Nevada Hoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 18,485
|
Post by Nevada Hoya on Sept 1, 2016 11:11:04 GMT -5
From the NY Times article: "Mr. DeGioa’s decision to offer an advantage in admissions to descendants, similar to that offered to the children and grandchildren of alumni, is unprecedented, historians say. The preference will be offered to the descendants of all the slaves whose labor benefited Georgetown, not just the men, women and children sold in 1838."
Is it true that admissions preference is given to the children and grandchildren of alumni? If true, tell that to some of my classmates, whose high performing children did not get accepted.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 1, 2016 11:13:06 GMT -5
|
|
Nevada Hoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 18,485
|
Post by Nevada Hoya on Sept 1, 2016 11:36:22 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Healy on Sept 1, 2016 12:14:40 GMT -5
From the NY Times article: "Mr. DeGioa’s decision to offer an advantage in admissions to descendants, similar to that offered to the children and grandchildren of alumni, is unprecedented, historians say. The preference will be offered to the descendants of all the slaves whose labor benefited Georgetown, not just the men, women and children sold in 1838." Is it true that admissions preference is given to the children and grandchildren of alumni? If true, tell that to some of my classmates, whose high performing children did not get accepted. My experience as an alum, former AAP interviewer, and father of 3 GU grads and 2 other children that were not admitted by GU, is that there is a slight legacy advantage in admissions. The vast majority of the applicants are high performing children, and the legacy advantage appears to increase a legacy applicant's chances of admission from say 15% to maybe 22%.
|
|
drquigley
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,386
|
Post by drquigley on Sept 1, 2016 13:21:49 GMT -5
In order to place the "sale" of the GU slaves in perspective I suggest fellow board members read, "The Half Has Never Been Told, Slavery and the Rise of American Capitalism" by Edward Baptest. I just happened to be reading it when the Georgetown story broke. The slaves that were sold by GU were not being moved from a typical early 18th century semi-feudsl plantation to one nearby. Most likely they were part of the forced relocation of nearly a million slaves during the period 1800-1865 from the terrible but fairly stable tobacco and farming plantations of Maryland, the Carolinas and Virginia, to the truly horrendous industrialized cotton plantations of Mississippi, Alabama, Louisiana, and Texas. As a white, GU grad who had taken a course in African American history and read John Hope Franklin's book, "From Slavery to Freedom", I thought I was aware of slavery and the toll it took on the lives of african americans. But Baptest's book was truly eye opening. The terror associated with the "sale" of these slaves is hard for us to comprehend. Understand that fathers and mothers were sold away from their children and children as young as 8-9 years old were ripped from their parents arms never to be seen again. Slave families that had worked the same plantation for generations were torn apart and slaves who had acquired basic farming, woodworking, or other skills were sent "down river" where they would be resold in New Orleans auction houses to plantation owners who would work them from sunup to sundown planting and picking cotton in heat worse than anything we have experienced here the last few weeks. Baptest explains that by 1832 this was known to both the slaves and their owners and thus the GU sale was especially egregious. In effect, to make money (and there was a lot of money to be made. By the mid 1800's the price of a slave had increased 2-3 fold due to the demand for slave labor created by the explosion of the cotton economy) the Jesuits were consigning their slaves to a living hell. This whole episode, when put in perspective, should truly be a learning experience for all of us.
|
|
DallasHoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,636
|
Post by DallasHoya on Sept 1, 2016 13:31:24 GMT -5
From the NY Times article: "Mr. DeGioa’s decision to offer an advantage in admissions to descendants, similar to that offered to the children and grandchildren of alumni, is unprecedented, historians say. The preference will be offered to the descendants of all the slaves whose labor benefited Georgetown, not just the men, women and children sold in 1838." Is it true that admissions preference is given to the children and grandchildren of alumni? If true, tell that to some of my classmates, whose high performing children did not get accepted. My experience as an alum, former AAP interviewer, and father of 3 GU grads and 2 other children that were not admitted by GU, is that there is a slight legacy advantage in admissions. The vast majority of the applicants are high performing children, and the legacy advantage appears to increase a legacy applicant's chances of admission from say 15% to maybe 22%. I'd rather see the University give financial aid to these descendants instead of funding another useless African American Studies program.
|
|
tgo
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 803
|
Post by tgo on Sept 1, 2016 13:32:36 GMT -5
In my experience as a interview committee chair for the last 15 years I haven't seen alumni kids get much of a boost but I think it is enough to put someone over the top if they are on the edge, a tie breaker of sorts.
The supposedly large advantage given to alumni children is usually "proved" by showing that they get in at higher rates but that is no proof at all. As a subset of the population, the children of Hoya alums are far more likely to be higher performing students than other subsets of the applicant population for what should be obvious reasons. They are also more likely to yield which gives a school an incentive to accept them although I dont feel like GU plays games like that.
I think alumni kids should get more of a boost than they do, not because I want GU to be exclusive and not let in new blood but I think that if your family has been involved in the university then that is something of value, your family helped make it what it is today. In the same vein, i want the children of Hoya professors to get a boost in admissions. Not a blank check for any moron whose dad was a Hoya but something that moves someone out of the second tier into the accepted pool and/or we give a second harder look at these students when their initial review has them on the outside looking in to see if we can justify their admission.
We give athletes a boost because they have shown a dedication to hone a skill and they bring something different that the high achieving academic doesnt bring and I dont think that athletics is the only thing we do or should value that is outside of academics. Legacy status should be small but should still count for something.
