3 ms·

> they select for students that had the luck (or the right parentage) to go to either a private school or to a public school in a well-funded school district.

> they select for students that had the luck (or the right parentage) to go to either a private school or to a public school in a well-funded school district. They select for math ability, it just so happens that students with access to great resources get better at math than those without them. > The result is that the student base will be overwhelmingly white rich kids, which is pretty problematic Pretty clearly not true. It is overwhelmingly asian kids and while wealth plays a factor, poor asians still do exceptionally well (IIRC poor asians do better than rich whites). This can never be acknowledged because it makes people less sympathetic to your point. > purpose of academia - that is, to provide education and research opportunities to the actually gifted instead A students innate ability is irrelevant for college admissions. What matters is what are your actual capabilities. Are you capable doing mathematics at the highest level or are you not? An innately talented student who is bad at math due to life circumstances out of their control is still bad at math.

texaslonghorn5 4y ago
> They select for math ability, it just so happens that students with access to great resources get better at math than those without them. So we just throw our hands up and lament that those without preexisting opportunities stay down? I completely disagree. Colleges should be looking for high ceiling students who have the potential to do great things if the college throws their resources at the kid for four years. > A students innate ability is irrelevant for college admissions. What matters is what are your actual capabilities. Are you capable doing mathematics at the highest level or are you not? Last time I checked, the whole point of college is to develop these skills! Should every single person who didn't get to take advanced math in high school be immediately disqualified from studying high level math, even if they have the potential to do incredibly well given the tools? This isn't to say that students who have the foundation should be kept down, more that those without it shouldn't be excluded if they have the potential to succeed.

texaslonghorn5 4y ago

> They select for math ability, it just so happens that students with access to great resources get better at math than those without them. So we just throw our hands up and lament that those without preexisting opportunities stay down? I completely disagree. Colleges should be looking for high ceiling students who have the potential to do great things if the college throws their resources at the kid for four years. > A students innate ability is irrelevant for college admissions. What matters is what are your actual capabilities. Are you capable doing mathematics at the highest level or are you not? Last time I checked, the whole point of college is to develop these skills! Should every single person who didn't get to take advanced math in high school be immediately disqualified from studying high level math, even if they have the potential to do incredibly well given the tools? This isn't to say that students who have the foundation should be kept down, more that those without it shouldn't be excluded if they have the potential to succeed.