<p>At the big-name schools nobody is paying full fare, actually. IMO they should raise the tuition so those who can afford the true full cost will pay it, and play Robin Hood to everybody else.</p>
<p>If they are paying the “true cost”, then they aren’t subsidizing any one else. Where’s the “Robin Hood”?</p>
<p>(At any rate, they will continue to move toward true “full fare” as they have over the past decade. No “Robin Hood”, simple “supply and demand”, with a little Thorsten Veblen thrown in (raising the price makes it MORE attractive to the desired customers, not less.)</p>
<p>“The truth is that black students have NEVER been seen as worthy of the comparatively few spots they were granted at the elite institutions, no matter what their qualifications. The assumption has ALWAYS been that they must have been admitted over a more worthy and qualified white applicant. LONG BEFORE there was ever AA, this was the mindset.” </p>
<p>poetsheart - hoe true that statement is but the very existence of AA is why. If admissions were color-blind that assumption would collapse which is why I believe AA is now hurting URMs more than helping them.</p>
<p>BTW I fully agree that 50 or 100 point differences in SAT scores and small differences in GPA and class rank are insignificant and that other factors can and should enter into school decisions. But how long do you think it would take for the URM plaintiffs to get into court with a racial discrimination class action suit if the disaggregated SAT and GPA numbers indicated that the accepted pool of URM applicants had on average 50 points higher on their SATs and and .2 higher on their GPAs? We’d need the atomic clock to measure that nanosecond.</p>