This article is reproduced from the China Youth Daily client. The author is a professor at the University of Miami in the United States and an expert in comparing education and culture between China and the United States. Huang Quanyu :
In March 2019, the US's ill-telling corruption cases flooded the screen, and China's "baby is unhappy" flooded the screen.
The US's senior corruption case, federal prosecutors prosecuted 50 people, including 33 parents and 9 college sports coaches. What is shocking is that the coaches involved in the case come from many well-known universities, such as Yale, Stanford, UCLA, , University of Southern California, , etc. The amount involved reached US$25 million.
American society was shocked and called it "the most serious and largest enrollment fraud case in history." Famous schools are stigmatized!
On October 14, 2018 local time, protesters who opposed the Harvard University admission policy held a protest in the case of "Harvard Admissions Discrimination against Asians".
Someone commented that the United States is rigorous and fair in its tricks. Isn’t this also fraud? Some people also quickly concluded that it is better to "everyone is equal in front of scores".
Over the years, China has been reforming the college entrance examination, trying to break the mechanism of "recognizing scores but not people": "Recognizing scores, recognize people more!" At this time, the corruption case of enrollment in famous American universities was exposed, which made people doubt the unfairness of "recruitment", believing that we should return to the old path of "using exams instead of recording" of "everyone is equal in front of scores".
I have written a book about American college entrance examinations "The College Entrance Exam in America" (reprinted "How far are you from Harvard" - author's note). The English book proposed by the publisher is College Entrance Exams in America, but I changed it to College Admissions in America. Because, in the United States, "exam" and "record" are different, and "college entrance examination" does not represent "college tips". The Chinese "college entrance examination" and "high skills" are not easy to see the universe. Once translated into English, the characters "cai" and "chao" reveal the secrets of "heavenly".
As the saying goes, "Growing melons makes you get beans." The harvest of the next year depends on two points: first, what "seeds" to choose, and then how to choose good seeds. First, what to choose - the national standards for identifying talents; second, how to choose - scientifically, fairly, reasonably and strictly identify and select talents according to the standards.
is guided by "points", and everyone is trying to get the "points", which is exhausting! However, separation of recruitment and examinations is difficult. "Test" is quantifiable, very intuitive, and also like "fairness". "Test" = "Test" is concise and worry-free; at the same time, the "Test" water is too deep, and I am worried that I can't close the back door. Isn’t this the US college corruption case proves that recruitment is inseparable? Singer, the suspect in the
corruption case, said: "If you give an example, there is a front door that allows students to enter through their own efforts, and there is a back door that allows people to donate a lot of money through the school's donation system. I designed a side door..." I was worried about the back door, but now I have another "side door", which is comparable to the front door to make things messed up.
In fact, humans are social animals, so from a time perspective, the back door and the side door will never withdraw from the historical stage; from a space perspective, any country will have the evil ways of back door and the side door. What we have to do is: squeeze the back and side doors to a minimum!
As a scholar studying Sino-US education, I would like to explain and analyze the procedures and mechanisms of American skills in detail here. Let us think in a big framework: how to learn from the "high tricks" of the United States - "high" and Ming's "tactic tricks" to avoid their shortcomings! Give China a reference thinking about the reform of the college entrance examination. Below
, let’s talk about Ivy League enrollment.
The secret in the admissions office
Is there a back door and a side door for admissions to a world-class university? Yes, but it's not easy to open! Therefore, only one of the 50 people involved in the case was recruiting office, and they were responsible for the special sports enrollment - the hardest hit area of this corruption case did not participate in general enrollment. Regarding this point, we will analyze it specifically later.
Why is it difficult to open the back and side doors of the United States’ skilled back doors? There is a restaurant at the University of Miami in Ohio called "1809", which is named after it was founded in 1809. Harvard earlier, 1636. After more than two centuries of hard work, the system of skill can be said to be strictly guarded.
Please see the typical way of reviewing and screening applicants in top American universities - it is reported that in 2019, Duke University , which was ranked "old eighth" by " US News and World Report ", adopted this method.
For example, there are 15,000 applicants in a certain year, and their application materials have at least 100,000 copies. Each person must submit:
1. Part 1 of the application form, including the applicant's basic information: name, birthday, social security number, address, parents' occupation and education level, etc.
2. The second part of the application form generally includes the applicant's interests, hobbies, social activities, academic activities, extracurricular activities, working conditions, and awards. Some schools also have a series of "small" problems (also known as "small" compositions). The answers to each question are usually limited to 300 to 500 words. Most of them are questions that are not painful, have to answer, and are difficult to excel. For example, why apply to this university? What academic projects are you interested in?
3. Open book composition.
4. The third part of the application form is generally filled in by the school’s student consultant, including what courses have you taken? What level of courses? Average scores, rankings, student consultant evaluations...
5. High school transcripts. In mid-February of that year, the student's first semester of senior high school must also send out the transcript of the student; in early July, the transcript of the graduation was sent out.
6. Recommendation letter. A good university requires at least two letters of recommendation.
7. Interview report.
8. Various supplementary materials. Such as award certificates, published literary works, art works, musical works, etc.
9, SAT, ACT, SAT II single exam and other "college entrance examination" results.
Unseal, classify and divide these materials into pieces, and it will take about one to two weeks. Then, start reading, reviewing, and screening application materials.
First step: Several "first readers" review all application materials and write review opinions. It is said that Duke University's "first readers" include retired admissions office staff, faculty and staff of the school, alumni, graduate students, etc., and "temporary professionals" in all aspects. Because the "first readers" were temporarily selected, the materials they read were randomly selected. If someone wanted to "take the back door", he would "hold the pig's head and cannot find the temple gate."
The second step: Each recruitment office has its own "sphere of influence" by region - they have become "regional officials", responsible for carefully reading, reviewing, and screening application materials in this region and signing review opinions. In this way, each application material is guaranteed to be reviewed by at least two people, avoiding "mistake" selection caused by personal prejudice. In fact, it is also mutual restraint.
The third step: select the strongest candidates from 5% to 7%, and submit them to the director of the admissions office to make a decision. If both reviewers sign "admission" with green pen, they can generally pass the review of the dean. If the dean has different opinions, he will take it to the "Screening Committee" to discuss. At this stage, it seems easier to open the side door through the back door because not many people are "gate the check". But 5% to 7% of the 15,000 people can recognize the best with normal IQ. It is not easy to go to the backdoor at this stage. First of all, students have good conditions and there is no need to go through the back door; if the conditions are poor, who would like to act as an "idiot" in front of the dean? Secondly, without the opinions signed by the first and second reviewers in a green pen, any "blank" application materials in the dean's hand is tantamount to a short-circuit explosion.
The fourth step: "removing" the materials of the weakest applicants of 25% to 30%, and as applicants who are "rejected", they will be handed over to the vice president for final review. These rejected persons must be signed by both reviewers with a red pen to "reject acceptance". As long as one of the reviewers does not agree to immediately "reject it", the fifth step must be passed and handed over to the "Screen Committee" for discussion. As long as the vice president also signed the "rejection" with a red pen, these applicants will be thrown into "death prison" and there is almost no chance to overturn the case.
The fifth step: Except for 5% to 7% of applicants who are absolutely admitted and 25% to 30% of applicants who are absolutely not admitted, the rest will be discussed by the "Screening Committee".The personnel of the "Screening Committee" vary from school to school. Some schools are composed of professors from each college and senior officials of the admissions office; some are added with student representatives on this basis; some are composed only senior officials of the admissions office. It is said that the student committee of Rice University is also involved in the screening work; teachers of Duke University's Polytechnic School are also involved in the screening work. Generally speaking, various "officials" do not participate in the "screening committee". From the perspective of avoiding suspicion, the initial reviewers do not participate in the "screening committee". Of course, no matter who is composed, it must be an odd number in the end so that the vote can be made.
Step 6: The "Screening Committee" discusses this part of the most controversial and most crowded applicants one by one. It mainly discusses the review opinions of the first and second auditors. If there is any dispute, please refer to the original application materials. This is the most difficult, most complex, most detailed, most subtle, most challenging and most work-intensive key step in the entire enrollment work.
At this stage, those who walk through the back door and open the side door are thinking, but there are many difficulties.
It is said that Duke University’s “Screening Committee” is very cautious about the work at this stage. As long as one committee member believes that an applicant is worthy of detailed discussion, all members of the committee will think from all aspects and explore the applicant’s potential: What can this student contribute to the campus? What can the university’s expertise and favorable conditions provide for the potential development of this student?
Princeton University's admissions dean told me: "Everyone has the ability to see those shining jades. But some beautiful jades are mixed in stubborn stones, called 'nails', and the admissions personnel need to 'selves' in this step. Missing a child with training potential is greater than choosing a mediocre student! Choosing a mediocre talent, but wasting more than 100,000 US dollars; missing a talent is priceless, and it may even be a big loss for human beings."
Columbia University's Admissions Office Executive Director told me: "We also have a very strong belief that students can learn a lot from each other, whether in class or outside of class. Therefore, a group of students with different life experiences can bring great contributions to the campus. And these different experiences cannot be verified through the exam."
Miami University Boys Choir came to Beijing to sing for the "Beijing Olympics"
World-class universities are committed to building a multicultural campus - an academic society composed of people with different backgrounds, characteristics and abilities.
I went to the campus of China University in 1977. I have always missed our "hidden dragon and crunched tigers and varied" campus culture: "old school students" from the mountains, private teachers who have reached 10 years of teaching experience, high school students who are not tired of silly, transferees who always look like stepping down, "white-haired girl" who skips ballet in art troupes, county cadres who nail iron palms on plastic sandals, "stinky old nine" who has published works in provincial publications, workers who copied "Zuo Zhuan" with small regular script characters, young people who have lost their jobs because of listening to foreign language stations, "thinkers" who have been jailed because of dissatisfaction with the "Gang of Four", children of high-ranking officials in high walls and deep courtyards, returning overseas Chinese who speak pidgin Mandarin, "old senior three" who keeps talking about "Gotha Program Criticism"... Of course, there are also top scorers in the college entrance examination. Although love was forbidden in college at that time, everyone gathered to talk about it as a feast of thought that was endless. You can meet several talents when you urinate in the toilet. This constitutes the priceless property of campus culture.
scores do not recognize people, and the students recruited are too single. The campus culture composed of homogeneous students with similar advantages and disadvantages is also unhealthy.
In short, the mission of enrollment personnel is to bring all kinds of talents together to create a colorful academic environment so that they can collide with each other and make progress together.
Speaking of the "secret" of the admissions office, we have to talk about the funding policies related to money.
Need-blind: Blind means "to touch the dark". That is, when reviewing the admission qualifications of students, they do not look at their family’s financial situation at all.Whether you are a homeless man who can’t even afford to pay for food or a billionaire who is rich enough to rival a country, you will be "disdainful"! Only review the applicant's own conditions and be admitted as long as they pass. Therefore, it may be admitted to a kid who is so poor that he may be admitted to Bill Gates 's daughter. In short, no matter who you are admitted, you will only come to "set the accounts after the autumn" after the admission - to calculate whether you need funding? How much funding is needed?
