300 words of kinda wild but here is:
Legacy admissions, where children of alumni are given preferential treatment in the admissions process, is a practice that reinforces structural inequality in the education system. These preferences are not based on the merit or potential of the student, but rather on their family connections.
Other similar practices include early decision admissions, where students commit early to a school and are rewarded with a boost in their application, as well as VIP admissions for donors, athletes, or underrepresented groups. These types of non-merit-based admissions disproportionately benefit higher-income and higher-social capital students while disadvantaging lower-income and minority students.
These legacy and VIP programs essentially reserve several spots in the admissions class for students who are not admitted based primarily on their academic qualifications or potential to contribute to the diversity and learning experiences of the campus. They are essentially circumventing a fair and meritocratic admissions review process.
While colleges aim to build a diverse and inclusive campus, these types of non-merit-based admissions undercut that goal. They lead to less qualified and less diverse admissions classes by taking spots away from exceptionally talented students from lower-income or minority backgrounds. They propagate inequality by giving advantages to those already born into privilege.
If colleges are truly committed to diversity, equity and excellence, they need to eliminate these kinds of legacy preferences and evaluate all applicants based solely on their qualifications for success at the institution. Standardized test scores, high school GPA, the strength of curriculum, extracurricular activities, personal essays, and recommendations should be the sole criteria used to determine who is admitted, not family ties or ability to donate.
Only by using a fair and meritocratic admissions process can colleges build classes of high-achieving students from a diverse range of backgrounds. Legacy and VIP programs may serve the interests of privilege but they undermine the greater good of opportunity and justice. It is time for colleges to close these loopholes and live up to their ideals.
By giving the privileged precedence, legacy admissions and non-merit-based practises like sports recruitment and standardised test preferences enhance structural inequality in college admissions.
Does Carnegie Mellon care about its legacy?Interested in carrying on your family's tradition? We take seriously your status as a possible legacy family, but the admissions process at CMU applies the same standards to all applicants, regardless of legacy status. Throughout the assessment process, each applicant is treated equally and uniquely.
Are there any legacy admissions at MIT?There have been complaints about giving preference to the offspring of alumni, and certain American colleges and universities, like MIT, have a rule against doing so.
To know more about privileged visit:-
https://brainly.com/question/16698446
#SPJ1
Does the Canadian Government have a moral responsibility to review the Indian Act?
Identify moral ideals. This includes notions such as justice, fairness, the “golden rule”, honesty, compassion, forgiveness, beneficence (performance of good acts), etc.
The Canadian Government has a moral responsibility to review the Indian Act based on the moral ideals of justice, compassion, fairness, beneficence, and the Golden Rule :
What are the moral ideas in which the Indian Act is to be reviewed?The Indian Act developed in 1876 was condemned for its policies, which are restrictions on Indigenous land ownership, cultural practices, and self-governance, and resulted in oppression and marginalization of the Indigenous people.
Some of the moral ideas in which the Indian Act is to be reviewed include:
Justice that is, the rights and dignity of Indigenous peoples would be sustained by the review since it has been argued that the Act has a history of systemic injustices and discriminatory provisions.
The review would be an act of compassion as it recognizes the harm caused by the Act and take steps to rectify it, by meaningful engagement and partnership with Indigenous communities.
Reviewing the Act would promote fairness and equitable treatment of Indigenous peoples, especially in the area of land ownership, cultural practices, etc.
Reviewing the Indian Act supports the beneficence principle, which is the obligation to do good and promote the well-being of others.
The Indian Act is considered to violate the Golden Rule - to treat others as you would want to be treated. The review is an opportunity to rectify the imbalance of imposed policies that deny the indigenous people autonomy and self-determination.
Learn more about the Indian Act at brainly.com/question/29596645
#SPJ1
Which of the following is true about cultural adaptation?
6 OF 10
a. Changing the wording used in a treatment protocol to be more culturally relevant is
an example of cultural adaptation
b. Evidence-based treatments usually are developed with diverse populations, so
cultural adaptations are rarely needed
c. Cultural adaptations are usually tailored toward racial or ethnic identity and do not
take gender or socioeconomic status into account
d. None of the above
The truth about cultural adaptation is that it is rarely necessary because evidence-based treatments are typically developed with various groups.
Option B is the right choice.
What is the reality of cultural adaptation?The ability of people and cultures to overcome and adapt to changes in the natural and social environment through minor alterations to their typical way of life is defined by the new notion of cultural adaptation.
Which of the following is an illustration of a cultural adaptation?Examples of cultural adaptation include learning the greetings of the new culture, its language and slang, its dress rules, and how to access goods and services in it.
To know more about cultural adaptation visit:-
https://brainly.com/question/3594984
#SPJ1
