<p>When looking at the subject of aa froma theoretical ( ITS ALWAYS GOING TO BE THAT WAY) and or philisophical aspect, i came up with more inquiries and personal opinions. I support aa if it is done in the "spirit of diversity". Like someone said earlier in a state like california that doesnt even have a white majority ( 50+ percent) it is ludacris to have a unreasonably disproportionate amount of one race or another in an academic institution. If a select few minorities(as evidence provided has shown, they arnt being admitted in great masses to any "top notch" schools) get in and meet the minimum requirements i have no problem with this. They have met the requirements for admission and as someone whos been college educated i realize that schools do indeed need to take other factors into effect. </p>
<p>Off on a tangent where are the out cries of people who feel they have been robbed by the legacy system. For many generations schools such as the ivy catered to the rich. I wonder if more white poeple have benifited from the legacy system, than minorities have benifitted from AA. If wealthy whites benefitted from this more than blacks did from aa, cumulativley (thats the complete total for you highschoolers) than i would not be surprised. Where is the outrage in the suburban white people over this? Oh yea i forgot its always the black peoples fault isnt it???hahahaha i love you east coasters, i really do.</p>
<p>That's an interesting point, croberts. It has been heartening to have some attention given to legacy admissions in the national press. I have certainly found it remarkable that here in Michigan, one hears little complaint that one may have been rejected because an athlete, a non-resident, or an alumni child was admitted instead of them Students and their parents save their ire for that minority who have taken the space the rejected white student was "entitled" to. </p>
<p>I have a lot of empathy for a disappointed student. I know the system isn't as objective as many hope it would be. But to only target minorities as being the problem--well, that sure doesn't sit right with me.</p>
<p>While I don't think anyone should ever claim a URM took their "place," I have no trouble with PRIVATE schools accepting legacies. As the Yale stats show, they reject 70% of legacies who apply; the legacy kids have as good or SLIGHTLY BETTER stats than the other kids; and they have slightly better stats than other admitted kids.</p>
<p>I also think there is no reason to sneer at private schools as "catering to the rich." They are NOT public schools and do NOT have as their mission -as a public does -that they have to be open to all comers. Yet they do a remarkable job and spend a LOT of money to help people who could not otherwise afford to go.</p>
<p>No flames please.:) I am just reminding people to distinguish between public and private schools.</p>
<p>voronwe, it's an important distinction but recall that not all publics are "open to all comers." Community colleges are generally the only ones who really fulfill that mission. Some 4-year publics have pretty competitive admissions, and there are many more interested applicants than there are places in the class.</p>
<p>Of course you're right, hoedown. I probably should have said "in the best of all possible worlds, open to all comers!" I wish the states would give more money to the state schools.</p>
<p>Here is an analogy that is imperfect (as all analogies are) but sometimes helpful: our town has a very ritzy private golf club, and very cool private country club with an olympic size pool, as well as a municipal golf course and a town pool. No one gets hysterical that the golf club and country club charge insanely high fees, and no one demands that they let in the middle class and poor, subsidize them, etc. No one gets hysterical that the children of members have a better chance than others of being put for membership when they reach legal age. They are, after all, private clubs.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, the municipal (public) golf course has reserved tee times, and not everyone can get one on a day that they would like. The town pool can be so crowded that there is not enough parking, and people have no choice but to go home. That's the real problem.</p>
<p>It just troubles me that people have delusional expectations of what the Ivies etc. "owe" them. Now, it IS true that the Ivies take some tax money - but as has been posted many times on other threads, that money is generally for research, and the taxpayer gets his quid pro quo (is paid back) when the research is done.</p>