There are 3 times more staff than teachers in our school system. Let that sink in. Would you go get an oil change where there's 3 secretaries and 1 mechanic?
i agree that private schools should be able to set their own admissions policies. like a lot of legislation in this state --those it is intended to benefit may well end up being hurt by it because as donations dry up there will be fewer scholarships as a result.
Legacy Admissions in UC and Cal State schools may be counter to everyone paying taxes for the schools. However, I don't see a problem with Stanford, USC, and Santa Clara using Legacy as a means of better treatment. The Legacy people are likely to have more loyalty to the university. That is good to great financially for any university. Actually it even seems that they should use it for the top UC schools. They could stand to have their alumni to be more motivated to give money to the universities. Cal and UCLA are probably the best examples of universities that could use Legacy admissions to get more and bigger donations. They have been hurting increasingly over the years. I remember the University of California use to have almost no tuition and other fees. Where have those days gone? Wouldn't virtually free top universities be incredibly important to people who do not have as much money. They might admit more low income students if they could admit more Legacy students. Plus a Stanford guy said that two thirds of the donations go to financial aid. With the increasing costs of housing and food, that can be a very determining factor in whether a low income student can afford to go to college. That was the idea behind making the JC's effectively free. Unfortunately the JC's do not prepare students well for Cal, UCLA, Stanford, etc. The work load for the homework is made so lax that students have to perhaps triple their efforts if they manage to get into Cal, UCLA, or Stanford. This seems to be another case of California creating too many laws to control citizens' lives. I remember when California didn't have enough power to avoid black outs and brown outs. However, didn't many people think that the ecological concerns were too important to allow companies to build power plants?
This backfire. Donations may drop off. Tuition will be raised, class size will be smaller, more foreign stidents admitted, less California students will be admitted, and California taxpayers will have to give these universities more money.
There are 3 times more staff than teachers in our school system. Let that sink in. Would you go get an oil change where there's 3 secretaries and 1 mechanic?
i agree that private schools should be able to set their own admissions policies. like a lot of legislation in this state --those it is intended to benefit may well end up being hurt by it because as donations dry up there will be fewer scholarships as a result.
How about children of faculty and administrators? This seems like more of an issue IMO.
People still don’t know that America’s top universities (arguably universities in general) keep our unspoken class system running?
Legacy Admissions in UC and Cal State schools may be counter to everyone paying taxes for the schools. However, I don't see a problem with Stanford, USC, and Santa Clara using Legacy as a means of better treatment. The Legacy people are likely to have more loyalty to the university. That is good to great financially for any university. Actually it even seems that they should use it for the top UC schools. They could stand to have their alumni to be more motivated to give money to the universities. Cal and UCLA are probably the best examples of universities that could use Legacy admissions to get more and bigger donations. They have been hurting increasingly over the years. I remember the University of California use to have almost no tuition and other fees. Where have those days gone? Wouldn't virtually free top universities be incredibly important to people who do not have as much money. They might admit more low income students if they could admit more Legacy students. Plus a Stanford guy said that two thirds of the donations go to financial aid. With the increasing costs of housing and food, that can be a very determining factor in whether a low income student can afford to go to college. That was the idea behind making the JC's effectively free. Unfortunately the JC's do not prepare students well for Cal, UCLA, Stanford, etc. The work load for the homework is made so lax that students have to perhaps triple their efforts if they manage to get into Cal, UCLA, or Stanford. This seems to be another case of California creating too many laws to control citizens' lives. I remember when California didn't have enough power to avoid black outs and brown outs. However, didn't many people think that the ecological concerns were too important to allow companies to build power plants?
Stanford is a private school. They should be able to admit who they want. Money will always talk.
If that is the case, minorities don’t have much of a chance at these schools.
Says the guy that probably went to trade school
@@morrisjones9537Affirmative Action?
This backfire. Donations may drop off. Tuition will be raised, class size will be smaller, more foreign stidents admitted, less California students will be admitted, and California taxpayers will have to give these universities more money.
OMG accepting students based only on merit, what a concept!