It's public information dipshit. btw, since English is your second language, perhaps you missed my point that AA = Affirmative Action..i.e. a person of color can gain admissions to Harvard, Yale, Princeton, merely by having superior test scores, grades to similar students in a pool of minority students. Likewise, athletes are thrown in the "athletic pool" which only requires/required a minimum benchmark score (combining class rank, gpa, sat/act scores) to gain admissions.
I played golf with school principal who assured me that Ivys now consider things like geographic diversity. In fact he stated that it is far easier for kids in CA to get into ivys because so few want to make the cross country trip. Like I said I have a sense ivys have mucked up their selection process away from academic "merit". but, I agree with your point about academic institutions. I was not thinking about them when I posted.
Good point about geographic diversity. I knew about that back in the day. I wouldn't have considered California, but it does make some sense since it is a cross country haul. I always thought of places like the Dakota's, Wyoming, Idaho, etc, etc...if you could graduate in the top 5% of your class and were the only kid in the area to apply to one of the Ivy's, there's a pretty good chance you'd get in.
no it's not...if so, please, send me a link, or an article to show how stupid I am in knowing that his thesis is NOT AVAILABLE FOR WITHDRAWAL anywhere at Harvard. you are really good at making yourself look like a fool and fyi perfect punctuation all (not some) of the time in type is for people who don't work on wall street
geographic diversification and geographic socioeconomic (as in if the city you grew up in was a shanty village vs a new york highrise) are simply 2 additional forms of affirmative action. the only kind of selection that i do actually support is some form of legacy to build tradition. other than that all of this AA/GD/GS is just a bunch of bullshit- and i'm sure you could argue against legacy, but i think of the 4 it clearly holds the most merit. athletes are a different division in and of themselves and each sport should be thought of as a business and if it is profitable have the scholarships available to invest in further profit. the whole title 9 (i think that's it at least) thing is just bullshit as well. if women sports don't raise any money, the schools shouldn't be forced to give them an equal number of scholarships. it just fucking blows when the government legislates how businesses must run.
Are you drunk? I said TEST SCORES, not his THESIS, you f'ing MORON! So please, go back into the rat infested shithole you came from In case you really are that mentally challenged, I offer you one of a myriad of sources for TEST SCORES. http://www.satscores.us/sat_scores_by_college.asp?college_id=166027
Good on you to keep the conversation going. It's a very good point comparing geographic diversification to AA. I'm not kidding when I say that I remember a few students families questioning whether they should move out of a metro area into the boondocks just to gain a leg up on college admissions. Athletic priority holds weight in the big time schools, but at the Ivy League level, there is a minimal amount of revenue generated. Title 9 is an abomination, but at the same time if a men's sport isn't generating revenue (lots of sports are just drains, especially scholarship sports that don't even have a fanbase)...then I suppose it gives the pc crowd a leg to stand on when arguing in favor of equalized scholarship OR admissions priority.
harvard? no, sir Also, your link is false. Those are for applicants. Harvard does NOT publish test score stats of admits. I challenge you to send me a link from the last 4 years of the three tests, I guarantee you won't find one. You call me stupid for talking about his thesis.... I was talking about that in the first place, then you respond with test scores. You're the drunk dumb shit. dumb
boom - that is the distinction I was not making. The applicants are high... but I am telling you that the admissions are skewed. I have 4 kids so I have been tracking this for a while. I have been told time after time by kids that the top kids in their class often do not get into the top schools. When I first was hearing this I figured the top kid must have had some flag in his record. But, I sense a pattern. I would say at least here in CA that many good students almost feel admission to Ivy and other top schools is close to random because the top of the class is not automatically going to a top school.