Although this is a very fair admission policy, because many reviewers subconsciously "support" children from difficult families (such as Harvard once admitted to homeless girls, and Berkeley once recruited homeless people), this puts children from poor families in a certain way at a disadvantage.
Need-based: Need means "need", based on it; that is, funding is issued "based on needs", which is considered based on the applicant's family financial status. If the family is in trouble, the school will pay more (even free school); if the family is not in trouble, the school will pay less; the rich family will not subsidize pennies. The University Funding Office has a set of calculation formulas: How much does a family income? How many people are there? How many children go to college? What are the fixed assets of the household? How much bank deposits are there? How much shareholding? Fill in the formula and the “answer” comes out: How much scholarship does the school need to provide (free, no need to pay back the money)? How much does a student need to borrow? How many jobs do students need to do? How much does a family need to pay...it is clear at a glance. For example, if you need $50,000 to go to school, the formula shows that your family can only pay $10,000, and the gap is $40,000, and the school will fund you $40,000.
Every year, students must provide family tax returns, and the school recalculates your "need-based" funding amount. As family income increases, funding will decrease; otherwise, funding will increase. This is the essence of "need-based". If you have made a fortune (winning lottery, stock trading or other legal income) after you are admitted, but you have concealed it and continue to receive the same funding, once you find out, you will be subject to legal sanctions.
Merit-based: Merit means "talent", which means "capital based" grant. This is the funding method corresponding to "need-based". The principle of funding is considered based on the applicant's own academic status and qualifications in all aspects. The better the grades and higher the conditions, the school will issue more scholarships; otherwise, it will issue less scholarships. In order to increase the attractiveness, many schools with slightly lower rankings "attract" some good students (applicants who have good conditions but cannot get too much funding due to their good family financial conditions) and often adopt the "Merit-based" funding policy.
In short, need-based is funding based on the family financial status of qualified persons, and Merit-based is funding only based on their own qualifications.
"dark curtain" of robbing the rich and helping the poor
The United States has a great trick scandal, some say it is "dark curtain", and some say it is "fraud". "Shame" refers to behind-the-scenes transactions, and "fraud cases" are cases of private fraud. The media has disclosed many "corruption cases". As for "behind-the-scenes transactions", let's unveil the "scene" and take a look at the "deals" behind it.
American college admissions are quite a bit like "robbing the rich and helping the poor". The average grade of the rich family is B not as valuable as that of the poor. If there is only one quota, the result is likely to be "robbing the rich and helping the poor" - tilting towards the disadvantaged group. Because although the results of both are B, the process of getting B between the two is very different. If you give the weaker a chance, he is more likely to give you a surprise!
However, is it the American trick that must "rob the rich and help the poor"?
may not be!
html earns 200,000 to 300,000 US dollars in annual income, no more or less, and the average score of the child is B, and he might be on the list of "Ivy League" and he was "shooted".But if the parents are very rich, the story will be different.
American universities all set up "Development Office" or "Alumni Office" (the name may vary from school to school), and the main task of the office is to "find money".
This article is reproduced from the China Youth Daily client. The author is a professor at the University of Miami in the United States and an expert in comparing education and culture between China and the United States. Huang Quanyu :
In March 2019, the US's ill-telling corruption cases flooded the screen, and China's "baby is unhappy" flooded the screen.
The US's senior corruption case, federal prosecutors prosecuted 50 people, including 33 parents and 9 college sports coaches. What is shocking is that the coaches involved in the case come from many well-known universities, such as Yale, Stanford, UCLA, , University of Southern California, , etc. The amount involved reached US$25 million.
American society was shocked and called it "the most serious and largest enrollment fraud case in history." Famous schools are stigmatized!
On October 14, 2018 local time, protesters who opposed the Harvard University admission policy held a protest in the case of "Harvard Admissions Discrimination against Asians".
Someone commented that the United States is rigorous and fair in its tricks. Isn’t this also fraud? Some people also quickly concluded that it is better to "everyone is equal in front of scores".
Over the years, China has been reforming the college entrance examination, trying to break the mechanism of "recognizing scores but not people": "Recognizing scores, recognize people more!" At this time, the corruption case of enrollment in famous American universities was exposed, which made people doubt the unfairness of "recruitment", believing that we should return to the old path of "using exams instead of recording" of "everyone is equal in front of scores".
I have written a book about American college entrance examinations "The College Entrance Exam in America" (reprinted "How far are you from Harvard" - author's note). The English book proposed by the publisher is College Entrance Exams in America, but I changed it to College Admissions in America. Because, in the United States, "exam" and "record" are different, and "college entrance examination" does not represent "college tips". The Chinese "college entrance examination" and "high skills" are not easy to see the universe. Once translated into English, the characters "cai" and "chao" reveal the secrets of "heavenly".
As the saying goes, "Growing melons makes you get beans." The harvest of the next year depends on two points: first, what "seeds" to choose, and then how to choose good seeds. First, what to choose - the national standards for identifying talents; second, how to choose - scientifically, fairly, reasonably and strictly identify and select talents according to the standards.
is guided by "points", and everyone is trying to get the "points", which is exhausting! However, separation of recruitment and examinations is difficult. "Test" is quantifiable, very intuitive, and also like "fairness". "Test" = "Test" is concise and worry-free; at the same time, the "Test" water is too deep, and I am worried that I can't close the back door. Isn’t this the US college corruption case proves that recruitment is inseparable? Singer, the suspect in the
corruption case, said: "If you give an example, there is a front door that allows students to enter through their own efforts, and there is a back door that allows people to donate a lot of money through the school's donation system. I designed a side door..." I was worried about the back door, but now I have another "side door", which is comparable to the front door to make things messed up.
In fact, humans are social animals, so from a time perspective, the back door and the side door will never withdraw from the historical stage; from a space perspective, any country will have the evil ways of back door and the side door. What we have to do is: squeeze the back and side doors to a minimum!
As a scholar studying Sino-US education, I would like to explain and analyze the procedures and mechanisms of American skills in detail here. Let us think in a big framework: how to learn from the "high tricks" of the United States - "high" and Ming's "tactic tricks" to avoid their shortcomings! Give China a reference thinking about the reform of the college entrance examination. Below
, let’s talk about Ivy League enrollment.
The secret in the admissions office
Is there a back door and a side door for admissions to a world-class university? Yes, but it's not easy to open! Therefore, only one of the 50 people involved in the case was recruiting office, and they were responsible for the special sports enrollment - the hardest hit area of this corruption case did not participate in general enrollment. Regarding this point, we will analyze it specifically later.
Why is it difficult to open the back and side doors of the United States’ skilled back doors? There is a restaurant at the University of Miami in Ohio called "1809", which is named after it was founded in 1809. Harvard earlier, 1636. After more than two centuries of hard work, the system of skill can be said to be strictly guarded.
Please see the typical way of reviewing and screening applicants in top American universities - it is reported that in 2019, Duke University , which was ranked "old eighth" by " US News and World Report ", adopted this method.
For example, there are 15,000 applicants in a certain year, and their application materials have at least 100,000 copies. Each person must submit:
1. Part 1 of the application form, including the applicant's basic information: name, birthday, social security number, address, parents' occupation and education level, etc.
2. The second part of the application form generally includes the applicant's interests, hobbies, social activities, academic activities, extracurricular activities, working conditions, and awards. Some schools also have a series of "small" problems (also known as "small" compositions). The answers to each question are usually limited to 300 to 500 words. Most of them are questions that are not painful, have to answer, and are difficult to excel. For example, why apply to this university? What academic projects are you interested in?
3. Open book composition.
4. The third part of the application form is generally filled in by the school’s student consultant, including what courses have you taken? What level of courses? Average scores, rankings, student consultant evaluations...
5. High school transcripts. In mid-February of that year, the student's first semester of senior high school must also send out the transcript of the student; in early July, the transcript of the graduation was sent out.
6. Recommendation letter. A good university requires at least two letters of recommendation.
7. Interview report.
8. Various supplementary materials. Such as award certificates, published literary works, art works, musical works, etc.
9, SAT, ACT, SAT II single exam and other "college entrance examination" results.
Unseal, classify and divide these materials into pieces, and it will take about one to two weeks. Then, start reading, reviewing, and screening application materials.
First step: Several "first readers" review all application materials and write review opinions. It is said that Duke University's "first readers" include retired admissions office staff, faculty and staff of the school, alumni, graduate students, etc., and "temporary professionals" in all aspects. Because the "first readers" were temporarily selected, the materials they read were randomly selected. If someone wanted to "take the back door", he would "hold the pig's head and cannot find the temple gate."
The second step: Each recruitment office has its own "sphere of influence" by region - they have become "regional officials", responsible for carefully reading, reviewing, and screening application materials in this region and signing review opinions. In this way, each application material is guaranteed to be reviewed by at least two people, avoiding "mistake" selection caused by personal prejudice. In fact, it is also mutual restraint.
The third step: select the strongest candidates from 5% to 7%, and submit them to the director of the admissions office to make a decision. If both reviewers sign "admission" with green pen, they can generally pass the review of the dean. If the dean has different opinions, he will take it to the "Screening Committee" to discuss. At this stage, it seems easier to open the side door through the back door because not many people are "gate the check". But 5% to 7% of the 15,000 people can recognize the best with normal IQ. It is not easy to go to the backdoor at this stage. First of all, students have good conditions and there is no need to go through the back door; if the conditions are poor, who would like to act as an "idiot" in front of the dean? Secondly, without the opinions signed by the first and second reviewers in a green pen, any "blank" application materials in the dean's hand is tantamount to a short-circuit explosion.
The fourth step: "removing" the materials of the weakest applicants of 25% to 30%, and as applicants who are "rejected", they will be handed over to the vice president for final review. These rejected persons must be signed by both reviewers with a red pen to "reject acceptance". As long as one of the reviewers does not agree to immediately "reject it", the fifth step must be passed and handed over to the "Screen Committee" for discussion. As long as the vice president also signed the "rejection" with a red pen, these applicants will be thrown into "death prison" and there is almost no chance to overturn the case.
The fifth step: Except for 5% to 7% of applicants who are absolutely admitted and 25% to 30% of applicants who are absolutely not admitted, the rest will be discussed by the "Screening Committee".The personnel of the "Screening Committee" vary from school to school. Some schools are composed of professors from each college and senior officials of the admissions office; some are added with student representatives on this basis; some are composed only senior officials of the admissions office. It is said that the student committee of Rice University is also involved in the screening work; teachers of Duke University's Polytechnic School are also involved in the screening work. Generally speaking, various "officials" do not participate in the "screening committee". From the perspective of avoiding suspicion, the initial reviewers do not participate in the "screening committee". Of course, no matter who is composed, it must be an odd number in the end so that the vote can be made.
