3 ms·
It was already "open to all". A more accurate title would be "What happens when an elite public school loosens its admission standard". But that doesn't sound a
by car_analogy 4y ago
It was already "open to all". A more accurate title would be "What happens when an elite public school loosens its admission standard". But that doesn't sound as noble.
It's strange the expert writers at the New Yorker would opt for a less informative, borderline misleading title, instead of using their skills to convey information more concisely and truthfully.
- Arnt 4y agoI disagree. Before the change, it was open to everyone whose grades were not much below the cut-off in past years. Most people had worse grades and therefore knew before applying that they would not be accepted. That's closed. The change opened it to those people. It did not increase the number of students who were accepted, but it did make applying worthwhile for all students.
- car_analogy 4y agoIt's a barrier to entry, but it's not "closed". Regardless, "looser standards" is the unambiguously more informative, less ambiguous description, and what an honest journalist should have used.