3 ms·

> 75% of those would not have been admitted w/o that help this not making a claim anywhere near as interesting as it pretends. Since you're using a %, what is

> 75% of those would not have been admitted w/o that help this not making a claim anywhere near as interesting as it pretends. Since you're using a %, what is the % difference in quality that admitting these 75% makes (assuming it's even true, considering I don't believe much from the Guardian) and how does that (what the author calls "affirmative action") compare with other affirmative actions taken to achieve a balanced class? were they otherwise 99% good enough, or only 10% good enough? My money is on above 90% because I went to an elite school (that has no legacy) and lots of people there were extremely highly qualified, and the ones who weren't did not fall in a pattern of being wealthy or whatever, probably better explained by something like your evidence of how ineffective IQ (what SAT does correlate to) or high school grades are in predicting college GPA and how effective GPA is or isn't in predicting future contributions. I find grades have much more to do with psychological makeup, like do you rebel against authority, or knuckle under. Good grades are valuable, but don't tell the whole story of your value as a contributor, sometimes screwed up and crazy genius works better. But either way, shouldn't that be up to the school what combinations they wish to place their bets on?

charlieyu1 4y ago
Grades are the only metric that is difficult to cheat even with wealth.
- Jcowell 4y ago
  Couldn’t you just bribe people?
  - naniwaduni 4y ago
    Not all bribery is equally easy.
- fsckboy 4y ago
  unless you have especially rigorous grading (and look at the volume of comments here bitching about grading on a curve, so it's rare), it's easy to get good grades by just doing the normal amount of work, put in some time each day on each class. It's a measure of conscientiousness, not smartness, ability, etc., but yes, it's a good measure of getting a baseline amount of learning out of a course, nothing exceptional. (people here who bitch about grading on a curve should take a course in statistics graded on a curve, then listen to their fellow students who got A's to explain how it works.)
- washadjeffmad 4y ago
  The private "school of excellence" I attended instituted a 40% minimum on any assignment turned in with a name and date on it, and labs, tests, and quizzes - combined - made up 25% of one's final grade. The administration contended this policy had nothing to do with the $8M athletics facility built with donor funds, nor the influx of scholarships awarded to students who all happened to join the football team that year. I disagreed. Vocally. When I went from a 98% student to a 24% student at the start of a new semester just by refusing to write my name on any homework, I was pulled from all activities, isolated in endless detentions, and put on a "remedial track" away from my class (like ISS). It took a few more weeks of talking with the teachers and priests and protesting, but the headmaster eventually stepped down and was replaced by one of the nuns. Grades aren't hard to cheat if the institution is complicit, especially if what's being measured is compliance and obedience.
xmddmx 4y ago
I was specifically trying to rebut a claim that is often made that special help for minorities is bad, because we live in a meritocracy and "let those people compete on the same metric as us". The point here is that 75% of 40% (= 30%) of the majority/white students received special help and would not have been admitted otherwise. Furthermore, much of that special help was directed because of wealth and donation power, not due to "need". You raise a good statistical question ("ok, it's 30% of majority but what is the % for minority"). I do not have the data for that, and in a world where average income of various ethnicities was the same, that would be a compelling point.

charlieyu1 4y ago

Grades are the only metric that is difficult to cheat even with wealth.

Jcowell 4y ago
Couldn’t you just bribe people?
- naniwaduni 4y ago
  Not all bribery is equally easy.
fsckboy 4y ago
unless you have especially rigorous grading (and look at the volume of comments here bitching about grading on a curve, so it's rare), it's easy to get good grades by just doing the normal amount of work, put in some time each day on each class. It's a measure of conscientiousness, not smartness, ability, etc., but yes, it's a good measure of getting a baseline amount of learning out of a course, nothing exceptional. (people here who bitch about grading on a curve should take a course in statistics graded on a curve, then listen to their fellow students who got A's to explain how it works.)
washadjeffmad 4y ago
The private "school of excellence" I attended instituted a 40% minimum on any assignment turned in with a name and date on it, and labs, tests, and quizzes - combined - made up 25% of one's final grade. The administration contended this policy had nothing to do with the $8M athletics facility built with donor funds, nor the influx of scholarships awarded to students who all happened to join the football team that year. I disagreed. Vocally. When I went from a 98% student to a 24% student at the start of a new semester just by refusing to write my name on any homework, I was pulled from all activities, isolated in endless detentions, and put on a "remedial track" away from my class (like ISS). It took a few more weeks of talking with the teachers and priests and protesting, but the headmaster eventually stepped down and was replaced by one of the nuns. Grades aren't hard to cheat if the institution is complicit, especially if what's being measured is compliance and obedience.

xmddmx 4y ago

I was specifically trying to rebut a claim that is often made that special help for minorities is bad, because we live in a meritocracy and "let those people compete on the same metric as us". The point here is that 75% of 40% (= 30%) of the majority/white students received special help and would not have been admitted otherwise. Furthermore, much of that special help was directed because of wealth and donation power, not due to "need". You raise a good statistical question ("ok, it's 30% of majority but what is the % for minority"). I do not have the data for that, and in a world where average income of various ethnicities was the same, that would be a compelling point.