[cardcoug]

Read that article last week. Bunch of garbage. The author came into it with his conclusions decided and didn't even really try to massage the data to fit his viewpoint.

Exactly. I think the entire point is pretty well summed up toward the end: "It is noble that Stanford wants to make sure that any kid who is talented enough to gain admission there, regardless of income, has the option of doing so. It is, of course, preferable that Stanford and other schools have tuition waivers than nothing at all. These programs can only achieve their objective, however, if there are enough low-income high-school students who are accomplished enough to make the application cut for elite schools."

In other words, while Stanford is doing what it can to make its education more accessible, it hasn't eliminated all economic injustice in the United States. The rest of the article is an attempt to somehow spin this into a problem for Stanford's specific policy, generally in incoherent fashion.

[cardcoug]

Read that article last week. Bunch of garbage. The author came into it with his conclusions decided and didn't even really try to massage the data to fit his viewpoint.

Exactly. I think the entire point is pretty well summed up toward the end: "It is noble that Stanford wants to make sure that any kid who is talented enough to gain admission there, regardless of income, has the option of doing so. It is, of course, preferable that Stanford and other schools have tuition waivers than nothing at all. These programs can only achieve their objective, however, if there are enough low-income high-school students who are accomplished enough to make the application cut for elite schools."

In other words, while Stanford is doing what it can to make its education more accessible, it hasn't eliminated all economic injustice in the United States. The rest of the article is an attempt to somehow spin this into a problem for Stanford's specific policy, generally in incoherent fashion.