Quote:
And that's precisely what I disagree with. In other words, what you are saying is that the Ivies should get a free pass because they "set an expectation" of unmeritocratic behavior in the past. Just because you were bad in the past doesn't mean that you get a free pass now. If anything, I would argue that that actually makes it worse and that you have more sins to expiate.
I think it is far more fair to hold all schools to the same current standards, regardless of how those schools might have behaved in the past. Who cares about the past? What matters is now.
|
We hold all schools with respect to their respective mission standards and what they wish to do. We don't hold Christian universities to the same admission standards as Ivy League universities - because we know that Christian universities have a particular goal - and that goal is different from that of the Ivy League universities. We don't hold Caltech to the same admission standards as Ivy League universities - because we know that Caltech's educational goals are different from those of the Ivy League universities.
What has changed, though, are MIT's educational goals in particular. MIT's educational goals have changed from what they were in the past. And some people don't like it.
One such educational goal is the "training of the future scientists and engineers of the 20th century". MIT's goal captures this sentiment, but has broadened it out. Caltech has retained it. How many more universities retain such a goal? Pure engineering universities do exist, but where then is the student who desires a mix of science and engineering at the top level?
Edited post above for wording errror.