Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums General Discussion Changes in college admissions policies?

Okay, what about the other 124 donation admits? At Duke alone? Multiply that by 20, 30, or more top tier schools, and pretty soon you're into the thousands.

No one arguing that donation admissions are acceptable has commented on the large set of information I provided that shows pretty clearly that donation admissions are a significant phenomenon in college admissions. I find that interesting.

Mithawk, you asked for proof. I provided it, and you focused on a single point, ignoring all the other evidence. In my experience, this type of reaction is a sign of not wanting to acknowledge the facts.

I know of someone who is in the top most earning bracket in the US who made 2 phone calls to his connections and promised millions (don't know how many) and their special snowflake got into Stanford despite SAT scores that were not stellar - the child was told to apply for a different major because the popular one that she wanted was oversubscribed and it was suggested that she change majors in a few months to the one that she wanted. I am not well networked, am middle class and have a child in elementary school and don't really go looking for info like this - so, if even I heard about this, chances are that there are more of these things happening all around me!
Money speaks, sometimes crassly, sometimes subtly and meritocracy sometimes takes a backseat. But, I am an optimist and believe that there are enough good college seats for all of our kids!

No way that Duke or any other school has 125 seven figure donors each year. That means that they could cover the cost of attendance for every incoming freshman (for the first year anyway) with some money left over.

The 125 included others with connections. Connections/legacy are not always kids that could not get in on their own. I'll let you know how it goes for middle kid this year. Her legacy connection college isn't elite, but well known and fairly highly ranked. Mom, dad, aunt and uncle all attended the school, and the school heavily considers legacy. She is also above the 75th percentile test scores. So what if they let her in and that is in part due to her connections? I assure you it will not be because of a seven figure donation.

Colleges benefit from tax breaks (deductions for donationa, tax exemptions for endowment investment income) and subsidies (Pell grants, guaranteed student loans). It could be argued that government-subsidized institutions should not be nepotistic, but that ideal is often not met. There are foundations and churches that give jobs to relatives of the founder.

I would not mind if my alma mater abolished legacy preferences, but I am not outraged by them, because trying to benefit one's offspring, even as adults, is natural and common. Small business owners commonly employ their children and pass on their businesses to them. Is that bad? Two of our three children have expressed interest in becoming doctors, like their mother. She says she wants to pay for not just college but medical school, because she did not leave medical school with debt in her country (where the path to becoming a doctor is shorter). They will be "privileged" over students with several hundred thousand dollars in college and medical school loans. Should parents with the means to do so not help adult children?

This, exactly.

I'm no longer very convinced that good college seats are necessarily to be found exclusively in the so-called elite schools, however. I've shifted my opinion on this even in the time since my daughter entered high school five years ago.

It seems more and more to be a system which is about token diversity accompanied by an overwhelming culture of extreme privilege. No, thank you. While that makes me sad, because I do believe that at one time, those institutions were about quality in education and commitment to their mission statements, I strongly suspect that those days are long since vanished.

I'm increasingly of the opinion-- and I'm not alone-- that the better bet for highly capable students is to get out of undergraduate studies without debt, and not to worry over-much about the branding of one's diploma.

My child isn't a daughter of the 1%, and therefore, an elite college isn't a part of meeting that particular goal. A full-service research institution can be, however, because she is easily a standout among that cohort. Interestingly, she's met quite a number of other students who have opted for this same approach.

Also interesting-- no Common App, and no letters of recommendation from anyone. Wasn't part of the application at all. They cared about EC's, sure-- but more as a way of seeing who has the ability to handle academics with ease, as opposed to those working 50-70 hours a week to pull A's in a few AP courses, if that makes sense.

It depends on what they want to do afterwards. The brand does matter for finance and consulting jobs. It matters less for aspiring physicians and professors, I think, but for the latter group the graduate school matters a lot.

This is similar to my current opinion: graduate from a reasonable 4 year college (state uni, respectable-but-not-necessarily-top-tier private), and then a strong graduate program in your area of actual career interest/aspiration.

I'd even add, there's something to be said for backing it up one more step, and picking up a vocational certification on your way through high school, or during a gap year, so that you have the possibility of working your way through college with a job with a living wage, rather than at minimum wage.

Instead of giving less weight to AP exams, I'd like to see scores reported on a finer scale. A score of 5 corresponds to a wide raw score range. The 12 students who got perfect scores on the AP Calculus exam (see the article Lincoln High School student gets perfect score on AP Calculus exam -- 1 of 12 in the world to do so) deserve a bit more credit than the the other students who scored 5's. Some will say "don't report raw scores -- it will just increase the pressure to be perfect". My answer is that other things being equal, schools should prefer the best students, and I'd rather have students competing based on academics.

Except for the first clause, which I think waters the rest of the sentence down, I fully agree with Bostonian's last sentence above because it will certainly provide the best means to differentiate those with 5s. It just makes sense.

The point of the ivies is that they allow you to shine for the rest of your life with a vibrant glow of achievementistic glory.

It's not really whether you are "suited" toward the college or get an "education".

Think of it as an "awesomeness certificate."

Plus, you get to join things like the Harvard Club.