Step 6: The "Screening Committee" discusses this part of the most controversial and most crowded applicants one by one. It mainly discusses the review opinions of the first and second auditors. If there is any dispute, please refer to the original application materials. This is the most difficult, most complex, most detailed, most subtle, most challenging and most work-intensive key step in the entire enrollment work.
At this stage, those who walk through the back door and open the side door are thinking, but there are many difficulties.
It is said that Duke University’s “Screening Committee” is very cautious about the work at this stage. As long as one committee member believes that an applicant is worthy of detailed discussion, all members of the committee will think from all aspects and explore the applicant’s potential: What can this student contribute to the campus? What can the university’s expertise and favorable conditions provide for the potential development of this student?
Princeton University's admissions dean told me: "Everyone has the ability to see those shining jades. But some beautiful jades are mixed in stubborn stones, called 'nails', and the admissions personnel need to 'selves' in this step. Missing a child with training potential is greater than choosing a mediocre student! Choosing a mediocre talent, but wasting more than 100,000 US dollars; missing a talent is priceless, and it may even be a big loss for human beings."
Columbia University's Admissions Office Executive Director told me: "We also have a very strong belief that students can learn a lot from each other, whether in class or outside of class. Therefore, a group of students with different life experiences can bring great contributions to the campus. And these different experiences cannot be verified through the exam."
Miami University Boys Choir came to Beijing to sing for the "Beijing Olympics"
World-class universities are committed to building a multicultural campus - an academic society composed of people with different backgrounds, characteristics and abilities.
I went to the campus of China University in 1977. I have always missed our "hidden dragon and crunched tigers and varied" campus culture: "old school students" from the mountains, private teachers who have reached 10 years of teaching experience, high school students who are not tired of silly, transferees who always look like stepping down, "white-haired girl" who skips ballet in art troupes, county cadres who nail iron palms on plastic sandals, "stinky old nine" who has published works in provincial publications, workers who copied "Zuo Zhuan" with small regular script characters, young people who have lost their jobs because of listening to foreign language stations, "thinkers" who have been jailed because of dissatisfaction with the "Gang of Four", children of high-ranking officials in high walls and deep courtyards, returning overseas Chinese who speak pidgin Mandarin, "old senior three" who keeps talking about "Gotha Program Criticism"... Of course, there are also top scorers in the college entrance examination. Although love was forbidden in college at that time, everyone gathered to talk about it as a feast of thought that was endless. You can meet several talents when you urinate in the toilet. This constitutes the priceless property of campus culture.
scores do not recognize people, and the students recruited are too single. The campus culture composed of homogeneous students with similar advantages and disadvantages is also unhealthy.
In short, the mission of enrollment personnel is to bring all kinds of talents together to create a colorful academic environment so that they can collide with each other and make progress together.
Speaking of the "secret" of the admissions office, we have to talk about the funding policies related to money.
Need-blind: Blind means "to touch the dark". That is, when reviewing the admission qualifications of students, they do not look at their family’s financial situation at all.Whether you are a homeless man who can’t even afford to pay for food or a billionaire who is rich enough to rival a country, you will be "disdainful"! Only review the applicant's own conditions and be admitted as long as they pass. Therefore, it may be admitted to a kid who is so poor that he may be admitted to Bill Gates 's daughter. In short, no matter who you are admitted, you will only come to "set the accounts after the autumn" after the admission - to calculate whether you need funding? How much funding is needed?
Although this is a very fair admission policy, because many reviewers subconsciously "support" children from difficult families (such as Harvard once admitted to homeless girls, and Berkeley once recruited homeless people), this puts children from poor families in a certain way at a disadvantage.
Need-based: Need means "need", based on it; that is, funding is issued "based on needs", which is considered based on the applicant's family financial status. If the family is in trouble, the school will pay more (even free school); if the family is not in trouble, the school will pay less; the rich family will not subsidize pennies. The University Funding Office has a set of calculation formulas: How much does a family income? How many people are there? How many children go to college? What are the fixed assets of the household? How much bank deposits are there? How much shareholding? Fill in the formula and the “answer” comes out: How much scholarship does the school need to provide (free, no need to pay back the money)? How much does a student need to borrow? How many jobs do students need to do? How much does a family need to pay...it is clear at a glance. For example, if you need $50,000 to go to school, the formula shows that your family can only pay $10,000, and the gap is $40,000, and the school will fund you $40,000.
Every year, students must provide family tax returns, and the school recalculates your "need-based" funding amount. As family income increases, funding will decrease; otherwise, funding will increase. This is the essence of "need-based". If you have made a fortune (winning lottery, stock trading or other legal income) after you are admitted, but you have concealed it and continue to receive the same funding, once you find out, you will be subject to legal sanctions.
Merit-based: Merit means "talent", which means "capital based" grant. This is the funding method corresponding to "need-based". The principle of funding is considered based on the applicant's own academic status and qualifications in all aspects. The better the grades and higher the conditions, the school will issue more scholarships; otherwise, it will issue less scholarships. In order to increase the attractiveness, many schools with slightly lower rankings "attract" some good students (applicants who have good conditions but cannot get too much funding due to their good family financial conditions) and often adopt the "Merit-based" funding policy.
In short, need-based is funding based on the family financial status of qualified persons, and Merit-based is funding only based on their own qualifications.
"dark curtain" of robbing the rich and helping the poor
The United States has a great trick scandal, some say it is "dark curtain", and some say it is "fraud". "Shame" refers to behind-the-scenes transactions, and "fraud cases" are cases of private fraud. The media has disclosed many "corruption cases". As for "behind-the-scenes transactions", let's unveil the "scene" and take a look at the "deals" behind it.
American college admissions are quite a bit like "robbing the rich and helping the poor". The average grade of the rich family is B not as valuable as that of the poor. If there is only one quota, the result is likely to be "robbing the rich and helping the poor" - tilting towards the disadvantaged group. Because although the results of both are B, the process of getting B between the two is very different. If you give the weaker a chance, he is more likely to give you a surprise!
However, is it the American trick that must "rob the rich and help the poor"?
may not be!
html earns 200,000 to 300,000 US dollars in annual income, no more or less, and the average score of the child is B, and he might be on the list of "Ivy League" and he was "shooted".But if the parents are very rich, the story will be different.
American universities all set up "Development Office" or "Alumni Office" (the name may vary from school to school), and the main task of the office is to "find money".
In 2012, the University of Miami planned to hold a "cocktail reception for parents of Chinese students" at the US Embassy in China to thank Chinese parents for sending their children to study at Maida University. Actually, I just want to raise funds. It is said that the local Mercedes-Benz car dealer once wrote thank you letters to the school because many Chinese students bought their cars.
In fact, the University of Miami I teach also gathers many wealthy American children. In a certain year, a student was originally scheduled to take the exam at 15:00, but it was almost 16:00. He even politely gave people who were in urgent matters to take the exam first.
I said, "Aren't you a plane at 5 pm? You have to go from school to the airport for at least one hour, and you have to go through security checks or something..."
He smiled shyly: "My dad flew to pick me up (Maida Airport)..."
The development office of the university stared at these people's pockets.
When it comes to donating, we must first explain the concept of "AI".
AI is the abbreviation of Academic Index, which can be translated as "Academic Index". Simply put, a former deputy director of the Ivy League admissions office once wrote a book that the "Ivy League" uses "mysterious calculation formulas" and tables to uniformly quantify the high school scores, grade rankings, SAT and SAT II scores from applicants from different regions into academic reference indexes (Note: SAT is commonly known as the "college entrance examination" in the United States, and SAT II is an additional SAT single-subject test required by Ivy League schools).
If your parents or grandparents are rich, and your AI is not high, extracurricular activities and social activities are mediocre, you really want to go to a certain university. You can ask your parents or grandparents to hang up a phone number to the university's development office: express your willingness to help the university expand its library, add a laboratory, or simply set up a scholarship... Then, don't forget to tell the university: "I have a child, I want to study in your university this year..."
However, there are many people who want to enter the school through this kind of channel. Donate $100,000 and don't even get a bubble, which is equivalent to hiring people to eat food stalls in China. Of course, different schools ask for different prices. Both sides can negotiate terms. It is said that if you want to go to a top university, there are no millions of dollars, and you can't talk. Generally, they are queued according to the amount of donations and sent to the Admissions Office for review by the Development Office or the Alumni Office. If the donation from your parents or grandparents can impress the principal, your list may be handed over directly to the admissions office director by the principal's office, and that's almost done.
"Exchange donations for admission" is more complicated, involving many departments, and the amount of donations is also related to your own conditions. The worse your conditions are, the smaller the chance of bargaining, and the greater the donation will be. Of course, if your own conditions are too poor and the Admissions Office strongly opposes it, this road is basically unavailable. Judging from the 50 people involved in the case and the amount involved in the case disclosed by the US media, it should be a "cop case" rather than a legal "behind-the-scenes transaction."
2006, Harvard University undergraduate admission notice.
is also a poor student who entered the university and donated money from the back door to the school’s account. The bribery is to put the stolen money into his private pocket through the “side door”. This is the difference between "shady curtain" (behind-the-scenes transaction) and "corruption case" (bribery and bribery).
I have exchanged views with some "relevant people" for this issue. They said that emotionally they are unwilling to accept such students; but rationally considering it, accepting a less qualified student in exchange for a brand new library or other facilities will be conducive to the teaching of teachers and students throughout the school, and this "transaction" is still acceptable. It means "sacrificing one of them, and happiness for thousands of families."
The deputy director of the admissions office of Northwestern University (known as "New Ivy League") told me: "This issue has always been a subtle topic. But to be honest, I don't often deal with such matters. Of course, we welcome donations to universities, but the seats in the classroom are not for sale. To put it bluntly, donating money to Northwestern University does not mean that the student will definitely be admitted. We hope that the purpose of donating is to better build Northwestern University, not just for a certain student to enter Northwestern University."
, the so-called "shady curtain", made me shake my head and nod.
Recommended and "backdoor"
Some people say that whether it is China or the United States, "the students are 'tested' before the college entrance examination, and the parents are 'tested' after the college entrance examination."
Indeed, relying solely on a dry college entrance examination score and a physical examination form with height and weight, how can the admissions office understand a living, flesh-and-blooded person?
"Recommended" is one of the channels for discovering and transporting talents. Since ancient times, there has been a saying in China that “the internal promotion does not avoid relatives”. The question is how to establish a recommendation system that operates reasonably.
In the United States, whether you are going to college or looking for a job, you must have a recommendation person. Even if you are renting a house, doing odd jobs, or even raising a dog, you must have a recommendation person.
Many American recommenders value their credibility very much and look fair and selfless when writing letters.
Of course, readers are concerned about whether there are backdoors for recommendations in the tips?
First-class universities require at least two letters of recommendation. Some even indicate that teachers in the third or fourth year of high school must have liberal arts and science.
In addition to requesting two letters of recommendation from high school teachers, Harvard encouraged to provide an additional letter of recommendation from a certain "adult who knows you", which can be relatives, neighbors, friends, nanny, elementary school teacher...
