3 ms·
i wouldn't be opposed to legacy admits if they were required to pay full tuition and judged to a higher standard: the legacy admit must have both a higher gpa,
by throwawaymaths 1y ago
i wouldn't be opposed to legacy admits if they were required to pay full tuition and judged to a higher standard: the legacy admit must have both a higher gpa, and sat score than the inbound class average.
- hulahoof 1y agoI’m not from the US so apologies if I miss something that seems obvious, but why should they have a higher standard instead of the same standard?
- adastra22 1y agoYou didn’t miss anything. That was a bizarre statement.
- throwawaymaths 1y agoas a legacy you could choose to apply as non-legacy. but your odds would be lower (you're competing with more people)
- tines 1y agoSo being legacy puts you at a disadvantage with no advantage?
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- throwawaymaths 1y agoyou'd be in a different pool for consideration, less competitors, higher odds.
- adastra22 1y agoThen you are against legacy admits as your policy would actively discriminate against them.
- throwawaymaths 1y agoit would not. your odds would be better (you'd be in a different pool, competing with fewer peiple).
- adastra22 1y agoThat doesn't reconcile with what you said: > judged to a higher standard: the legacy admit must have both a higher gpa, and sat score than the inbound class average
- throwawaymaths 1y agoyeah i didnt write it clearly, but i meant "legacy admit" to mean a "legacy admit pathway", which a legacy applicant could choose to not use.