<p>its funny how no one really criticizes legacies, those kids don't do anything except get born into the "right" families, just like urms get born into their families. my friend got into yale with a 1250, legacy, and a rich papa</p>
<p>I started this thread to say there was a huge boost for URM's this year - beyond what most people think. Legacies get nothing like the boost URM's get.</p>
<p>Also, I think legacy is more a gift for the parents of the kid than the kid. They may have been born into a family, but they are the children of a person who the university has a logical reason to favor. Not so for URM.</p>
<p>just forget this stupid thread its really stupid we have had soo many treads about it</p>
<p>but she still had lower scores...i thought that you were arguing against affirmative action because people of less credentials are getting in for whatever reason, and if legacies don't get as much of a boost how do you explain my friend</p>
<p>Legacies are less common, but you do have a point.
Colleges need to accept legacies because daddies and mommies pay a sizable sum of money to get their beloved children admitted.
Logically, however, their donations account for the large amounts of scholarship available.</p>
<p>maize&blue... tensions are running high now because everyone is getting his/her decision, so I get why you're 'lashing out' against URMs who 'stole' other people's seats, but I think you are mistaken. First of all, there are about 4-6 URMs on CC who posted whether or not they got into whichever top 25 school, so this isn't an accurate description of the URM applicant pool. You need to take into consideration all different factors, such as socio economic status. The people with low incomes are getting huge boosts because schools believe that low test grades are semi-excusable if an applicant cant afford test prep etc. I know that I've enjoyed many benefits of wealth that other applicants haven't; why should they have to suffer because of that?
I guess what I'm trying to say is that in my opninion the ends justify the means. By far. But of course, feel free to disagree.</p>
<p>"Also, I think legacy is more a gift for the parents of the kid than the kid. They may have been born into a family, but they are the children of a person who the university has a logical reason to favor. Not so for URM"</p>
<p>legacies are logical but URM isn't? Wow. No one can change your mind about what you think about Affirmative Action, but you know what? it doesn't matter what you think because universities do what they want to do.</p>
<p>Follow me, it's not difficult!</p>
<p>Legacies = Give money. They're the ones building those billion dollar endowments. They're the ones funding the building of labs, the grants, and the scholarships. It isn't logical to give the kid an advantage by virtue of his birth, but it is to give an advantage to the kid of an alumni. The alumni give to them, they give back. You see how that works?</p>
<p>URMs with no connection to University = (I've given my logical connection, where's yours?)</p>
<p>Also, about me lashing out. Once again, I've never applied to these schools and I never will. I couldn't care less one way other than discussing the practice as it's occuring because these institutions (or colleges in general) certainly aren't the only people practicing AA.</p>
<p>"Personally, I don't think you would have if you were white You see how that works?"</p>
<p>Really Maize? and how would you know? You dont know me, my credentials, anything. All you know is my race, and my SAT score. You dont know the depth of my ECs, my Essay/Interview/Rec quality. Nothing. </p>
<p>You have to realize that these colleges are MOLDING a student body that will be well rounded. A student body that will benefit and culture everyone. They are not building it based upon a ranking system of "who has the highest SAT scores". If you cannot see purpose in this, then I pity you.</p>
<p>"You build an argument about a single case (not a good sample size) and you don't even give a conclusion (where did she get in?)."</p>
<p>Im not trying to prove that Caucasians have the same chance as URMs lol. You misunderstood me. I am simply stating that the color of your skin is not end-all as you claim it to be. Ultimately, it's how they believe the individual will impact their student body.
