5 ms·

Maybe I'm old or insufficiently woke, but I don't see legacy or identity as substitutes for demonstrated learning. I see the decay of rigor and achievement as s

Maybe I'm old or insufficiently woke, but I don't see legacy or identity as substitutes for demonstrated learning. I see the decay of rigor and achievement as signals of decline of excellence and the crumbling of knowledge. The mythology of "everyone needs degrees" created a wealth transfer scam and a lowering of standards to sell more student loan debt for sheepskins. Maybe we need to throw away arbitrary employment requirements and make universities run on merit. Oh and there's a gender imbalance in most undergraduate programs where the bar is effectively higher for women because men aren't keeping up or have been left behind.

baremetal 4y ago
If everyone must be equitable, then the most expedient way to achieve that is to reduce the standard.
- hedora 4y ago
  Of course, there will always be a way for well off people to buy their way into higher standard systems. We need a word for this. “Separate but equitable”?
  - baremetal 4y ago
    Perhaps we can ask the Soviets what they called it.
CJefferson 4y ago
“Legacy” applicants is the opposite of woke, it’s been how the “old boys network” has run for hundreds of years, getting under qualified students into top Universities.
- mrangle 4y ago
  That's an urban myth perpetuated by people interested in generalized grievance. At least from the period I attended prep school, and beyond. From the mid-1990's. Almost in-total, the "old boys" applicants are not under-qualified. When compared to almost any kid that attended lesser secondary schools than the privileged kid attended, on average. These kids have almost always proven themselves in elite educational environments. Most of those who skate by in such environments don't go Ivy. They will instead attend one of the many more numerous elite Liberal Arts colleges that most others ignore but that carry almost equivalent cache. There are no Stuyvesant valedictorians missing Ivy admissions. In the same vein, there are plenty of prep school kids who do. I've only rarely seen underqualified kids go Ivy, and the only one that I can actually think of was a poor kid. Today, Ivy's are skipping qualified lesser privileged kids for diversity. In eliminating the SAT/ACT, they are essentially gambling that their reputation rather than their student body will continue to qualify them as Elite. Over time, I have doubts. The curriculums will have to be adjusted so as to avoid the pall of racism or classism that will occur when wildly divergent grades become apparent.
  - ww520 4y ago
    If they are so qualified, why not let them compete on the even ground with the rest of the applicants? Why is there a need to special track them via legacy? Legacy should have been abolished long time ago. It’s the epitome of systematic racism.
    - mrangle 4y ago
      You seem to have missed the point of my prior post, and you misunderstand how legacy admissions work. Dropping the rhetorical nuke of "systemic racism" doesn't cover for that. Read my prior post again. Legacy gets one looked at. Its not an automatic admission. Unlesss you are simply stating that legacy admissions should be disqualified (this would be ridiculous), then also consider that: you may be making the "research" error of uncontrolled variables that include the fact that legacy kids are likely to be smart, their parents are astute enough to track them in a manner that makes them better candidates on average, and that their parents are more aware of the process that they can relate to the child. Al leading to a statistically significant rate of legacy admissions that has nothing at all to do with unfairness.
      - IshKebab 4y ago
        > Legacy gets one looked at I'm not that familiar with the US legacy system but even if it is just "we'll definitely take a look at your application" that isn't competing on even ground is it? It might not guarantee you a place but it's clearly an unfair advantage.
        mrangle 4y ago
        No one is disputing the fact that there are advantages to being legacy, at least in terms of giving the application a hard look so as not to unduly disappoint donors and other people in the "club" that is the entire reason that non-legacy candidates want in. Versus say a public school (American) candidate who gets filtered out earlier because they graduated in the middle of their class. I don't recall anyone promising anyone else a perfectly even playing field down to the most minuscule detail. The people arguing that point seem to be demanding a social standard and then working from the assumption that it is a shared standard, value, and may even be the law. None of which is true. But the more important points are at the end of my last post, which point to the fact that people arguing against the rate of legacy admissions haven't a leg to stand on without first controlling for obvious variables.
sillypuddy 4y ago
States and companies are starting to drop college arbitrary college degree requirements: https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/pennsylvania-governor-removes-college-degree-requirement-most-state-jobs-first-full-day-office https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/pennsylvania-governor-r... https://www.cnbc.com/2022/04/25/companies-eliminate-college-degree-requirement-to-draw-needed-workers.html https://www.cnbc.com/2022/04/25/companies-eliminate-college-...
- aperson_hello 4y ago
  But all it will take for those arbitrary requirements to get reinstated is another recession...
hot_gril 4y ago
They want legacy because they care about treating their alumni well for donations.