Dartmouth College is even more "strange", and is the only school in the Ivy League school that requires a letter of recommendation from peers.
Princeton is quite "normal", only two recommendation letters are required. But Princeton receives many special letters of recommendation every year. For example, according to the book "Entering College Admissions Procedure", one year, Princeton received the following special recommendation letter:
16 fathers wrote recommendation letters to their children (one of which comes from China).
10 mothers write recommendation letters.
11 sisters wrote recommendation letters, one of which was a Princeton student; nine brothers wrote recommendation letters, two of which were Princeton student.
5 grandfathers wrote recommendation letters.
2 aunts, 1 uncle, and 1 aunt writes a recommendation letter to the juniors.
1 Princeton alumni wrote a letter of recommendation to their cousins.
26 Princeton alumni wrote recommendation letters to non-kindergarten. One of them is Princeton’s “school board member” (the principal’s boss), who wrote a letter of recommendation to 4 applicants in total.
2 U.S. senators wrote recommendation letters, one of them raised his letter: "Respectful".
1 letters of recommendation written by U.S. Representatives.
Recommended letter written by the Indian Ambassador to Germany.
Recommended letter written by the Attorney General of the Samoan Islands.
4 letters of recommendation written by professors at Princeton University.
2 recommendation letters written by presidents of other universities.
1 recommendation letters written by officials from other university admissions offices.
9 high school principals wrote recommendation letters to students who are not their own school.
4 recommendation letters written by teachers to students who are not themselves.
1 Recommended letters written by officials of the U.S. Department of Education .
As the saying goes: A layman watches the excitement, while an expert sees the trick.
And I—including many Chinese readers—can’t be said to be an “insider”, but I think I can “see the trick”: I am interested in “senator”, “representative”, “school board member”… Is this “person” and that “person” going through the back door?
It is said that the principals of some universities also directly write recommendation letters to their school’s admissions office for some applicants.
However, these "members" and "members"' recommendation letters are "bold", open and responsible, because they signed their own name and position.
Americans are also humans, but if they explicitly stipulate that "who" cannot write recommendation letters for "who", these "who" generally will not write recommendation letters to those "who".
Since there are no clause restrictions, writing a recommendation letter is not considered illegal or indiscriminate. As for whether you can be admitted, it is not my business. The "rules and rules" of admission are in your hands, so how to deal with it is your business.
In fact, there has been an ancient saying in China that “recommendation is not avoiding relatives”. If you think someone is qualified, write a letter of recommendation openly.
Jelly BushCan the daughter of President join Yale?
If she wants to enter in the form of Legacy (with a special explanation later), she still has to compare the conditions with other Legacy students to a certain extent, including SAT scores, AI and other hard conditions. If you go in by donating money, it depends on how much money the Bush family donated.
I asked the deputy director of the admissions office of Northwestern University: "According to the disclosure of the book "Admissions ABC", many American universities have special policies for the admission of celebrities, and clearly pointed out that celebrities include the 'children of the President and Vice President of the United States. Of course, it is not unconditional to admit these celebrities, and they must meet certain requirements. If President Bush's daughter applies to your school, will you accept her unconditionally? Why?"
He replied: "No, Northwestern University has no such unconditional admission. I can't disclose details. We are lucky that there are some applicants with great background every year. Some of them are accepted, but many are rejected. This is also very similar to the situation of donations. Whether you accept or not depends on the reputation and status of your parents."
Of course, many schools explicitly stipulate that "celebrity" can be admitted, and the children of the US president and vice president are classified as "celebrity". Therefore, you can go in "openly". But the recruitment office said that these "celebrities" also need to meet basic requirements. Bush's twin daughters only have one of them to Yale, which is intriguing! Is it another person who doesn't want to study Yale? Or did not meet the "basic requirements"? Or...I've consulted about reasons for admitting celebrities. Relevant people said: "That is advertising to the school to increase the school's popularity." Is
reasonable or not? It depends on one's opinion. Cambridge has admitted to Deng Yaping , and American schools have also admitted to Wang Junxia. They have their considerations and reasons. I think there are several types of celebrities, one is a person who has made special contributions to the country, nation, and even humanity, and these people can consider admission. But the president or vice president's children are "people" who are famous because of their father, so there is no need to take the benefits and ignore them at all.
The children of the president and vice president are admitted to school. Whether you say it is a back door or not, there are clear regulations and they are doing things according to the rules. Is it reasonable? It can be argued, but there is one thing: "legal". If you want to object, don’t object to “going backdoor”, but oppose “provisions” that stipulate “going backdoor” as legal. In other words, complaining can only be complaining. To eliminate such backdoors, we can only find ways to get rid of these "provisions" that make the backdoor legally exist.
Many people like to invite senators, members of the House of Representatives, and members of the school board, and those who are "members" write letters of recommendation to themselves. Only God knows whether it works or not.
The author of "The Secret of College Admissions Trading" tells the moving story of a female student:
This girl is responsible for the school's waste recycling. Due to work needs, since the second year of high school, she has had some contact with the principal and vice principal, and has carried out waste recycling with a cleaning tool body. When she applied to college in her senior year, she needed to choose one of these three people to write a recommendation letter. Everyone thought she either chose Principal Yiyan Jiuding or Vice Principal, but she unexpectedly chose the old cleaner.
The elderly are Mexican people, they are uneducated and don’t even know how to speak English. Strictly speaking, the old cleaner's recommendation letter is very bad. Not only is it grammatical, but some sentences are also inconsistent. But his recommendation letter told people: The girl cared about him and his family very much. He always respects him very much and discusses with him how to do a good job in school waste recycling, making him feel that he is also very important - he can participate in the activities of the school family with all his heart and strength.
It is said that this recommendation letter touched every recruitment office staff, and some even read this recommendation letter with tears in their eyes.
The SAT score of this girl is only 1320 (out of 1600), which does not meet the requirements of the Ivy League school. But just because of this special recommendation letter, she was admitted to three "Ivy League schools".
On October 14, 2018, local time, protesters opposing Harvard University's admission policy held a march.
This story is very touching. But I don't know: Is she a Mexican? However, regardless of whether she is a minority protected by "equal rights measures", from the perspective of "strategy", this "risk move" is indeed unique.In the eyes of high school students, principals and vice presidents are unattainable; but in the eyes of university admissions officials, there are thousands of high school principals who write letters of recommendation; and the cleaners who write letters of recommendation may not be met in a century. Therefore, the effect of sudden emergence of strange peaks and sudden emergence of surprise weapons. This girl dared to give up the principal to choose cleaning. This courage alone was enough to make prestigious universities excited.
I think: The US recommendation letter system has loopholes and flaws. For example, what does the student consultant’s recommendation letter say? Only heaven knows it. To let the referee speak freely, many universities have stated that the recommendation letter or related forms will be destroyed before students go to school.
Use soap tickets to easily have a backdoor
. I talked about the admission process and filtering methods before. I think we can borrow a well-known statement from the war era and optimize it: "It is better to 'waste' three days than to miss one."
The review procedure of the American mastermind can be said to be "passing five levels and killing six generals." If the SAT score is very low (although schools such as Chia University no longer force SAT scores, most first-class universities still require it), the high school grades are poor, there are no specialties, and do not actively participate in extracurricular activities and social activities, even if you "bribe" the first and second-level auditors, you will not be able to "kill six generals" after "passing the five levels" - you will also be beaten down in the evaluation of the "Audit Committee" or the "Screen Committee".
itself cannot be "not online"; if it is "online", it is not necessary to bribe only a key person; it is necessary to bribe everyone, including those student representatives and teacher representatives in the committee, which is almost as difficult as possible. Therefore, judging from the current exposure of American college tricks, it can only be a change in SAT scores; and disguised as a student with sports expertise.
Generally speaking, Americans also talk about human feelings. Therefore, there is also a phenomenon of following the back door of "human favors". For example, if you are allowed, open some harmless back doors for very close relatives and friends. But it is limited to small back doors that do not break the law. If you step on the bottom line and take bribes, many people will become disregarded. So, this is the most serious corruption case in history. Of course, crime will exist at any time and in any country.
American college admissions generally try to be fair, just and open. In order to ensure these "three public", there are also supervision methods in society: if you find that your classmates are not as good as you (except Legacy, donations, ethnic minorities who benefit from "equal rights measures", special sports enrollment, etc.), but he is admitted and you are not admitted, you can sue the court or expose it in the media. In 2014, several white students sued the "legal" "equal rights measures" of the University of Michigan to the Supreme Court. At present, more than 60 Asian groups also believe that "equal rights measures" discriminate against Asian applicants and are taking Harvard to court.
Many Americans believe that bribing some people to go to college is very worthless. First, it is very dangerous and the consequences are very serious; second, if the bribe is too large, it is better to donate directly, and if it is small, it is useless; third, even if it is bribed, it may not work; fourth, instead of bribing, it is better to apply for a few more universities. If the east is not bright in the west, there will always be schools that will be accepted. Fifth, going to college is not a big deal. You can’t go to college this year, but next year. If you can't go to an ideal university this year, you can transfer to another school next year; if you don't have a good undergraduate degree, you still have a chance to graduate school. The future is long, and there is no need to take risks. Therefore, this biggest scandal in history is only 33 parents involved in the case.
Think about the American college entrance examination review process, may you think it is "daily familiar"? ——After the abolition of the college graduation allocation system, does the "various" independent recruitment of workers in each unit also depends on the grades, performance, ability, and interviews?
In other words, "daily familiar" means that we are not far away from us. In fact, if we combine these "daily familiarity", it will be the review and selection mechanism for the separation of the "college entrance examination" recruitment in the United States.
Since there is no out of control in the current "independent recruitment" situation, why should we be worried and unable to move forward for independent recruitment?
html More than 0 years ago, when China canceled soap tickets, cloth tickets, food tickets, and meat tickets, people were also worried about buying trends, hoarding, store out of stock, and bank runs... In fact, on the contrary, it was precisely when using soap tickets, cloth tickets, food tickets, and meat tickets, and people were everywhere. If we are always under the shadow of all kinds of worries, we will stop moving forward and will still use soap tickets, cloth tickets, food tickets, and meat tickets...The serious corruption phenomenon is related to the low quality of people, the incomplete rule of law, and the incomplete supervision mechanism. As long as we increase transparency in the admission policies, improve the legal system in the review system, and improve the supervision mechanism during the admission process, we can greatly reduce the ugly phenomenon in the separation of recruitment and examinations.
Legacy Complex
Legacy translated into Chinese means "passage" and "legacy".
Legacy admissions policy refers to the fact that universities (especially private universities) give certain care to alumni children during admissions. This is not a "unspoken rule", but it is a bit concealed.
Generally speaking, the applicant's parents are alumni, so they are regarded as Legacy. Some schools also regard grandparents and even siblings as alumni as Legacy.
