-
Recently Browsing 0 members
- No registered users viewing this page.
-
Topics
-
-
-
Popular Contributors
-
1
-
2
-
3
.thumb.jpeg.d2d19a66404642fd9ff62d6262fd153e.jpeg)
-
4
-
5
-
-
-
Latest posts...
-
495
Will there ever be a safe vaccine?
Both points already addressed and you obviously haven't checked the sources. -
10
Missed 90 day report by over a month.
I'm gonna call bull<deleted> on that. -
49
Alligator Alcatraz Prison , the Cecot ,on the shores of the Everglades
I agree with you...my comment was in response to another post. -
96
USA Epstein Case Becomes a Boomerang for Trump-Era Conspiracy Theorists
No, he wanted to recapture the Crimea. You need to do more research as you are very ill-informed. -
39
Community American Tourist Assaulted by Bar Owner for Filming Venue
What's a singes? -
69
Would you send your kids to harvard?
Again you have referred to "earners" without defining what the earner is and what the income levels are. I read the 2023 paper you reference sometime ago. Reading comprehension is obviously not one your skills as you did not understand the context, nor the data presented in the article. The document is not specific to Harvard. On the contrary it contrasts 24 selective private colleges with 9 Highly Selective Public Flagship Colleges. The paper confirms what I already stated, that successful parents tend to have successful children. It is why parents work hard and sacrifice to provide opportunities for their children. The 24 universities emphasize on creating innovators, leaders and great thinkers. Therefore, their selection criteria is different. That is why they look at the extracurricular activities of students and have interviews. The public schools do not. You blame income, when the reality is that higher income earners are the people who typically fund the charities and the social progress of society. You also ignore the fact that sports scholarships skew admissions. College football and basketball is big money in the USA and Harvard is not recruiting marginal students into its football program the way Ole Miss or Alabama does. A low income student almost always picks the university that has the best compensation options, not academic options. The reality of the world is that people who have contributed and will be able to sustain an institution will be given an edge in their family's admissions because that is how the educational facility survives. The marginal student from a background of not having supported the community is not going to contribute to the continuation of the facility. This is why many universities in Europe and Canada have seen their campuses deteriorate and become dens of selfishness. Canada pursued foreign students from India. It was a self destructive spiral. The students generated income for the schools but imposed a burden on social structure such as affordable housing. These students gave nothing back to the schools, and the corruption that attached to their admissions became too much, such that the scheme finally collapsed as the social costs became too heavy. Lower income students can go to Harvard. The barrier is not income. It is the qualification of the student that is the obstacle. The flaw of the study of the paper you referenced is that it was based on the premise that income is the primary barrier to success. The reality of life is that the obstacles are multiple and include, character, intellectual ability,discipline, focus, socialization, contribution to society, personality as well as financial status. And sometimes not attending Harvard or Yale or other Ivy league universities is the best thing that can happen to a student. No one asks me about my universities, and most people in the workplace are focused on results and achievements. The people who matter, that can provide the juice and connections to move ahead are looking at the person, not the frat or undergrad history.
-
-
Popular in The Pub
Recommended Posts