3 ms·

There's nothing wrong per se with awarding this aid either needs based or merit based. Awarding it merit based seems to be working for Stanford based on results

There's nothing wrong per se with awarding this aid either needs based or merit based. Awarding it merit based seems to be working for Stanford based on results. Moreover, this is for graduate business school. I'm a crunchy progressive but I see no problem with this private school doing whatever they want (legally) if it works for them which it apparently does. But awarding them merit based and then claiming to be needs based is hypocrisy.

indubitable 9y ago
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 engaging in racial and gender biases is quite absurd. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fisher_v._University_of_Texas_%282016%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fisher_v._University_of_Texas_...
- CalChris 9y ago
  The article does say gender discrimination and foreign discrimination but it doesn't mention racial discrimination.
  - indubitable 9y ago
    Good point. I've clarified my comment to be less leading.
saas_co_de 9y ago
> hypocrisy that is just the PR side of things. you also have to think of the students. Stanford lied to potential students and told them that they did not offer merit based scholarships thus inducing them to pay full price. That is an intentional misrepresentation of fact for financial gain on Stanford's part at the expense of students who paid full price.
- jessriedel 9y ago
  It also lied to donors. Naively it seems they'd have legal cause to sue for their donations back. The claim that Stanford give aid based only on need is an important part of the pitch.
autokad 9y ago
they also awarded {more to} female students with the same need as male students. how does your "crunchy progressive" side feel about that if that was reversed?

indubitable 9y ago

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 engaging in racial and gender biases is quite absurd. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fisher_v._University_of_Texas_%282016%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fisher_v._University_of_Texas_...

CalChris 9y ago
The article does say gender discrimination and foreign discrimination but it doesn't mention racial discrimination.
- indubitable 9y ago
  Good point. I've clarified my comment to be less leading.

saas_co_de 9y ago

> hypocrisy that is just the PR side of things. you also have to think of the students. Stanford lied to potential students and told them that they did not offer merit based scholarships thus inducing them to pay full price. That is an intentional misrepresentation of fact for financial gain on Stanford's part at the expense of students who paid full price.

jessriedel 9y ago
It also lied to donors. Naively it seems they'd have legal cause to sue for their donations back. The claim that Stanford give aid based only on need is an important part of the pitch.

autokad 9y ago

they also awarded {more to} female students with the same need as male students. how does your "crunchy progressive" side feel about that if that was reversed?