I remember how it was -- JR
Thursday, October 28, 2021
Companies Should Abandon College Degree Requirements if They Really Want to Increase Diversity
While most parents were practically filling out their children’s college applications, my mom was trying to convince me that I didn’t need a fancy degree to start earning money.
“You want to be a writer — just start writing!” she would tell me. As a teenager, her advice only made my desire to attend college grow stronger. Much to my great disappointment, I can now say she was absolutely right.
There are things I love about college: The people I’ve met and the places it’s taken me around the world. But in terms of educational outcomes, I gained more knowledge in the first week of my internship than from the last four years of classes.
In my experience, college is no longer about passing tests, engaging in discourse, or even learning about a subject area. College is about regurgitating what professors want to hear and rubbing elbows with an elitist society of well-connected people who can offer you a job that you aren’t qualified for.
If I did it all over again, I probably would have skipped the whole thing and saved $200,000.
Trending: One Crucial Official Was Nowhere to Be Seen as Biden Attends Tribute for 491 Fallen Officers
Of course, there are some technical careers that do require higher education. I probably wouldn’t allow a self-taught doctor to operate on me, and I wouldn’t drive over a bridge built by a self-taught engineer. But I can confidently say I would hire a self-taught, independent journalist over one who has been corrupted by a homogenous batch of like-minded academics.
Businesses removing the requirement of a college degree would not only increase the diversity of the workforce but also attract free-thinking individuals who have talent and character, all while undercutting the overvalued and overpriced nature of those degrees.
It’s not the color of a person’s skin but the school on their degree that remains the most artificial barrier keeping them from entering the workforce.
Prior to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, many companies had a history of discriminating against women and people of color. After Title VII was enacted, society demanded that those companies reverse their discriminatory practices. The way many organizations decided to treat discrimination was by implementing diversity initiatives and imposing racial quotas in hiring practices.
According to a report by Bloomberg last year, an increasing number of companies have adopted workforce quotas. Wells Fargo announced it would “increase black leadership” to 12 percent, Ralph Lauren pledged that 20 percent of its “global leaders” would be people of color, and Delta Airlines said it will double its percentage of black “officers and directors” by 2025.
Implementing racial quotas, however, fails to account for individuals who have faced adversity due to their financial circumstances. A Harvard graduate certainly has not faced the same challenges as a kid who grew up on the South Side of Chicago.
In a system that screens only for race, wealthy people of color will inevitably fill the spots, while individuals with fewer resources remain on the outside. Eliminating the necessity of college degrees would allow people who did not have the financial ability to afford school to enter the workforce.
According to a 2018 article in the Harvard Business Review, “Black men and women still represent a very low percentage of the professional white-collar workforce (less than 8%), given their overall representation in the population.”
The driving factor behind the underrepresentation of black Americans is seen in college graduation statistics. Among workers over age 25, Census Bureau data from 2019 show that while 40 percent of white adults hold at least a bachelor’s degree, only 26 percent of black adults have a bachelor’s degree or higher.
Related: Yale Law Students Tried to Throw Pro-America Party, Here's What Happened 12 Hours Later
If corporations hope to promote diversity and equal opportunity, they should work less on creating artificial racial compositions and turn focus to eliminating the barriers that keep people from employment.
Additionally, those without college degrees often have the skills and work ethic needed for higher-paying jobs, yet the positions are typically filled with those carrying collegiate pedigrees.
According to a report by the nonprofit Opportunity@Work, as many as 30 million U.S. workers without college diplomas have the skills necessary to earn 70 percent more. The report argues that employer education requirements are keeping these workers from attaining jobs they are qualified for.
Those who do not attend college have many other ways to gain skills through alternative routes. Some might enroll in tech bootcamps or community college programs. Others complete free workforce training, on-the-job skills building and military service. In this digital age, people can even use YouTube as a resource for education.
In the business world, nothing matters more than work ethic. According to Forbes, a growth mindset, continuous learning, survival skills and resilience are among the top skills recruiters are looking for in 2021.
The assumption that college graduates are more equipped in these areas simply does not hold up. My own observation is that college radicalizes students, leads them to shut down ideas that challenge their thinking and breeds mechanical memorizers. Those who carve their own path in life tend to take more responsibility for themselves and respect learning from others.
