5 ms·

> Why not just.. well, let poor people come first? I recently listened to an NPR piece on this and it seems like you're right here. Even with affirmative actio

> Why not just.. well, let poor people come first? I recently listened to an NPR piece on this and it seems like you're right here. Even with affirmative action you're really only affecting those that are going to elite colleges, and a large amount of people who benefited from it actually didn't come from low-income households. Essentially affirmative action benefited a tiny (like <1%) portion of all people going into universities in the way it was intended. What would be much more useful is exactly what you say, taking much more of the student's overall socioeconomic status into account rather than race. We would probably find that this does a better job of helping those who actually need help. And that would likely mean that minorities are still prioritized. Finally, what we should really be doing if we care about helping those at the bottom of the socioeconomic ladder is make all community college free. It's already very cheap as-is , we just need to take the leap to make it totally free. This would also help the student loan crisis since those who are going for bachelor degrees would only need a couple more years of education vs. 4

doktorhladnjak 3y ago
I listened to that same episode of Throughline. It was a great discussion that touched on aspects I’d not considered. One the key takeaways for me was the question of “what is it trying to achieve?” and “is it working?” To which the answers are nobody can agree but it’s not achieving any of the possible goals. The effects of affirmative action having been banned from California public universities since 1996, including Berkeley and UCLA, was also quite telling. This happened nearly 30 years ago, so the effects are very clear to see. Diversity was rocky for a few years, but they eventually figured out other ways to have it without using affirmative action. The part about community colleges being a huge lever at getting more students into higher education was interesting. It’s not talked about much but has proved to be very successful.
least 3y ago
No, we don’t need to be making community college free. Why do people always place so much emphasis on college when it’s clear that the entire system before that point is failing kids? All you’re doing is making it marginally easier for the people already sufficiently motivated to succeed in college to have a little easier time. Elementary and Secondary education is what desperately needs attention, not college. Certainly not with public funding.
- willio58 3y ago
  > Elementary and Secondary education is what desperately needs attention, not college. Certainly not with public funding. I just don't get this. Yes we need to improve primary and secondary education, but we can't just pretend like tertiary education doesn't matter to people. College isn't just about learning material in classrooms. College provides a way for young people to transition in a structured way into adulthood. It provides job opportunities and social interaction that you just can't get as easily or consistently if you immediately go into the workforce as a high school grad. I'll leave you with this, a list of 39 other countries that provide free or very cheap college for their citizens - https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/countries-with-free-college https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/countries...
  - least 3y ago
    > College provides a way for young people to transition in a structured way into adulthood. Given that the majority of people in the United States do not have even an associate's degree and still transition into adulthood, even if your assumption that it gives people a structured way into adulthood was correct, it's serving less than half the population. The majority of people do complete high school, or an equivalent, though. It's pretty plainly clear that preparing children to transition into adulthood needs to start earlier. That goes hand in hand with the failure of the elementary and secondary education systems in the United States. Also, just philosophically, I am morally opposed to the idea that people who don't or start complete college for one reason or another should be subsidizing those who can and do. College degree holders earn dramatically more money in their lifetime over non college graduates. I understand that the goal is to expand the number of people that can attend college. I think that you would expand that number more by improving the K-12 system and you'd leave everyone better off by doing so. If you want to increase the number of disadvantaged people in university (i.e. the people that would go to college if it were free but can't afford it so they don't) you should look at expanding the Pell grant, not subsidize college for everyone.
- soundnote 3y ago
  A teacher friend's school was sued because they disciplined black students more often. No consideration for the fact that the disruptive students were indeed disruptive. Now they're just not allowed to keep discipline, full stop. You can imagine the results for everyone else in class, the well-behaved blacks included (who are statistically most likely in need of a good learning environment at school)

doktorhladnjak 3y ago

I listened to that same episode of Throughline. It was a great discussion that touched on aspects I’d not considered. One the key takeaways for me was the question of “what is it trying to achieve?” and “is it working?” To which the answers are nobody can agree but it’s not achieving any of the possible goals. The effects of affirmative action having been banned from California public universities since 1996, including Berkeley and UCLA, was also quite telling. This happened nearly 30 years ago, so the effects are very clear to see. Diversity was rocky for a few years, but they eventually figured out other ways to have it without using affirmative action. The part about community colleges being a huge lever at getting more students into higher education was interesting. It’s not talked about much but has proved to be very successful.

least 3y ago

No, we don’t need to be making community college free. Why do people always place so much emphasis on college when it’s clear that the entire system before that point is failing kids? All you’re doing is making it marginally easier for the people already sufficiently motivated to succeed in college to have a little easier time. Elementary and Secondary education is what desperately needs attention, not college. Certainly not with public funding.

willio58 3y ago
> Elementary and Secondary education is what desperately needs attention, not college. Certainly not with public funding. I just don't get this. Yes we need to improve primary and secondary education, but we can't just pretend like tertiary education doesn't matter to people. College isn't just about learning material in classrooms. College provides a way for young people to transition in a structured way into adulthood. It provides job opportunities and social interaction that you just can't get as easily or consistently if you immediately go into the workforce as a high school grad. I'll leave you with this, a list of 39 other countries that provide free or very cheap college for their citizens - https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/countries-with-free-college https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/countries...
- least 3y ago
  > College provides a way for young people to transition in a structured way into adulthood. Given that the majority of people in the United States do not have even an associate's degree and still transition into adulthood, even if your assumption that it gives people a structured way into adulthood was correct, it's serving less than half the population. The majority of people do complete high school, or an equivalent, though. It's pretty plainly clear that preparing children to transition into adulthood needs to start earlier. That goes hand in hand with the failure of the elementary and secondary education systems in the United States. Also, just philosophically, I am morally opposed to the idea that people who don't or start complete college for one reason or another should be subsidizing those who can and do. College degree holders earn dramatically more money in their lifetime over non college graduates. I understand that the goal is to expand the number of people that can attend college. I think that you would expand that number more by improving the K-12 system and you'd leave everyone better off by doing so. If you want to increase the number of disadvantaged people in university (i.e. the people that would go to college if it were free but can't afford it so they don't) you should look at expanding the Pell grant, not subsidize college for everyone.
soundnote 3y ago
A teacher friend's school was sued because they disciplined black students more often. No consideration for the fact that the disruptive students were indeed disruptive. Now they're just not allowed to keep discipline, full stop. You can imagine the results for everyone else in class, the well-behaved blacks included (who are statistically most likely in need of a good learning environment at school)