Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That's not at all what the article says about the score-- crime rate, housing,education level of parents, etc. It says nothing about the course offerings in the local school.
Let's say it is about the school. How does enhancing the application help when a student doesn't have the very background needed to succeed in the more selective programs?
All the things in the first paragraph apply to poor rural areas too. They are not talking about letting in u qualified people. They are simply trying to give the accomplishments of the kids in these areas a chance when compared to the applications of kids with more resources. Like the Loughlin kids posed as crew members because at that school rowing crew got them more points. At Harvard playing polo would be rated higher than ice hockey would. A semester in language immersion in France would weight that application higher. A 3.90 from a highly rated high school would be weighted higher than a 4.20 from a school in a low income area.
College admissions became very much a symbol of “it takes money to make money”. This is an attempt to balance it.
There is no need for an adversity score for economic reasons.
Harvard's financial aid programs pay 100 percent of tuition, fees, room, and board for students from families earning less than $65,000 a year. Families with incomes from $65,000 to $150,000 pay between zero and 10 percent of their income. Students graduate without a penny of debt.
Princeton's financial aid programs let over 83% graduate from college without a penny of debt.
Columbia University eliminated all student loans - there are no student loans as part of any financial aid package; all financial aid is free money. Students graduate without a penny of debt.
The University of Pennsylvania did the same: Penn eliminated all student loans - there are no student loans as part of any financial aid package; all financial aid is free money. Students graduate without a penny of debt.
Ditto for Brown: Brown eliminated all student loans - there are no student loans as part of any financial aid package; all financial aid is free money. Students graduate without a penny of debt.
At Cornell, if your parents earn less than $60,000 and have less than $100K in net worth, there are no student loans - just free tuition, room, board & fees. Students graduate without a penny of debt.
The University of Chicago's financial aid package is free tuition & fees for students whose families earn up to $125,000 per year. For students whose families earn up to $60,000, UChicago provides free tuition, fees, books, room & board.
MIT's package is free tuition for students whose families earn up to $80K.
Stanford's package: free tuition for students whose families earn up to $125,000 per year. For students whose families earn up to $60,000, Stanford provides free tuition, fees, room & board.
The list goes on and on and on and on and on...
Well something needs to be done...most of those schools have more students in the TOP 1% than the entire BOTTOM 60% income levels!?
What would they be sued for? And colleges have been considering adversity for decades already.
Harvard is currently being sued on the premise they arbitrarily give Asians lower subjective scores to reduce Asian acceptance/enrollment. If I understand correctly, Asians are still significantly over-represented there nonetheless. If the "adversity" score were baked into the SAT, then schools can shift the blame off themselves to avoid Harvard's current issues.
Harvard is currently being sued on the premise they arbitrarily give Asians lower subjective scores to reduce Asian acceptance/enrollment. If I understand correctly, Asians are still significantly over-represented there nonetheless. If the "adversity" score were baked into the SAT, then schools can shift the blame off themselves to avoid Harvard's current issues.
Harvard's lawsuit deals with alleged unlawful racial bias in contravention of federal law tied to university funding; no one questions that Harvard can consider race all that it wants to in admissions as a private university (the equal protection clause only regulates the government). But Harvard has agreed to be bound to certain other rules by accepting federal grant and other aid. Of course, if the lawsuit against Harvard is successful, the university would still be able to continue on with its racial affirmative action policies so long as it isn't taking federal dollars.
On the whole, I haven't read anything to suggest that the adversity score on the SAT will account for race. True, the College Board hasn't been 100% transparent about it, but what has been released has led me to believe that racial background won't be a consideration.
There certainly isn't any problem with considering certain other factors (i.e. socioeconomic status, neighborhood raised in, etc.) in admissions and schools have done so in the past. There also isn't a problem considering race in admissions per the Supreme Court under certain circumstances. The only question in the Harvard case is whether Harvard has gone beyond what is allowed (as is tied to federal laws/funds).
You've said that before are you sure that's a correct claim?
The elite privates and Ivy's are majorly skewed towards the wealthy and uber-wealthy. Haven't seen all the details, but stand by that claim on a good number of them. Hope I'm wrong but don't think so. And yes, Asians have the toughest time getting into Harvard (and elite privates) for sure.
The elite privates and Ivy's are majorly skewed towards the wealthy and uber-wealthy. Haven't seen all the details, but stand by that claim on a good number of them. Hope I'm wrong but don't think so. And yes, Asians have the toughest time getting into Harvard (and elite privates) for sure.
That's a lot different than saying there are more top 1% admittees than bottom 60% admittees.
There is no need for an adversity score for economic reasons.
Harvard's financial aid programs pay 100 percent of tuition, fees, room, and board for students from families earning less than $65,000 a year. Families with incomes from $65,000 to $150,000 pay between zero and 10 percent of their income. Students graduate without a penny of debt.
Princeton's financial aid programs let over 83% graduate from college without a penny of debt.
Columbia University eliminated all student loans - there are no student loans as part of any financial aid package; all financial aid is free money. Students graduate without a penny of debt.
The University of Pennsylvania did the same: Penn eliminated all student loans - there are no student loans as part of any financial aid package; all financial aid is free money. Students graduate without a penny of debt.
Ditto for Brown: Brown eliminated all student loans - there are no student loans as part of any financial aid package; all financial aid is free money. Students graduate without a penny of debt.
At Cornell, if your parents earn less than $60,000 and have less than $100K in net worth, there are no student loans - just free tuition, room, board & fees. Students graduate without a penny of debt.
The University of Chicago's financial aid package is free tuition & fees for students whose families earn up to $125,000 per year. For students whose families earn up to $60,000, UChicago provides free tuition, fees, books, room & board.
MIT's package is free tuition for students whose families earn up to $80K.
Stanford's package: free tuition for students whose families earn up to $125,000 per year. For students whose families earn up to $60,000, Stanford provides free tuition, fees, room & board.
The list goes on and on and on and on and on...
That only applies to the richest (typically most elite) colleges, who are the only ones with endowments big enough to be “need blind”. The thing is, only something like 3-4% of all college students in a given year end up at an elite school, so it’s not like there’s a guarantee poor students will even get in.
The vast majority of colleges cannot meet full need for all students.
Lots of Poorer students do indeed end up making choices based on affordability, unless they are the valedictorian or close to it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