The top 20 American university rankings (some public universities are shortlisted) are basically private schools. It can be seen how far-reaching the impact of Legacy’s admissions policy in the United States. The admission rate of
Legacy is highly confidential and very sensitive, and is not easy to detect. Generally, it is between 30% and 45%. Princeton, which ranked first all year round, was 40% around 2010 (not yet found in recent years); Harvard was 40% in 2014; and 33% in 2018. In other words, about 40 out of 100 Legacy applicants were admitted. The admission rates of these two schools in 2019 were 7.0% and 5.3% respectively. Legacy's acceptance rate is 6 to 8 times the regular one. I can't find out Yale's Legacy acceptance rate, but it should be no less than 40%. Because, Yale’s Legacy students account for 15% of the total number of students. 15 out of 100 students are Legacy, which is a pretty high number. Yale Who is the most famous Legacy? Bush, then, Bush Jr., and then, Bush Jr.'s daughter!
In 2001, Bush Jr. was invited to give a speech at his alma mater. Facing the crowded graduates, he said, "You who have got A are great. If you have C, don't be sad. You can still be the president of the United States..."
People burst into laughter.
Then, he teased his deputy Cheney (who also studied at Yale but did not graduate): "Why can Chaney be the vice president? Because he did not graduate. Otherwise, he can still be the president..."
We don't know if George W. Bush is a C student, but there are many outstanding people in Legacy. Their privilege is manifested in the priority given to them when their conditions are the same or similar to those of the average applicant (although there are quota restrictions).
implements the Legacy enrollment policy, which has both reasons, helplessness and disadvantages. The three are cause and effect and penetrate each other.
first look at the "reason". The most fundamental reason for recruiting Legacy students is to build a consolidated "basic community" around the university. These Legacy continue to enroll and graduate from generation to generation, donating money to the school. In the familiar sayings we are familiar with, it is to attract a group of the most loyal "basic masses". I found that Legacy, which was spread across the United States in various schools, has become somewhat similar to religious complex. In fact, it is not only a university, but also a private high school and a junior high school. Even public universities attach great importance to their own Legacy. Chinese people like to spread a "relationship network", and American universities also spread a "relationship network" on the issue of recruiting Legacy students. In general universities, they have to do this because they are worried about the source of students, which is easy to understand. Why are the world's top universities also very passionate about Legacy? It's indeed a bit contemplated.
I think there are only three reasons: First, Chen Chen is related to each other, everyone is moving in an involuntary inertia; second, parents graduated from this school, and their children may also have corresponding qualities. The implementation of the Legacy policy can maintain a certain quality of students from generation to generation; third, I hope that successful graduates can "remember the source" - to "feedback" to the school from a political and economic perspective.
again sees its "helplessness". The operation of the school requires a lot of money. Many schools spend much more per capita than actually announced. Because of the loan to build a stadium, expand school buildings, add laboratory, etc. in a certain year, how can the per capita spending of students that year be counted? Therefore, on the one hand, the school has to increase its tuition fees year by year, and on the other hand, it has to raise funds everywhere. Among them, raising funds from alumni is the main source. According to statistics, the tuition fees for the best private universities range from $50,000 to $60,000. In the 2018-2019 academic year, Harvard is $50,420, Princeton is $47,140, and Colombia is $59,430. The actual per capita spending exceeds the tuition fee. There is no reliable data for the amount exceeding, so it is difficult to guess randomly. Let’s not look at the actual excess for the time being. Just pursuing the actual tuition fees, we can see the school’s difficulties and helplessness.
Take Colombia as an example. The tuition fee in 2014 was US$49,138, and the food and accommodation were US$11,978. In addition, the book fee, daily living expenses, transportation expenses and other expenses vary from person to person. If the average is US$5,000, the total is about US$66,000. When talking about tuition, we must discuss the relevant "Need-blind" admissions policy and "Need-based" funding policy. Because no matter whether you are poor or rich, as long as you pass the qualification, you will be admitted; if you are admitted, you will have to solve the tuition fee problem. If your family is rich, there will naturally be no problem; if your family is poor, eliminate the part that your parents can afford, and the remaining schools will solve their worries in the form of funding. This grant includes scholarships, loans, paid work, etc. For example, the scholarship is $40,000, the loan is $12,000, and the salary is $8,000. Well, your parents only need to offer $6,000 per year. But where did you get the $40,000 scholarship you received for free? The answer is: donations mainly from alumni and Legacy students’ parents.
From the 2018 to 2019 school year, 70% of Harvard students received various funding, of which 20% enrolled for free because their annual family income was less than US$65,000. A few years ago, about one-quarter of freshmen were poor students (the family’s annual income was less than US$60,000), and all enrolled for free. Some domestic media said: So-and-so received a full scholarship from Harvard. On the one hand, this shows that the student is excellent; on the other hand, it also shows that the student's family is poor. In 2019, Harvard recruited 1,990 freshmen. The 20% of poor students who funded that year were more than 20 million US dollars, and in four years it was 80 million US dollars. In addition, 50% of freshmen received various funding in four years, it is an astronomical figure.
This is the school’s “helplessness”: it is not easy to attract high-quality talents (including students and professors) if they do not provide high-quality scholarships and salaries. In order to provide high scholarships and salaries to high-quality talents, fundraising must be raised from alumni and a certain number of Legacy students must be accepted.
Finally, let’s see the “defaults”. It can be said that it is a disguised "inbreeding" that has been visited the same school for generations. For example, if 500 professors have taught at this university for 30 years, then many generations of Legacy are likely to have taken the same professor's course. Even if the child does not take the courses taught by his parents, what parents hear and see is what the child is influenced by.
For example, Columbia Law School has a tradition. At the end of the course, the professors all have a speech, a speech that makes the eyes of despicable prospective lawyers burst into tears.
One of the 92-year-old professors said, "Today I went to the supermarket to buy bananas, and the salesperson advised me to buy fully ripe ones, not to buy too raw ones..." (A kind of American humor, meaning: I am worried that I will buy raw bananas. Before the bananas are ripe, the elderly will die). The students felt sad. He then said to the salesperson, "You advise me like this every time, but the class I prepared has not been finished..."
I burst into tears when I heard it. When I have grandchildren, if the professor still teaches, can we not sing the "same song"? ! Therefore, this kind of relationship between Chen and Chen cannot be said to be not a disguised "cultural inbreeding" or "academic inbreeding".
Local time, May 16, 2018, New York, USA, graduates from New York University attended the graduation ceremony in the rain.
The worst, reactionary and puzzling thing is the Legacy admissions policy. Princeton, Harvard, Yale, and Columbia are all spared from being "can't be cut, but still messy" with this poorly-known legacy.
I think China’s college entrance examination reform must not learn this. As property, whether it is movable or real estate, it is natural for future generations to inherit it. But Legacy regards "education" as a legacy - a hereditary privilege, and its backwardness is obvious.
When parents go to Yale, they must pass this "go to Yale" to their children as a "passage". From the perspective of modern ethics, it is "reactionary"; from the perspective of modern science, it is also "reactionary".
Parents go to Yale, and their children also have full rights to go to Yale. But it is really undesirable to treat "Going Yale" as a legacy and institutionalize it as a policy.
Although many universities have put certain restrictions on legacy. For example, if you cannot enjoy legacy in different generations, it does not affect legacy in different generations. In addition, these schools emphasize that only the conditions are the same or similar will give priority to the children of alumni. Even so, the three generations of grandparents appreciate the same lecture notes of the same professor, and the ancestors sang the "same song" and told the same story for generations... From an ecology perspective, it is also deformed and unhealthy.
Sports Special Admissions
talks about American skills, and we have to talk about sports special admissions. First of all, this is the hardest hit area of corruption; secondly, sports students are a major feature of American universities.
At the 2016 Rio Olympics, the United States sent 555 athletes, of which 417 were members of the National College Athletic Association (NCAA). In other words, about 75% are college students. In other words, American college students top the world Olympics.
Let’s take a little more “gossip”: Who has the highest salary in the university I teach? Rugby coach! The second is the principal, and the third is the ice hockey coach of sports...
American universities attach importance to sports, which shows how it is!
The earliest developed in the United States was in the northeast, and the earliest established schools were also in the northeast. Therefore, all 8 Ivy League schools are in the northeast. After 1870, schools in the northeast carried out rugby and various sports competitions. In 1956, eight prestigious schools officially formed the "Ivy League". That is, the "Ivy League" was originally named for sports. It can be seen that the leader "Ivy" is also a footnote to the sports being regarded as a hot topic.
The "secret calculation formula" of Ivy League schools' calculation AI (academic index) mentioned earlier was originally used to calculate the academic index of "sports special enrollment". Now, is every Ivy League school using AI to guide its own admissions? Not necessarily. But this formula is basically certain that it is used to calculate the lower limit of the academic index of "sports special admissions". For example, in a certain year, Ivy League schools stipulated that the lower limit of AI for their respective "sports special enrollment" was 169.
AI is 169, which means that the scores of SAT and SAT II are around 600 points (full score of 1600), and the CRS (school ranking points) is 49, which means that the ranking is beyond 70%. Obviously, this academic index is a bit terrible.
If a school wants to recruit a sports student with AI below 169, the school must bring the application materials of the student to the joint meeting of the directors of the Ivy League Admissions Office to provide necessary explanations and must obtain the approval of the meeting.
If the "specialties" of the sports specialty students are not very prominent, the school generally does not want to put itself in a situation of "three-court trial". What's more, there are competitors among Ivy League schools. It may not be very pleasant to be "interrogated" by your opponent.
Therefore, the sports specialty students disclosed in recent corruption cases basically did not dare to fool Ivy League schools, but went to the USC university to visit schools. As for how did the only Yale women's football coach involved in the Ivy League case get away with it? Although there is no details of the crime, it is not difficult to "solve the case". 1. The girl is not an athlete. It can be imagined that her AI will be higher than the lower limit of the "sports specialty student" of Ivy League schools, so the joint meeting of the director of the Ivy League school admissions office could not stop her. 2. After enrolling as a "sports student", I received a coach of $400,000. How can I help this "Mr. Nan Guo" who can't play football? It's easy to deal with. Wouldn't you get away with it if you don't participate in team training under the pretext of being injured?
Each school has a dedicated person in charge of the "sports special enrollment". The coaches personally visited and interviewed the "Sports Special Admissions". One or two months before ordinary applicants are still anxiously waiting for the admission letter, they will first issue a tentative admission notice to the "Sports Specialty Students".The purpose is to appease them and stabilize them. Many schools have dedicated scholarships for these "sports special admissions".
In fact, there are two types of "sports special admissions": one is the real "sports special admissions". After arriving at school, you can plug and play and get points on the court. This type of person's AI can be relatively low. The second type is those who are wearing storefronts, bench players. This type of people has a higher AI, which is used to balance the low AI of the first type of people.