Finally, requiring a college education drives up the value of undergraduate degrees, which most students already agree are not worth the money or time.
Inside Higher Ed examined surveys that evaluated students’ college experiences post-pandemic. Roughly two-thirds agreed with the statement that “higher education is not worth the cost to students anymore.”
The burnout I’ve seen is astonishing. Students turn their cameras off and sleep through Zoom class. Those who go in person watch Netflix on their computers. Some professors are so desperate to engage students that they ask them to write daily reports on anything they learned. I don’t blame them.
With the average price of college sitting at $35,720 per year, students practically sell their souls for a degree. On average, it takes a student close to 20 years to pay off their loan debt. For some graduates, it can take more than 45 years. Those numbers don’t even take into consideration the other costs associated with college — everything from textbooks to housing.
The need for college is changing, and it’s time for companies to catch up with the times.
Corporations like Costco, Home Depot and Google have already rejected considering college degrees while screening candidates for employment opportunities. If more companies want to increase diversity, attract better talent and reject a system that drains millions of bank accounts, then it’s time for them to follow in their footsteps.
***********************************************
Amherst Eliminates Legacy Preferences
Amherst College announced Wednesday that it is eliminating the preference it has granted in admissions to legacy applicants since the 1920s. Currently, 11 percent of Amherst students are legacies.
“Now is the time to end this historic program that inadvertently limits educational opportunity by granting a preference to those whose parents are graduates of the college,” said Biddy Martin, president of Amherst. “We want to create as much opportunity for as many academically talented young people as possible, regardless of financial background or legacy status. There should be no doubt that a world-class education is within reach for students from all income groups.”
An FAQ posted to the website by the college said, “The use of legacy admission preference has never compromised very high standards -- admitted children of alumni are highly qualified, academically and otherwise. With this change, there will be neither an advantage nor a disadvantage to children of alumni; academically well-qualified children will be considered using the same criteria as the rest of the applicant pool.”
The FAQ also said, “After more than a year of study, the leadership and board determined that ending legacy preferences … would further expand our ongoing efforts to increase the diversity and variety of lived experience of the students attending Amherst. We are proud to be among the first of our peers to take this important step towards a more equitable system of higher education.”
One question in the FAQ was, how will the change affect alumni giving?
The answer, “We studied and debated this decision carefully before moving forward; ultimately, we believe that ending the legacy preference will have a significant positive impact on the college’s ability to deliver on its mission of opportunity and accessibility. We anticipate that this commitment to our mission will resonate with many alumni.”
Amherst also announced that it would add to its financial aid program. Under the new policy, Amherst will spend $71 million on aid next year, an increase of $4 million.
“With this enhancement, most students with total family incomes below $141,000 will receive a scholarship of at least $60,700 per year, an amount equal to Amherst’s tuition this year. And most students with total family incomes below $67,500 will receive a scholarship of at least $76,800, which is Amherst’s comprehensive fee for tuition, housing, and meals this year.”
These demographics represents substantial change for the college, which has long had a reputation for mostly educating white students from wealthy New England families. It is among the most expensive colleges in the country (tuition, room and board of $76,800 last year). It is a true liberal arts college at a time when many people are questioning the mission of liberal arts institutions. It’s a small college, with a little more than 1,800 students, in a small city in Massachusetts. Minority students can be reluctant to seek out a college in such a location.
Viet Nguyen, a Brown University graduate who recently founded a group of young alumni who vowed not to donate money to their alma maters if they continue legacy admissions, praised Amherst’s move. He said that just as colleges must improve their financial aid policies to attract students, so too colleges eliminating the legacy preference without also providing more aid won’t bring about real change. (Nguyen said his group has some Amherst alumni, who will be notified of the college’s change.)
He said his organization would soon send notes about Amherst’s decision to the boards of private colleges with legacy admissions. The message will be “This can be done,” he said.
But will other colleges follow Amherst’s lead?
Johns Hopkins University ended legacy admissions in 2019, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and California Institute of Technology do not use legacy admissions. However, most competitive private colleges do. Governor Jared Polis of Colorado, a Democrat, signed legislation in May to bar legacy preferences in admissions by public colleges and universities in the state.