And I stated that my white friend was accepted to Princeton, did I not? ...</p>
<p>"Why don't you tell me why it is good and not just tell me "it is" so there must be a good reason."</p>
<p>Maize, You know as well as I do that there is nothing I could say that would change your mind, or enlighten you in any way. What i was trying to point out is that not you, nor I, know everything. There are things greater than us in the world, and unfortunately, things we cannot fully grasp the purpose of. However, there are many out there who recognize the need for Affirmative Action. You compare it to Slavery and Jim Crow laws... however, you know as well as I do that this is a much more liberal time. The moment something is considered unfair by the smallest population, it is taken to court and reviewed. I have faith in our countries reasoning and you should too. We are much more critical and careful now than we were 50, or 150 years ago.</p>
<p>"
Quote:
I applied to ... Yale ... I am Black ... Yale accepted me</p>
<p>Personally, I don't think you would have if you were white You see how that works? All I'm asking is why we should tolerate that type of system. You build an argument about a single case (not a good sample size) and you don't even give a conclusion (where did she get in?). The fact remains URM's get in with less credentials across the board. Your anecdote doesn't contradict fact."</p>
<p>Does anyone else find this funny he start referring to sample pools like a few post on CC are the equivalent of a survey making him some type of admissions expert.</p>
<p>On the legacy issue I think you could easily make the argument that legacy is predominately no URM (URM's are only 10-15% in those schools which you claim are giving a huge boost). Logicallly you need to have an equal representation if the legacy system is to be fair to all ethnic groups hence you would have to get rid of or keep legacy AA in pairs</p>
<p>"
URMs with no connection to University = (I've given my logical connection, where's yours?)"</p>
<p>They become next generation of alums and donate.</p>
<p>"Legacies = Give money. They're the ones building those billion dollar endowments. They're the ones funding the building of labs, the grants, and the scholarships. It isn't logical to give the kid an advantage by virtue of his birth, but it is to give an advantage to the kid of an alumni. The alumni give to them, they give back. You see how that works?"</p>
<p>I still dont see why nobody ever debates this logic. What really is the difference between alumni who donate and just anyone who donates the money is used for the same purpose. Whats to say just anyone who donates money should be given a boost?Why cant I donate a few K with my application.</p>
<p>
[quote]
You compare it to Slavery and Jim Crow laws... however, you know as well as I do that this is a much more liberal time. The moment something is considered unfair by the smallest population, it is taken to court and reviewed. I have faith in our countries reasoning and you should too. We are much more critical and careful now than we were 50, or 150 years ago.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Courts don't make it right. Slavery and Jim Crow WERE interpreted by the courts as right several times. AA has reached the supreme court twice. Slavery (directly) reached it 3-4 times depending on which cases you count. History repeats itself.</p>
<p>I have faith in our countries reasoning, too. 72% oppose AA. Ballot initiatives are passing all over the country to ban it. I have faith in contemporary Americans, not in activist judges (on either side of the politcal spectrum).</p>
<p>
[quote]
I still dont see why nobody ever debates this logic. What really is the difference between alumni who donate and just anyone who donates the money is used for the same purpose. Whats to say just anyone who donates money should be given a boost?Why cant I donate a few K with my application.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Because there's a difference between bribes and donations? Alumni have a reason to donate other than paying off an admission. If you REALLY must play word games, we can say legacies deserve it because they are part of the university community and often donate money. Better?</p>
<p>"You have to realize that these colleges are MOLDING a student body that will be well rounded. A student body that will benefit and culture everyone. They are not building it based upon a ranking system of 'who has the highest SAT scores'. If you cannot see purpose in this, then I pity you." Exactly, why in the hell do you think colleges want more minorities? Because they add to the campus. Just like those legacies with rich daddies add buildings to a campus.</p>
<p>Maize&Blue, why are you assuming that the URM that actually get accepted had no hardships? Hispanics have an incredibly low high school graduation rate. If they don't have it as bad as you think, then why can't they graduate? Lack of support? You think it's easy to be a part of a culture that doesn't seem to be very interested in education? You're assuming that some of the URM accepted didn't have hardships. Where's your proof? I have yet to meet a URM with low stats and no hardships that got accepted into a top university. You don't know the whole story behind the URM, so stop assuming that some of the accepted ones actually had it easy. At least they'll succeed in college because they'll finally have the resources to excel.</p>
<p>If it makes anyone feel better - I'm an URM and I didn't get into Yale. Yay!! :)</p>
<p>"Because there's a difference between bribes and donations? Alumni have a reason to donate other than paying off an admission. If you REALLY must play word games, we can say legacies deserve it because they are part of the university community and often donate money. Better?"</p>
<p>I dont see how were playing word games. The only difference is that the university can attempt justify bribery with alumni where it cant with non alums. Money is money no matter where it comes from. I prefer not to call it bribery but instead call it admissions incentive</p>
<p>You play into my hand here. Thank you.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Maize&Blue, why are you assuming that the URM that actually get accepted had no hardships? Hispanics have an incredibly low high school graduation rate. If they don't have it as bad as you think, then why can't they graduate? Lack of support? You think it's easy to be a part of a culture that doesn't seem to be very interested in education? You're assuming that some of the URM accepted didn't have hardships. Where's your proof? I have yet to meet a URM with low stats and no hardships that got accepted into a top university. You don't know the whole story behind the URM, so stop assuming that some of the accepted ones actually had it easy. At least they'll succeed in college because they'll finally have the resources to excel.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>So why not base AA on economic status? Or overcoming obstacles? Or coming from a HS with a low graduation/placement rate? Why use skin color as the cornerstone?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Maize&Blue, why are you assuming that the URM that actually get accepted had no hardships?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Bingo. You might be ready to declare that black or hispanic is synonymous with poor, poverty and lower achievement, but I'm not willing to make that leap.</p>
<p>"Quote:
Maize&Blue, why are you assuming that the URM that actually get accepted had no hardships?</p>
<p>Bingo. You might be ready to declare that black or hispanic is synonymous with poor, poverty and lower achievement, but I'm not willing to make that leap."</p>
<p>You might not be willing to make that leap because it weakens any argument you have but statistically its true and if its not staticatics its an exception which you already said dont matter.</p>
<p>You played into my hand, Thank you</p>