When I was studying for my PhD, there was a football player next door. My son called him "Big Uncle", and he was the first American friend he made. At that time, my son didn't know how to speak English and wanted to say something to the "big uncle", so he went home to ask us, and then went to the next door to "communicate" like an inscription. He learned the UFO technology of mines and mines. Once, the UFO hit the middle nose bridge and bleeding, and his son didn't cry. The bridge of the nose is still slightly bulging. Whenever I mention it, I always comfort my wife: Isn’t it more handsome if my nose is taller?
At that time, I worked as a TA (teaching assistant). One day, I saw a big man coming to my office opposite me to meet another doctoral student who was a TA. When he saw me, his expression was a little unnatural, so I didn't say anything.
After he left, I deliberately asked the TA: "You are so big, you are playing basketball!"
TA shook his head: "You play rugby, it's a headache!"
A few days later, the big man asked me: "Do you know that TA?"
I said: "I know!"
The big man thought about it, but he stopped talking.
Later, the big man went to another school. The mine was sad for several days.
Mine, a "year-old friend", belongs to the "sports special enrollment" that gets points on the field. I guess the AI may not be too high.
Why does American education attach so much importance to sports?
First of all, sports enriches campus life. For Americans, sports are not only about strengthening their bodies, but more importantly, they can create a spiritual atmosphere that advocates competition and is proactive. On domestic campuses, there are a lot of "bean sprout-shaped" scholars wearing thick-edged glasses. Turn on the TV, and the channels are always feminine "young young meat". American campus culture may be biased, but Chinese campus culture does need to strongly call for men who walk out of the classroom! Of course, in addition to advocating a competitive and enterprising spirit, sports can also enhance the school's sense of collective honor.
Secondly, it comes back to the money issue. Tickets for sports are an important income for the school. More importantly, sports can best "pay" the "pockets" of those rich alumni. For example, the high school in the mine won the state basketball championship, and people cried and laughed... While those rich alumni were "unconscious" and "swelling", the principal proposed to expand the gymnasium. Those rich alumni who were so happy that they could not find the Beijing would probably even pat their chests on their backs. In short, sports are an important means of raising donations.
Finally, sports can bring reputation and honor to the school. There are about 3,500 universities in the United States. Except for the 100 most famous universities that everyone knows, who knows who? In this way, sports have become the most effective, convenient and sensational way to increase school visibility. No wonder the mine-mining high school won the state basketball championship, and after he went home, he said a few words: "There will be many freshmen applying to our school next year..."
Look at the admissions of famous American schools. In addition to Legacy students, "ethnic minority" students who enjoy "equal rights measures", sports special enrollment, international students, plus students donated by their parents, celebrity students, etc., the remaining normal enrollment quotas are not many. For example, 13,600 people applied to a certain university that year, and the university planned to admit 1,700 people, with an admission rate of 12.5%. Among them, 2,000 people applied for "early admission" and 600 were admitted. In this way, there are 1,100 places. Among these 1,100 places, about 200 are "ethnic minority" students who enjoy "equal rights measures", 200 are Legacy students, 200 are sports special enrollment, 100 are international students, and several donor students and celebrity students. In addition to these "students accompanying students", there are only less than 400 places left for "normal" admissions.There is no doubt that these 400 admitted students are truly the most outstanding high-scoring and high-energy talents!
Of course, there are many prestigious universities in the United States, Case Western Reserve University, which ranked 47th in 2019, also has 16 Nobel Prize winners. Therefore, this institution collects several hundred yuan and that school collects several hundred yuan, and outstanding talents still have their own destination. The top 100 institutions have an average of 400 students per university, and the American elites are basically included.
Use a huge stone to carve an Warrior . There is no gravel under your feet, how can the Warriors highlight it? We can also regard legacy students, sports special enrollment, "equal rights measures" beneficiary, etc. as essential "slave training" and "bench players" for a sports team, as a necessary "ecological balance", and as the gravel that lays the foundation for the Warriors...
metaphor may not be very pleasant, but does it make some sense?
Dr. Quitz is a famous professor at the University of Miami at the "Public Ivy" prestigious university and was once the chairman of the department's admissions committee. I once told him: In China, people’s biggest concern about reforming the college entrance examination is that they are worried that if the admission criteria are not based on the high or low scores, they will have a “backdoor”. If, like the American master's tricks, some subjective and unquantifiable standards are added to the admission process, people are worried that many fraudulent and difficult to explain admission decisions will occur.
Dr. Quitz's words are very meaningful and are used as the conclusion of this article: "Although we have reason to worry that college admissions with multiple standards will be corrupt due to privileges; college admissions with the only standard for exam scores cannot prevent unfair admissions caused by privileges.
American prestigious schools are not facing finding jade from piles of stubborn stones, but finding the beautiful jade we need from piles of jade, and deciding which piece to choose and which piece to keep. Of course, the easiest way is to use formulas to calculate various indicators of each piece of jade. However, the conclusion If you will be almost the same jade you get. If your goal is to remake the same small jade, even if the jade you get is a little different, it will still be over. However, if your goal is to create exquisite jade in various shapes, you must choose jade of various shapes, sizes, and colors. This is what most American college admissions office staff do.
uses a broad set of admission standards instead of a single college entrance examination score, and there will be ugly phenomena. This worry is understandable, but this is not our mainstream."
Indeed, relying solely on a dry college entrance examination score and a physical examination form with height and weight, how can the admissions office understand a living, flesh-and-blooded person?
"Recommended" is one of the channels for discovering and transporting talents. Since ancient times, there has been a saying in China that “the internal promotion does not avoid relatives”. The question is how to establish a recommendation system that operates reasonably.
In the United States, whether you are going to college or looking for a job, you must have a recommendation person. Even if you are renting a house, doing odd jobs, or even raising a dog, you must have a recommendation person.
Many American recommenders value their credibility very much and look fair and selfless when writing letters.
Of course, readers are concerned about whether there are backdoors for recommendations in the tips?
First-class universities require at least two letters of recommendation. Some even indicate that teachers in the third or fourth year of high school must have liberal arts and science.
In addition to requesting two letters of recommendation from high school teachers, Harvard encouraged to provide an additional letter of recommendation from a certain "adult who knows you", which can be relatives, neighbors, friends, nanny, elementary school teacher...
Dartmouth College is even more "strange", and is the only school in the Ivy League school that requires a letter of recommendation from peers.
Princeton is quite "normal", only two recommendation letters are required. But Princeton receives many special letters of recommendation every year. For example, according to the book "Entering College Admissions Procedure", one year, Princeton received the following special recommendation letter:
16 fathers wrote recommendation letters to their children (one of which comes from China).
10 mothers write recommendation letters.
11 sisters wrote recommendation letters, one of which was a Princeton student; nine brothers wrote recommendation letters, two of which were Princeton student.
5 grandfathers wrote recommendation letters.
2 aunts, 1 uncle, and 1 aunt writes a recommendation letter to the juniors.
1 Princeton alumni wrote a letter of recommendation to their cousins.
26 Princeton alumni wrote recommendation letters to non-kindergarten. One of them is Princeton’s “school board member” (the principal’s boss), who wrote a letter of recommendation to 4 applicants in total.
2 U.S. senators wrote recommendation letters, one of them raised his letter: "Respectful".
1 letters of recommendation written by U.S. Representatives.
Recommended letter written by the Indian Ambassador to Germany.
Recommended letter written by the Attorney General of the Samoan Islands.
4 letters of recommendation written by professors at Princeton University.
2 recommendation letters written by presidents of other universities.
1 recommendation letters written by officials from other university admissions offices.
9 high school principals wrote recommendation letters to students who are not their own school.
4 recommendation letters written by teachers to students who are not themselves.
1 Recommended letters written by officials of the U.S. Department of Education .
As the saying goes: A layman watches the excitement, while an expert sees the trick.
And I—including many Chinese readers—can’t be said to be an “insider”, but I think I can “see the trick”: I am interested in “senator”, “representative”, “school board member”… Is this “person” and that “person” going through the back door?
It is said that the principals of some universities also directly write recommendation letters to their school’s admissions office for some applicants.
However, these "members" and "members"' recommendation letters are "bold", open and responsible, because they signed their own name and position.
Americans are also humans, but if they explicitly stipulate that "who" cannot write recommendation letters for "who", these "who" generally will not write recommendation letters to those "who".
Since there are no clause restrictions, writing a recommendation letter is not considered illegal or indiscriminate. As for whether you can be admitted, it is not my business. The "rules and rules" of admission are in your hands, so how to deal with it is your business.
In fact, there has been an ancient saying in China that “recommendation is not avoiding relatives”. If you think someone is qualified, write a letter of recommendation openly.
Jelly BushCan the daughter of President join Yale?
If she wants to enter in the form of Legacy (with a special explanation later), she still has to compare the conditions with other Legacy students to a certain extent, including SAT scores, AI and other hard conditions. If you go in by donating money, it depends on how much money the Bush family donated.
I asked the deputy director of the admissions office of Northwestern University: "According to the disclosure of the book "Admissions ABC", many American universities have special policies for the admission of celebrities, and clearly pointed out that celebrities include the 'children of the President and Vice President of the United States. Of course, it is not unconditional to admit these celebrities, and they must meet certain requirements. If President Bush's daughter applies to your school, will you accept her unconditionally? Why?"
He replied: "No, Northwestern University has no such unconditional admission. I can't disclose details. We are lucky that there are some applicants with great background every year. Some of them are accepted, but many are rejected. This is also very similar to the situation of donations. Whether you accept or not depends on the reputation and status of your parents."
Of course, many schools explicitly stipulate that "celebrity" can be admitted, and the children of the US president and vice president are classified as "celebrity". Therefore, you can go in "openly". But the recruitment office said that these "celebrities" also need to meet basic requirements. Bush's twin daughters only have one of them to Yale, which is intriguing! Is it another person who doesn't want to study Yale? Or did not meet the "basic requirements"? Or...I've consulted about reasons for admitting celebrities. Relevant people said: "That is advertising to the school to increase the school's popularity." Is
reasonable or not? It depends on one's opinion. Cambridge has admitted to Deng Yaping , and American schools have also admitted to Wang Junxia. They have their considerations and reasons. I think there are several types of celebrities, one is a person who has made special contributions to the country, nation, and even humanity, and these people can consider admission. But the president or vice president's children are "people" who are famous because of their father, so there is no need to take the benefits and ignore them at all.
The children of the president and vice president are admitted to school. Whether you say it is a back door or not, there are clear regulations and they are doing things according to the rules. Is it reasonable? It can be argued, but there is one thing: "legal". If you want to object, don’t object to “going backdoor”, but oppose “provisions” that stipulate “going backdoor” as legal. In other words, complaining can only be complaining. To eliminate such backdoors, we can only find ways to get rid of these "provisions" that make the backdoor legally exist.
Many people like to invite senators, members of the House of Representatives, and members of the school board, and those who are "members" write letters of recommendation to themselves. Only God knows whether it works or not.
