<p>I think it’s great</p>
<p>Racially based gets on my nerves, regardless of my minority status. It makes the experienced cheapened, like you didn’t get in of your own talent(but that’s just my opinion). I prefer socioeconomic.</p>
<p>Definitely don’t support it, and I suppose socioeconomic would be better, but there are situations where students could work around the system. Like my friend, her parents are divorced and she lives with her mom who is low-income, but her dad is filthy rich. Apparently you only have to report the parent you are living with, so it makes her seem low income. When in reality, her dad will be paying for all of her expenses and gives her a huge allowance every month. Meritocracy should be the best way.</p>
<p>I don’t think there is ever going to be AA on the basis on socioeconomic status. Why would college want to have more poor people who need FinAid?</p>
<p>I am a URM. Of course I benefited from it greatly. I was accepted to schools that I would NEVER have had a chance at if i was white/asian. I have friends who applied to many of the same schools I applied to (much better qualified) but get rejected. Is it fair? Of course not. We have had plenty conversation about the subject, and I can never find an argument to justify AA. What are the benefits of admitting less qualified applicants? What could the schools possibly gain from admitting someone that would contribute less to their school? To claim that their school is Diverse? I don’t know. Am I for it? Yes. And No. I understand when people get mad because of the faulty system, but I don’t like it when people get mad at the person. After all, every student tries to work the system in some way to their advantage. I have just played the game. AA varies from case to case, and there is no fixed answer for the validity of AA. That is the correct perspective that everyone should have on this topic.</p>