The one that comes to mind was the study that compared long term outcomes of students who were accepted to Harvard and attended to those who were accepted but did not attend. Average future incomes were not statistically different. But the study did note that the starkest improvents…
[deleted]
Re: UC Berkeley inappropriately admitted students as favors to donors
#230If you had asked me yesterday what percent of students I thought got into UC schools due to personal connection or wealth, I would have estimated between 10-20%. But this report seems to suggest otherwise: > In Violation of University Policy, the Campuses We Reviewed Admitted 64 Applicants Because of Their Families’ Donations and Connections > UC Berkeley inappropriately admitted 42 other applicants the UC schools as…
Side note, but why are water polo and volleyball considered upper-class sports in the USA? I understand regular polo, rowing, etc, because of the cost of equipment. But at my school (on the other side of the world), volleyball was for the islanders, and water polo was for the misfits who couldn't make it in a more popular sport. What sports in the USA are for the plebs? Baseball?
>Side note, but why are water polo and volleyball considered upper-class sports in the USA?
Beach volleyball is more common in areas close to the beach. Beach and indoor players are also significantly taller than the average person-- in the league that my college was a part of, the shortest woman playing middle blocker was still 185cm. Height and beach access both have correlations to socioeconomic factors.
For various reasons, the US has huge racial disparities when it comes to swimming ability. Most African American and Hispanic children don't know how to swim.
As others have mentioned, football, basketball and to a lesser extent soccer/baseball tend to be the "pleb" sports. But even within a sport, you'll see class and racial distinctions when you compare different positions. When you look at pros and college, the majority of quarterbacks and centers are white. QBs also tend to come from wealthier families. Meanwhile, wide receivers and running backs are mostly black. The defense is mostly black, and I don't think there's a single non-black cornerback in the NFL (unless you miscount Tre'Davious White)