The author of "The Secret of College Admissions Trading" tells the moving story of a female student:
This girl is responsible for the school's waste recycling. Due to work needs, since the second year of high school, she has had some contact with the principal and vice principal, and has carried out waste recycling with a cleaning tool body. When she applied to college in her senior year, she needed to choose one of these three people to write a recommendation letter. Everyone thought she either chose Principal Yiyan Jiuding or Vice Principal, but she unexpectedly chose the old cleaner.
The elderly are Mexican people, they are uneducated and don’t even know how to speak English. Strictly speaking, the old cleaner's recommendation letter is very bad. Not only is it grammatical, but some sentences are also inconsistent. But his recommendation letter told people: The girl cared about him and his family very much. He always respects him very much and discusses with him how to do a good job in school waste recycling, making him feel that he is also very important - he can participate in the activities of the school family with all his heart and strength.
It is said that this recommendation letter touched every recruitment office staff, and some even read this recommendation letter with tears in their eyes.
The SAT score of this girl is only 1320 (out of 1600), which does not meet the requirements of the Ivy League school. But just because of this special recommendation letter, she was admitted to three "Ivy League schools".
On October 14, 2018, local time, protesters opposing Harvard University's admission policy held a march.
This story is very touching. But I don't know: Is she a Mexican? However, regardless of whether she is a minority protected by "equal rights measures", from the perspective of "strategy", this "risk move" is indeed unique.In the eyes of high school students, principals and vice presidents are unattainable; but in the eyes of university admissions officials, there are thousands of high school principals who write letters of recommendation; and the cleaners who write letters of recommendation may not be met in a century. Therefore, the effect of sudden emergence of strange peaks and sudden emergence of surprise weapons. This girl dared to give up the principal to choose cleaning. This courage alone was enough to make prestigious universities excited.
I think: The US recommendation letter system has loopholes and flaws. For example, what does the student consultant’s recommendation letter say? Only heaven knows it. To let the referee speak freely, many universities have stated that the recommendation letter or related forms will be destroyed before students go to school.
Use soap tickets to easily have a backdoor
. I talked about the admission process and filtering methods before. I think we can borrow a well-known statement from the war era and optimize it: "It is better to 'waste' three days than to miss one."
The review procedure of the American mastermind can be said to be "passing five levels and killing six generals." If the SAT score is very low (although schools such as Chia University no longer force SAT scores, most first-class universities still require it), the high school grades are poor, there are no specialties, and do not actively participate in extracurricular activities and social activities, even if you "bribe" the first and second-level auditors, you will not be able to "kill six generals" after "passing the five levels" - you will also be beaten down in the evaluation of the "Audit Committee" or the "Screen Committee".
itself cannot be "not online"; if it is "online", it is not necessary to bribe only a key person; it is necessary to bribe everyone, including those student representatives and teacher representatives in the committee, which is almost as difficult as possible. Therefore, judging from the current exposure of American college tricks, it can only be a change in SAT scores; and disguised as a student with sports expertise.
Generally speaking, Americans also talk about human feelings. Therefore, there is also a phenomenon of following the back door of "human favors". For example, if you are allowed, open some harmless back doors for very close relatives and friends. But it is limited to small back doors that do not break the law. If you step on the bottom line and take bribes, many people will become disregarded. So, this is the most serious corruption case in history. Of course, crime will exist at any time and in any country.
American college admissions generally try to be fair, just and open. In order to ensure these "three public", there are also supervision methods in society: if you find that your classmates are not as good as you (except Legacy, donations, ethnic minorities who benefit from "equal rights measures", special sports enrollment, etc.), but he is admitted and you are not admitted, you can sue the court or expose it in the media. In 2014, several white students sued the "legal" "equal rights measures" of the University of Michigan to the Supreme Court. At present, more than 60 Asian groups also believe that "equal rights measures" discriminate against Asian applicants and are taking Harvard to court.
Many Americans believe that bribing some people to go to college is very worthless. First, it is very dangerous and the consequences are very serious; second, if the bribe is too large, it is better to donate directly, and if it is small, it is useless; third, even if it is bribed, it may not work; fourth, instead of bribing, it is better to apply for a few more universities. If the east is not bright in the west, there will always be schools that will be accepted. Fifth, going to college is not a big deal. You can’t go to college this year, but next year. If you can't go to an ideal university this year, you can transfer to another school next year; if you don't have a good undergraduate degree, you still have a chance to graduate school. The future is long, and there is no need to take risks. Therefore, this biggest scandal in history is only 33 parents involved in the case.
Think about the American college entrance examination review process, may you think it is "daily familiar"? ——After the abolition of the college graduation allocation system, does the "various" independent recruitment of workers in each unit also depends on the grades, performance, ability, and interviews?
In other words, "daily familiar" means that we are not far away from us. In fact, if we combine these "daily familiarity", it will be the review and selection mechanism for the separation of the "college entrance examination" recruitment in the United States.
Since there is no out of control in the current "independent recruitment" situation, why should we be worried and unable to move forward for independent recruitment?
html More than 0 years ago, when China canceled soap tickets, cloth tickets, food tickets, and meat tickets, people were also worried about buying trends, hoarding, store out of stock, and bank runs... In fact, on the contrary, it was precisely when using soap tickets, cloth tickets, food tickets, and meat tickets, and people were everywhere. If we are always under the shadow of all kinds of worries, we will stop moving forward and will still use soap tickets, cloth tickets, food tickets, and meat tickets...The serious corruption phenomenon is related to the low quality of people, the incomplete rule of law, and the incomplete supervision mechanism. As long as we increase transparency in the admission policies, improve the legal system in the review system, and improve the supervision mechanism during the admission process, we can greatly reduce the ugly phenomenon in the separation of recruitment and examinations.
Legacy Complex
Legacy translated into Chinese means "passage" and "legacy".
Legacy admissions policy refers to the fact that universities (especially private universities) give certain care to alumni children during admissions. This is not a "unspoken rule", but it is a bit concealed.
Generally speaking, the applicant's parents are alumni, so they are regarded as Legacy. Some schools also regard grandparents and even siblings as alumni as Legacy.
The top 20 American university rankings (some public universities are shortlisted) are basically private schools. It can be seen how far-reaching the impact of Legacy’s admissions policy in the United States. The admission rate of
Legacy is highly confidential and very sensitive, and is not easy to detect. Generally, it is between 30% and 45%. Princeton, which ranked first all year round, was 40% around 2010 (not yet found in recent years); Harvard was 40% in 2014; and 33% in 2018. In other words, about 40 out of 100 Legacy applicants were admitted. The admission rates of these two schools in 2019 were 7.0% and 5.3% respectively. Legacy's acceptance rate is 6 to 8 times the regular one. I can't find out Yale's Legacy acceptance rate, but it should be no less than 40%. Because, Yale’s Legacy students account for 15% of the total number of students. 15 out of 100 students are Legacy, which is a pretty high number. Yale Who is the most famous Legacy? Bush, then, Bush Jr., and then, Bush Jr.'s daughter!
In 2001, Bush Jr. was invited to give a speech at his alma mater. Facing the crowded graduates, he said, "You who have got A are great. If you have C, don't be sad. You can still be the president of the United States..."
People burst into laughter.
Then, he teased his deputy Cheney (who also studied at Yale but did not graduate): "Why can Chaney be the vice president? Because he did not graduate. Otherwise, he can still be the president..."
We don't know if George W. Bush is a C student, but there are many outstanding people in Legacy. Their privilege is manifested in the priority given to them when their conditions are the same or similar to those of the average applicant (although there are quota restrictions).
implements the Legacy enrollment policy, which has both reasons, helplessness and disadvantages. The three are cause and effect and penetrate each other.
first look at the "reason". The most fundamental reason for recruiting Legacy students is to build a consolidated "basic community" around the university. These Legacy continue to enroll and graduate from generation to generation, donating money to the school. In the familiar sayings we are familiar with, it is to attract a group of the most loyal "basic masses". I found that Legacy, which was spread across the United States in various schools, has become somewhat similar to religious complex. In fact, it is not only a university, but also a private high school and a junior high school. Even public universities attach great importance to their own Legacy. Chinese people like to spread a "relationship network", and American universities also spread a "relationship network" on the issue of recruiting Legacy students. In general universities, they have to do this because they are worried about the source of students, which is easy to understand. Why are the world's top universities also very passionate about Legacy? It's indeed a bit contemplated.
I think there are only three reasons: First, Chen Chen is related to each other, everyone is moving in an involuntary inertia; second, parents graduated from this school, and their children may also have corresponding qualities. The implementation of the Legacy policy can maintain a certain quality of students from generation to generation; third, I hope that successful graduates can "remember the source" - to "feedback" to the school from a political and economic perspective.
again sees its "helplessness". The operation of the school requires a lot of money. Many schools spend much more per capita than actually announced. Because of the loan to build a stadium, expand school buildings, add laboratory, etc. in a certain year, how can the per capita spending of students that year be counted? Therefore, on the one hand, the school has to increase its tuition fees year by year, and on the other hand, it has to raise funds everywhere. Among them, raising funds from alumni is the main source. According to statistics, the tuition fees for the best private universities range from $50,000 to $60,000. In the 2018-2019 academic year, Harvard is $50,420, Princeton is $47,140, and Colombia is $59,430. The actual per capita spending exceeds the tuition fee. There is no reliable data for the amount exceeding, so it is difficult to guess randomly. Let’s not look at the actual excess for the time being. Just pursuing the actual tuition fees, we can see the school’s difficulties and helplessness.
Take Colombia as an example. The tuition fee in 2014 was US$49,138, and the food and accommodation were US$11,978. In addition, the book fee, daily living expenses, transportation expenses and other expenses vary from person to person. If the average is US$5,000, the total is about US$66,000. When talking about tuition, we must discuss the relevant "Need-blind" admissions policy and "Need-based" funding policy. Because no matter whether you are poor or rich, as long as you pass the qualification, you will be admitted; if you are admitted, you will have to solve the tuition fee problem. If your family is rich, there will naturally be no problem; if your family is poor, eliminate the part that your parents can afford, and the remaining schools will solve their worries in the form of funding. This grant includes scholarships, loans, paid work, etc. For example, the scholarship is $40,000, the loan is $12,000, and the salary is $8,000. Well, your parents only need to offer $6,000 per year. But where did you get the $40,000 scholarship you received for free? The answer is: donations mainly from alumni and Legacy students’ parents.
From the 2018 to 2019 school year, 70% of Harvard students received various funding, of which 20% enrolled for free because their annual family income was less than US$65,000. A few years ago, about one-quarter of freshmen were poor students (the family’s annual income was less than US$60,000), and all enrolled for free. Some domestic media said: So-and-so received a full scholarship from Harvard. On the one hand, this shows that the student is excellent; on the other hand, it also shows that the student's family is poor. In 2019, Harvard recruited 1,990 freshmen. The 20% of poor students who funded that year were more than 20 million US dollars, and in four years it was 80 million US dollars. In addition, 50% of freshmen received various funding in four years, it is an astronomical figure.