At Hopkins, university administrators shifted the legacy policy gradually, starting in 2014 before ending it officially in 2020. In 2013, 8.5 percent of admitted students at Hopkins were legacies, 8.1 percent of the class was first generation and 12.8 percent of the class was eligible for a Pell Grant. This year, with the policy fully in place, only 3.7 percent of the class is a legacy admit, 17.8 percent are first generation and 20.1 percent were eligible for a Pell Grant.
Williams College, another elite private liberal arts institution in Massachusetts, offered qualified support for Amherst’s decision, although no indication that it would follow Amherst.
“The Amherst announcement is a fresh entry in the ongoing reconsideration of college admission practices, and we support them in making the choice that was right for them,” Williams said. “At Williams we’re expanding our own efforts to build diversity and provide what we call ‘true affordability’ by expanding our financial aid to include students’ health insurance and all required books and course materials, as well as reducing the cost to middle-income families by revising our financial aid methodology … It’s through such efforts that Williams, Amherst and our peers are trying to make an outstanding education more affordable and accessible to the students and families we serve.”
One group that has defended legacy admissions is the Council for Advancement and Support of Education. Robert Moore, vice president for marketing and communications of CASE, said the Amherst decision did not change CASE’s policy.
“CASE strongly asserts that legacy status should never be the sole criterion for acceptance to a college or university,” he said. “Institutions develop admissions criteria to ensure that each entering class is comprised of students who show the potential to succeed and who will take advantage of the specific opportunities that the institution can offer. At some institutions, an applicant’s legacy status is given consideration; in those instances, the advancement professionals that CASE serves are asked to work with their colleagues in admissions when institutional structures and guidelines warrant such interaction. In other institutions, no interaction between advancement professionals and their admissions counterparts takes place.”
****************************************
34% of white college students lied about their race to improve chances of admission, financial aid benefits
Every year, aspiring college students complete admissions applications, with the hopes that their grades, extracurriculars, and recommendations will lift them above the pack, and earn them acceptance at the school of their choice.
However, some college applicants are misrepresenting their race in an effort to use their desired school’s diversity efforts to gain admission, or obtain more financial aid.
Intelligent.com asked 1,250 white college applicants ages 16 and older if they lied on their application by indicating they were a racial minority.
The survey found that 34% of white Americans who’ve applied to college falsely claimed on their applications they’re a racial minority.
The number one reason why applicants faked minority status is to improve their chances of getting accepted (81%). Fifty percent also lied to benefit from minority-focused financial aid.
Men are three times as likely than women to lie about their race on a college application. Forty-eight percent of male respondents claimed to be a minority on their college application, compared to just 16% of female applicants.
Lying also varies by age groups, with 43% of people 35-44 years old, and 41% of 16-24 year-olds admitting to faking a racial minority status when applying to college.
Those rates are lower for 25-34 year-olds (31%); 45-54 year-olds (28%), and people 54 and older (13%).
Nearly half of all respondents who lied about their minority status (48%) identified themselves as Native American on their applications.
Thirteen percent claimed to be Latino, 10% claimed to be Black, and 9% claimed to be Asian or Pacific Islander.
According to Intelligent.com Managing Editor Kristen Scatton, the prevalence of applicants who claim Native American ancestry is possibly due to the popular narrative that for many Americans, a small percentage of their DNA comes from a Native American tribe.
“For college applicants who are trying to give their application a boost by pretending to be a racial minority, they may seize on this notion that many Americans of European descent have some Native American DNA in their bloodline,” Scatton says. “However, research has shown that’s not all that common, particularly among white Americans. But applicants are banking on the fact that no college is going to ask them to provide a DNA sample to verify.”
Seventy-seven percent of people who claimed to be a racial minority on their applications were accepted by the colleges to which they lied.
While other factors may have played a role in their acceptance, the majority of applicants who lied and were accepted (85%) believe that falsifying their racial minority status helped them secure admission to college.
Despite the ethical and moral drawbacks, Scatton warns future applicants that trying similar ploys to increase admissions chances isn’t worth the risk.
“Lying on a college application about anything, including your race, is never a good idea,” she says. “Colleges can and will rescind admissions offers if they discover students lied during the application process.”
***********************************
My other blogs: Main ones below
http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)
http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)
http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)
http://australian-politics.blogspot.com/ (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)
http://snorphty.blogspot.com/ (TONGUE-TIED)
*******************************
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment