<p>
[quote]
Yes, either you work hard or you owe up and donate a building. Have you donated a building? Didn't think so. Don't complain about paying the normal tuition and appreciate the fact that they even let you in!
[/quote]
</p>
<p>In 2008, paying full sticker or -10-15% for college is hardly "normal tuition." Unless of course, you're wealthy enough to not care.</p>
<p>
[quote]
And yes, believe it or not, the college admissions process is as fair as it can get right now.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The economy in the US is as good as it can get right now.</p>
<p>My bladder is as full as it can get right now.</p>
<p>"... is as ... as it can get right now" means absolutely nothing. Those two little words on the end add a bound that basically negates any movement.</p>
<p>But that's neither here nor there.</p>
<p>College admissions are broken, as part of a larger broken system: loads of shoddy public schools providing weak preparation, demands for extracurriculars which require time and support from family, "college admission resumes" and standardized tests that are consistently correlated with wealth. Are you really going to try and argue this one? </p>
<p>Face it, it's not a fair playing field. And if you survey your classmates, you may learn that the majority come from upper-middle class to upper class backgrounds.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Don't give me that bs about how you worked the hardest, but not in the ways that these schools wanted.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I never said anything of the sort. Nice straw man though.</p>
<p>
[quote]
There are students here who did come from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, and fought through and managed to get into these schools on their own merit. DO NOT marginalize their achievements.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Sure, but they're in the minority. Only 43% of Columbia undergrads receive institutional grants (NCES 06-07). The fair admissions process that you tout so highly sure seems to favor those who aren't eligible or don't need any financial aid. In plainer terms, 57% of Columbia undergrads come from families where $200k for college is not a big deal.</p>
<p>But what gets me is that you seem to be touting meritocracy when you speak of those who fought the odds and got in. What I don't understand is why you seem to think meritocracy matters during the K-12 years, but by defending the current system you seem to implicitly believe that it becomes irrelevant once inside the college gates. There are more than a few instances I'm aware of where there are GS students and CC students who could be compared side-by-side academically where a GS student has better results in the same program, yet is receiving a fraction of the support.</p>
<p>If you're going to wave to meritocracy banner, that's awesome and in my opinion the right way to be thinking. But please keep in mind that you can't have it ala carte.</p>