This is the school’s “helplessness”: it is not easy to attract high-quality talents (including students and professors) if they do not provide high-quality scholarships and salaries. In order to provide high scholarships and salaries to high-quality talents, fundraising must be raised from alumni and a certain number of Legacy students must be accepted.
Finally, let’s see the “defaults”. It can be said that it is a disguised "inbreeding" that has been visited the same school for generations. For example, if 500 professors have taught at this university for 30 years, then many generations of Legacy are likely to have taken the same professor's course. Even if the child does not take the courses taught by his parents, what parents hear and see is what the child is influenced by.
For example, Columbia Law School has a tradition. At the end of the course, the professors all have a speech, a speech that makes the eyes of despicable prospective lawyers burst into tears.
One of the 92-year-old professors said, "Today I went to the supermarket to buy bananas, and the salesperson advised me to buy fully ripe ones, not to buy too raw ones..." (A kind of American humor, meaning: I am worried that I will buy raw bananas. Before the bananas are ripe, the elderly will die). The students felt sad. He then said to the salesperson, "You advise me like this every time, but the class I prepared has not been finished..."
I burst into tears when I heard it. When I have grandchildren, if the professor still teaches, can we not sing the "same song"? ! Therefore, this kind of relationship between Chen and Chen cannot be said to be not a disguised "cultural inbreeding" or "academic inbreeding".
Local time, May 16, 2018, New York, USA, graduates from New York University attended the graduation ceremony in the rain.
The worst, reactionary and puzzling thing is the Legacy admissions policy. Princeton, Harvard, Yale, and Columbia are all spared from being "can't be cut, but still messy" with this poorly-known legacy.
I think China’s college entrance examination reform must not learn this. As property, whether it is movable or real estate, it is natural for future generations to inherit it. But Legacy regards "education" as a legacy - a hereditary privilege, and its backwardness is obvious.
When parents go to Yale, they must pass this "go to Yale" to their children as a "passage". From the perspective of modern ethics, it is "reactionary"; from the perspective of modern science, it is also "reactionary".
Parents go to Yale, and their children also have full rights to go to Yale. But it is really undesirable to treat "Going Yale" as a legacy and institutionalize it as a policy.
Although many universities have put certain restrictions on legacy. For example, if you cannot enjoy legacy in different generations, it does not affect legacy in different generations. In addition, these schools emphasize that only the conditions are the same or similar will give priority to the children of alumni. Even so, the three generations of grandparents appreciate the same lecture notes of the same professor, and the ancestors sang the "same song" and told the same story for generations... From an ecology perspective, it is also deformed and unhealthy.
Sports Special Admissions
talks about American skills, and we have to talk about sports special admissions. First of all, this is the hardest hit area of corruption; secondly, sports students are a major feature of American universities.
At the 2016 Rio Olympics, the United States sent 555 athletes, of which 417 were members of the National College Athletic Association (NCAA). In other words, about 75% are college students. In other words, American college students top the world Olympics.
Let’s take a little more “gossip”: Who has the highest salary in the university I teach? Rugby coach! The second is the principal, and the third is the ice hockey coach of sports...
American universities attach importance to sports, which shows how it is!
The earliest developed in the United States was in the northeast, and the earliest established schools were also in the northeast. Therefore, all 8 Ivy League schools are in the northeast. After 1870, schools in the northeast carried out rugby and various sports competitions. In 1956, eight prestigious schools officially formed the "Ivy League". That is, the "Ivy League" was originally named for sports. It can be seen that the leader "Ivy" is also a footnote to the sports being regarded as a hot topic.
The "secret calculation formula" of Ivy League schools' calculation AI (academic index) mentioned earlier was originally used to calculate the academic index of "sports special enrollment". Now, is every Ivy League school using AI to guide its own admissions? Not necessarily. But this formula is basically certain that it is used to calculate the lower limit of the academic index of "sports special admissions". For example, in a certain year, Ivy League schools stipulated that the lower limit of AI for their respective "sports special enrollment" was 169.
AI is 169, which means that the scores of SAT and SAT II are around 600 points (full score of 1600), and the CRS (school ranking points) is 49, which means that the ranking is beyond 70%. Obviously, this academic index is a bit terrible.
If a school wants to recruit a sports student with AI below 169, the school must bring the application materials of the student to the joint meeting of the directors of the Ivy League Admissions Office to provide necessary explanations and must obtain the approval of the meeting.
If the "specialties" of the sports specialty students are not very prominent, the school generally does not want to put itself in a situation of "three-court trial". What's more, there are competitors among Ivy League schools. It may not be very pleasant to be "interrogated" by your opponent.
Therefore, the sports specialty students disclosed in recent corruption cases basically did not dare to fool Ivy League schools, but went to the USC university to visit schools. As for how did the only Yale women's football coach involved in the Ivy League case get away with it? Although there is no details of the crime, it is not difficult to "solve the case". 1. The girl is not an athlete. It can be imagined that her AI will be higher than the lower limit of the "sports specialty student" of Ivy League schools, so the joint meeting of the director of the Ivy League school admissions office could not stop her. 2. After enrolling as a "sports student", I received a coach of $400,000. How can I help this "Mr. Nan Guo" who can't play football? It's easy to deal with. Wouldn't you get away with it if you don't participate in team training under the pretext of being injured?
Each school has a dedicated person in charge of the "sports special enrollment". The coaches personally visited and interviewed the "Sports Special Admissions". One or two months before ordinary applicants are still anxiously waiting for the admission letter, they will first issue a tentative admission notice to the "Sports Specialty Students".The purpose is to appease them and stabilize them. Many schools have dedicated scholarships for these "sports special admissions".
In fact, there are two types of "sports special admissions": one is the real "sports special admissions". After arriving at school, you can plug and play and get points on the court. This type of person's AI can be relatively low. The second type is those who are wearing storefronts, bench players. This type of people has a higher AI, which is used to balance the low AI of the first type of people.
When I was studying for my PhD, there was a football player next door. My son called him "Big Uncle", and he was the first American friend he made. At that time, my son didn't know how to speak English and wanted to say something to the "big uncle", so he went home to ask us, and then went to the next door to "communicate" like an inscription. He learned the UFO technology of mines and mines. Once, the UFO hit the middle nose bridge and bleeding, and his son didn't cry. The bridge of the nose is still slightly bulging. Whenever I mention it, I always comfort my wife: Isn’t it more handsome if my nose is taller?
At that time, I worked as a TA (teaching assistant). One day, I saw a big man coming to my office opposite me to meet another doctoral student who was a TA. When he saw me, his expression was a little unnatural, so I didn't say anything.
After he left, I deliberately asked the TA: "You are so big, you are playing basketball!"
TA shook his head: "You play rugby, it's a headache!"
A few days later, the big man asked me: "Do you know that TA?"
I said: "I know!"
The big man thought about it, but he stopped talking.
Later, the big man went to another school. The mine was sad for several days.
Mine, a "year-old friend", belongs to the "sports special enrollment" that gets points on the field. I guess the AI may not be too high.
Why does American education attach so much importance to sports?
First of all, sports enriches campus life. For Americans, sports are not only about strengthening their bodies, but more importantly, they can create a spiritual atmosphere that advocates competition and is proactive. On domestic campuses, there are a lot of "bean sprout-shaped" scholars wearing thick-edged glasses. Turn on the TV, and the channels are always feminine "young young meat". American campus culture may be biased, but Chinese campus culture does need to strongly call for men who walk out of the classroom! Of course, in addition to advocating a competitive and enterprising spirit, sports can also enhance the school's sense of collective honor.
Secondly, it comes back to the money issue. Tickets for sports are an important income for the school. More importantly, sports can best "pay" the "pockets" of those rich alumni. For example, the high school in the mine won the state basketball championship, and people cried and laughed... While those rich alumni were "unconscious" and "swelling", the principal proposed to expand the gymnasium. Those rich alumni who were so happy that they could not find the Beijing would probably even pat their chests on their backs. In short, sports are an important means of raising donations.
Finally, sports can bring reputation and honor to the school. There are about 3,500 universities in the United States. Except for the 100 most famous universities that everyone knows, who knows who? In this way, sports have become the most effective, convenient and sensational way to increase school visibility. No wonder the mine-mining high school won the state basketball championship, and after he went home, he said a few words: "There will be many freshmen applying to our school next year..."
Look at the admissions of famous American schools. In addition to Legacy students, "ethnic minority" students who enjoy "equal rights measures", sports special enrollment, international students, plus students donated by their parents, celebrity students, etc., the remaining normal enrollment quotas are not many. For example, 13,600 people applied to a certain university that year, and the university planned to admit 1,700 people, with an admission rate of 12.5%. Among them, 2,000 people applied for "early admission" and 600 were admitted. In this way, there are 1,100 places. Among these 1,100 places, about 200 are "ethnic minority" students who enjoy "equal rights measures", 200 are Legacy students, 200 are sports special enrollment, 100 are international students, and several donor students and celebrity students. In addition to these "students accompanying students", there are only less than 400 places left for "normal" admissions.There is no doubt that these 400 admitted students are truly the most outstanding high-scoring and high-energy talents!
Of course, there are many prestigious universities in the United States, Case Western Reserve University, which ranked 47th in 2019, also has 16 Nobel Prize winners. Therefore, this institution collects several hundred yuan and that school collects several hundred yuan, and outstanding talents still have their own destination. The top 100 institutions have an average of 400 students per university, and the American elites are basically included.
Use a huge stone to carve an Warrior . There is no gravel under your feet, how can the Warriors highlight it? We can also regard legacy students, sports special enrollment, "equal rights measures" beneficiary, etc. as essential "slave training" and "bench players" for a sports team, as a necessary "ecological balance", and as the gravel that lays the foundation for the Warriors...
metaphor may not be very pleasant, but does it make some sense?
Dr. Quitz is a famous professor at the University of Miami at the "Public Ivy" prestigious university and was once the chairman of the department's admissions committee. I once told him: In China, people’s biggest concern about reforming the college entrance examination is that they are worried that if the admission criteria are not based on the high or low scores, they will have a “backdoor”. If, like the American master's tricks, some subjective and unquantifiable standards are added to the admission process, people are worried that many fraudulent and difficult to explain admission decisions will occur.
Dr. Quitz's words are very meaningful and are used as the conclusion of this article: "Although we have reason to worry that college admissions with multiple standards will be corrupt due to privileges; college admissions with the only standard for exam scores cannot prevent unfair admissions caused by privileges.
American prestigious schools are not facing finding jade from piles of stubborn stones, but finding the beautiful jade we need from piles of jade, and deciding which piece to choose and which piece to keep. Of course, the easiest way is to use formulas to calculate various indicators of each piece of jade. However, the conclusion If you will be almost the same jade you get. If your goal is to remake the same small jade, even if the jade you get is a little different, it will still be over. However, if your goal is to create exquisite jade in various shapes, you must choose jade of various shapes, sizes, and colors. This is what most American college admissions office staff do.
uses a broad set of admission standards instead of a single college entrance examination score, and there will be ugly phenomena. This worry is understandable, but this is not our mainstream."
