Elyssa Durant at 6:41pm February 23
Judson, let me clarify that statement since it was not intended to be a be astatement about finance. By definition, Harvard and the other Ivy's seek out the most talented individuals through the admissions process. Historicallly the Ivy League diffeentiated themselves by refusing to look at other criteriaq for admissins such as sports ability.... it seems only fair that ability to pay should be removed from the talent search process. By suspending admissions for one year is not intended to "screw the wealthy" and given their historical search process should not be viewed or perceived that way. Unfortunately, that is not really the case as we know due to other sociological factors, edcuational attainment is often linked to SES. Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Dartmouth, Penn, Columbia, Yale and Brown seek out the best students, who are already slated and identified to be successful. Sort of like the "gifted" programs that will be successful without the added benefit ....
Elyssa Durant at 6:47pm February 23
of esteemed professors. (sorry-- ran out of room) I'm not talking about the redistribution of wealth, I al talking about providiging an equitable system of educational reform. When the Ivy's take only ttyhe best students that have been identified as heving those qualities that will make them successful, then it seems a bit redundant. There are many people who could benefit from an excellent education, among them are student who do not have the necessary home environments that create a culture of success. I don't think our society will suffer if we ask the most talented among us to do a minimal service requirement by teaching and sharing the intelelctual gifts that have been bestowed upon them.... edd