baremetal 4y ago

If everyone must be equitable, then the most expedient way to achieve that is to reduce the standard.

hedora 4y ago
Of course, there will always be a way for well off people to buy their way into higher standard systems. We need a word for this. “Separate but equitable”?
- baremetal 4y ago
  Perhaps we can ask the Soviets what they called it.

CJefferson 4y ago

“Legacy” applicants is the opposite of woke, it’s been how the “old boys network” has run for hundreds of years, getting under qualified students into top Universities.

mrangle 4y ago
That's an urban myth perpetuated by people interested in generalized grievance. At least from the period I attended prep school, and beyond. From the mid-1990's. Almost in-total, the "old boys" applicants are not under-qualified. When compared to almost any kid that attended lesser secondary schools than the privileged kid attended, on average. These kids have almost always proven themselves in elite educational environments. Most of those who skate by in such environments don't go Ivy. They will instead attend one of the many more numerous elite Liberal Arts colleges that most others ignore but that carry almost equivalent cache. There are no Stuyvesant valedictorians missing Ivy admissions. In the same vein, there are plenty of prep school kids who do. I've only rarely seen underqualified kids go Ivy, and the only one that I can actually think of was a poor kid. Today, Ivy's are skipping qualified lesser privileged kids for diversity. In eliminating the SAT/ACT, they are essentially gambling that their reputation rather than their student body will continue to qualify them as Elite. Over time, I have doubts. The curriculums will have to be adjusted so as to avoid the pall of racism or classism that will occur when wildly divergent grades become apparent.
- ww520 4y ago
  If they are so qualified, why not let them compete on the even ground with the rest of the applicants? Why is there a need to special track them via legacy? Legacy should have been abolished long time ago. It’s the epitome of systematic racism.
  - mrangle 4y ago
    You seem to have missed the point of my prior post, and you misunderstand how legacy admissions work. Dropping the rhetorical nuke of "systemic racism" doesn't cover for that. Read my prior post again. Legacy gets one looked at. Its not an automatic admission. Unlesss you are simply stating that legacy admissions should be disqualified (this would be ridiculous), then also consider that: you may be making the "research" error of uncontrolled variables that include the fact that legacy kids are likely to be smart, their parents are astute enough to track them in a manner that makes them better candidates on average, and that their parents are more aware of the process that they can relate to the child. Al leading to a statistically significant rate of legacy admissions that has nothing at all to do with unfairness.
    - IshKebab 4y ago
      > Legacy gets one looked at I'm not that familiar with the US legacy system but even if it is just "we'll definitely take a look at your application" that isn't competing on even ground is it? It might not guarantee you a place but it's clearly an unfair advantage.
      - mrangle 4y ago
        No one is disputing the fact that there are advantages to being legacy, at least in terms of giving the application a hard look so as not to unduly disappoint donors and other people in the "club" that is the entire reason that non-legacy candidates want in. Versus say a public school (American) candidate who gets filtered out earlier because they graduated in the middle of their class. I don't recall anyone promising anyone else a perfectly even playing field down to the most minuscule detail. The people arguing that point seem to be demanding a social standard and then working from the assumption that it is a shared standard, value, and may even be the law. None of which is true. But the more important points are at the end of my last post, which point to the fact that people arguing against the rate of legacy admissions haven't a leg to stand on without first controlling for obvious variables.

sillypuddy 4y ago

States and companies are starting to drop college arbitrary college degree requirements: https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/pennsylvania-governor-removes-college-degree-requirement-most-state-jobs-first-full-day-office https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/pennsylvania-governor-r... https://www.cnbc.com/2022/04/25/companies-eliminate-college-degree-requirement-to-draw-needed-workers.html https://www.cnbc.com/2022/04/25/companies-eliminate-college-...

aperson_hello 4y ago
But all it will take for those arbitrary requirements to get reinstated is another recession...

hot_gril 4y ago

They want legacy because they care about treating their alumni well for donations.