4 ms·
From the text of the complaint: > The 568 Exemption allowed the [colleges in question] to eliminate incentives to compete if all of the members admitted all st
by jasonhansel 5y ago
From the text of the complaint:
> The 568 Exemption allowed the [colleges in question] to eliminate incentives to compete if all of the members admitted all students on a need-blind basis. Plaintiffs show herein, however, that by their own actions, Defendants did not satisfy this provision and thus were not entitled to the exemption.
This seems to be the heart of the complaint. The admissions process wasn't actually need-blind, so the colleges don't have an exemption from laws against price-fixing.
Starting at page 26 (https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ilnd.411049/gov.uscourts.ilnd.411049.1.0.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ilnd.41...) they list a number of ways that colleges, despite claiming to be need-blind, actually do take financial need into account in admissions decisions. That's the real reason this scheme is illegal.
One (small) part of the reason they aren't need-blind turns out to be that they decide where and how to recruit students using sophisticated models that try to predict the resulting demand for financial aid (see pp. 29-32). Essentially, they are able to use data to shape their applicant pool based on financial need, while still technically being "need-blind" when reviewing the applications that come in.
But there are other issues too, such as the use of need-aware policies for waitlisted applicants and the advantages given to "legacy" students.
- JumpCrisscross 5y agoApparently the exemption expires this September [1]. [1] https://newrepublic.com/article/163001/congress-let-ivy-league-operate-monopoly https://newrepublic.com/article/163001/congress-let-ivy-leag...
- nopenopenopeno 5y agoThe only solution I see is to eliminate “need” altogether.
- mandmandam 5y agoDo you mean by eliminating poverty, or by giving free education for all? Because I'd be happy with both.
- nopenopenopeno 5y agoEliminating poverty is the only solution. Free college education will just create a demand for some other ridiculous scheme. I’d also be happy for both, but I think only one can work, but it would require retiring capitalism altogether as well.
- mandmandam 5y agoMany countries have free college education. Some even pay people to go. It works, and it's expected, and rightfully so. If America wanted, we could copy the best aspects of other countries higher education models - the rest of the world would love to see Americans better educated, and would likely be more than happy to help. It's not ridiculous, it's not a scheme. It's basic common sense, and an investment. The rest of the developed world laughs at America for charging so much for college. They really do. It's a common punchline. It would be funny to me too, if I didn't have a distaste for schadenfreude. And hell yeah. Let's retire capitalism before we lose the oceans, insects, birds, steady climate and a life worth living.
- loceng 5y agoI wonder if participants in clinical trials are "gamed" this way as well to make sure they only get participants they may have learned would respond better to whatever they're trialing?
- daniel-cussen 5y agoOr were going to get better at the same time for reasons the medicine couldn't foil. But it's a choice. There's always a way to tip the scales, they still have the choice of not doing so, or doing so against their own interests.