I read an article about an editorial from the opinion section of the New York Times yesterday.
The author, Richard D. Kahlenberg, made an argument about whether the elites manipulate the system to their advantage ---easy college admission for their children. This is a good article because it provides strong evidence, logic thinking, and practical statistics.
The author’s intended audience could be college or university alumni, legacy children, lawyers, tax collectors, law makers, and populists. Populist is growing anger about this situation. They think the educational system is the United States is not fair now because colleges grant easy admission channel for the children of alumni. Some of the alumni and legacy children may argue that this is not true.
There is no hard evidence to prove that legacy preference are often justified as a way of building loyalty among alumni, sustaining tradition, and increasing donations for colleges. However, the author, Richard D. Kahlenberg provides a very strong evidence to make an argument --- “Studies have shown that being the child of an alumnus adds the equivalent of 160 SAT points to one’s application and increases one’s chances of admission by almost 20% points.”
There is no hard evidence to prove that legacy preference are often justified as a way of building loyalty among alumni, sustaining tradition, and increasing donations for colleges. However, the author, Richard D. Kahlenberg provides a very strong evidence to make an argument --- “Studies have shown that being the child of an alumnus adds the equivalent of 160 SAT points to one’s application and increases one’s chances of admission by almost 20% points.”
Both article and author are credible. The author, Richard D. Kahlenberg, is a senior fellow at the Century Foundation. Also, he is the editor of “Affirmative Action for the Rich: Legacy Preferences in College Admissions.” In this article, he uses Thomas Jefferson’s famous quote—“natural aristocracy based on virtue and talent” to explain hereditary preferences. Then he took and example –the two lawyers’ arguments in Pennsylvania, to explain legacy preference violates the US law. Finally, the author appeals Congress outlaw alumni preferences at all universities. Otherwise, it will put an end to the form of discrimination in higher education.
I agree with the author. Our government should protect the quality of the higher education. Congress should outlaw alumni preferences. If legislators don’t act, some colleges and universities will lose credit for people.
No comments:
Post a Comment