6 ms·

It's a cynical move to hit their enrollment numbers, sold to the public as something to improve "diversity". But it's really just laying the groundwork for scho

It's a cynical move to hit their enrollment numbers, sold to the public as something to improve "diversity". But it's really just laying the groundwork for schools to cope with life after the college boom is over. For elite schools, it also makes it easier to provide cover for legacy and donor admissions. You no longer have to explain how Keese James Shackleford IV got into the the Shackleford school of dkljalfjaf while scoring just 950 on his SAT.

wtvanhest 7y ago
Not just enrollment, but also % of applicants accepted.
- ajross 7y ago
  Why would a school want to increase their acceptance rate? Generally selectivity is seen as a proxy for "quality".
  - itronitron 7y ago
    more students will apply if they think they have a chance despite a lower test score, which will keep the acceptance rate low :>
  - Jorge1o1 7y ago
    Acceptance is typically a fixed-ish number, while applications vary. You want to maximize applications
alpineidyll3 7y ago
Exactly. Colleges are in the business of marketing prestige, why lend credibility to a test anyone can take to prove they are intelligent without paying to attend for four years. Ex professor here. Faculty have the power to end this bezzle if we admit students are learning nothing and we'd all be better off with real jobs.
- dragonwriter 7y ago
  > Ex professor here. Faculty have the power to end this bezzle if we admit students are learning nothing and we'd all be better off with real jobs. I learned quite a lot in most of my classes in college; if your students weren't maybe that's not an indictment of the education system so much as their particular institution & instructors.
  - xyzzyz 7y ago
    I’ve also learned a lot in my degrees, and greatly enjoyed my time in the university. However, I’ve only ever needed a tiny fraction of what I learned there in my jobs at Google and Facebook.
    - docbrown 7y ago
      Depending on your job, i think people confuse the true idea of what a college education is meant to be. It is not a trade, nor is it career-prepping with the exception of a handful of programs (engineering, nursing, accounting). So in your case, depending on your field, your education was designed to give you a basic understanding of the fundamentals that you will need and the critical thinking skills that will allow you to alter those fundamentals into something workable for the project you’re doing at Google or Facebook. Edit: I once spoke to a MechE graduate from MIT. They held internships at one of the Big Three automakers. During our conversation, I asked explicitly: what do they teach you at school? engine design? safety harness mechanisms? They said, “No. They teach us the foundations of engineering.” You could ask the same to a law school student. Do they teach you the law? No, they don’t. They explain the law to you and encourage you to apply the law under your own discretion. They do not give you simple A, B, C answers to a case. The example of “John murdered Steve, but Steve was a slave and John had a contract of borrowing Steve. Is John responsible for Steve’s death or is Steve considered property under federal statue — as he’s a slave — and therefore would not be protected by standard of care?” As you can see, no true education gives you direct cause-and-effect answers, unless specifically those mentioned in my above paragraph.
      - 7y ago

wtvanhest 7y ago

Not just enrollment, but also % of applicants accepted.

ajross 7y ago
Why would a school want to increase their acceptance rate? Generally selectivity is seen as a proxy for "quality".
- itronitron 7y ago
  more students will apply if they think they have a chance despite a lower test score, which will keep the acceptance rate low :>
- Jorge1o1 7y ago
  Acceptance is typically a fixed-ish number, while applications vary. You want to maximize applications

alpineidyll3 7y ago

Exactly. Colleges are in the business of marketing prestige, why lend credibility to a test anyone can take to prove they are intelligent without paying to attend for four years. Ex professor here. Faculty have the power to end this bezzle if we admit students are learning nothing and we'd all be better off with real jobs.

dragonwriter 7y ago
> Ex professor here. Faculty have the power to end this bezzle if we admit students are learning nothing and we'd all be better off with real jobs. I learned quite a lot in most of my classes in college; if your students weren't maybe that's not an indictment of the education system so much as their particular institution & instructors.
- xyzzyz 7y ago
  I’ve also learned a lot in my degrees, and greatly enjoyed my time in the university. However, I’ve only ever needed a tiny fraction of what I learned there in my jobs at Google and Facebook.
  - docbrown 7y ago
    Depending on your job, i think people confuse the true idea of what a college education is meant to be. It is not a trade, nor is it career-prepping with the exception of a handful of programs (engineering, nursing, accounting). So in your case, depending on your field, your education was designed to give you a basic understanding of the fundamentals that you will need and the critical thinking skills that will allow you to alter those fundamentals into something workable for the project you’re doing at Google or Facebook. Edit: I once spoke to a MechE graduate from MIT. They held internships at one of the Big Three automakers. During our conversation, I asked explicitly: what do they teach you at school? engine design? safety harness mechanisms? They said, “No. They teach us the foundations of engineering.” You could ask the same to a law school student. Do they teach you the law? No, they don’t. They explain the law to you and encourage you to apply the law under your own discretion. They do not give you simple A, B, C answers to a case. The example of “John murdered Steve, but Steve was a slave and John had a contract of borrowing Steve. Is John responsible for Steve’s death or is Steve considered property under federal statue — as he’s a slave — and therefore would not be protected by standard of care?” As you can see, no true education gives you direct cause-and-effect answers, unless specifically those mentioned in my above paragraph.
    - 7y ago