If I carry that same line of reasoning to the descendants of slaves who helped build the university then logically we should give them a similar boost. I am not sure how many hundreds of years later that lineage should count for something though. If my great grandfather went to GU and that is it then I dont think that should be considered a current connection to GU and thus no "legacy advantage" for the applicant. Where do we draw the line with other contributions?
|
|
tgo
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 803
|
Post by tgo on Sept 1, 2016 13:37:07 GMT -5
My experience as an alum, former AAP interviewer, and father of 3 GU grads and 2 other children that were not admitted by GU, is that there is a slight legacy advantage in admissions. The vast majority of the applicants are high performing children, and the legacy advantage appears to increase a legacy applicant's chances of admission from say 15% to maybe 22%. I'd rather see the University give financial aid to these descendants instead of funding another useless African American Studies program. We already give aid based on need but I agree that we dont need some new major or department.
|
|
AvantGuardHoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
"It was when I found out I could make mistakes that I knew I was on to something."
Posts: 1,481
|
Post by AvantGuardHoya on Sept 1, 2016 14:41:40 GMT -5
My experience as an alum, former AAP interviewer, and father of 3 GU grads and 2 other children that were not admitted by GU, is that there is a slight legacy advantage in admissions. The vast majority of the applicants are high performing children, and the legacy advantage appears to increase a legacy applicant's chances of admission from say 15% to maybe 22%. I'd rather see the University give financial aid to these descendants instead of funding another useless African American Studies program. That's rich.
|
|
njhoya78
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,775
|
Post by njhoya78 on Sept 1, 2016 18:20:54 GMT -5
Very positive media coverage on CBS, NBC and ABC's evening news shows, as well as on WNBC's local news in New York City tonight.
|
|
Nevada Hoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 18,485
|
Post by Nevada Hoya on Sept 1, 2016 19:05:32 GMT -5
|
|
RusskyHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
In Soviet Russia, Hoya Blue Bleeds You!
Posts: 4,620
|
Post by RusskyHoya on Sept 1, 2016 20:41:44 GMT -5
From the NY Times article: "Mr. DeGioa’s decision to offer an advantage in admissions to descendants, similar to that offered to the children and grandchildren of alumni, is unprecedented, historians say. The preference will be offered to the descendants of all the slaves whose labor benefited Georgetown, not just the men, women and children sold in 1838." Is it true that admissions preference is given to the children and grandchildren of alumni? If true, tell that to some of my classmates, whose high performing children did not get accepted. Just about everyone thinks their own children/grandchildren are "high performing." It's like Lake Wobegon out there! Kidding aside, every successive generation has been forced to reckon with the fact that "if I were applying now, I probably wouldn't get in." The bar moves over time. In my experience as a interview committee chair for the last 15 years I haven't seen alumni kids get much of a boost but I think it is enough to put someone over the top if they are on the edge, a tie breaker of sorts. The supposedly large advantage given to alumni children is usually "proved" by showing that they get in at higher rates but that is no proof at all. As a subset of the population, the children of Hoya alums are far more likely to be higher performing students than other subsets of the applicant population for what should be obvious reasons. They are also more likely to yield which gives a school an incentive to accept them although I dont feel like GU plays games like that. I think alumni kids should get more of a boost than they do, not because I want GU to be exclusive and not let in new blood but I think that if your family has been involved in the university then that is something of value, your family helped make it what it is today. In the same vein, i want the children of Hoya professors to get a boost in admissions. Not a blank check for any moron whose dad was a Hoya but something that moves someone out of the second tier into the accepted pool and/or we give a second harder look at these students when their initial review has them on the outside looking in to see if we can justify their admission. We give athletes a boost because they have shown a dedication to hone a skill and they bring something different that the high achieving academic doesnt bring and I dont think that athletics is the only thing we do or should value that is outside of academics. Legacy status should be small but should still count for something. If I carry that same line of reasoning to the descendants of slaves who helped build the university then logically we should give them a similar boost. I am not sure how many hundreds of years later that lineage should count for something though. If my great grandfather went to GU and that is it then I dont think that should be considered a current connection to GU and thus no "legacy advantage" for the applicant. Where do we draw the line with other contributions? The children of faculty and staff do get special admissions consideration, much like the children of alumni. In all cases, the... erm... 'level' of consideration depends on the level of involvement. AAP interviewers do not (necessarily) have full knowledge of that. Which is as it should be. As to how much of a boost any sort of special status should provide - people of good faith will disagree, of course. Lots of arguments in any number of directions, and there is no 'right' answer. What the team in place is trying to do is assemble the best, most authentically Georgetown class they can. It's a tough job, but I think Charlie Deacon & Co. have done it well. Long story short: our nation's reckoning with its original sin will take just as long, if not longer, as the sin itself. It is a good thing indeed that Georgetown is at the forefront among institutions grappling with how to approach and navigate that reckoning. There are no 'right' answers, not everyone will be happy with the outcomes (on either side of the spectrum), and there's going to be some unpleasant thoughts, words, and deeds to come for all concerned. But the Georgetown willing to take that on is the Georgetown that John Thompson Jr. devoted himself to. It is the Georgetown that bloomed a thousand Starter jackets in places where an admissions letter from CAD was like ice on Venus. It is the Georgetown that will look at itself in the mirror and know it is part of the solution, however long that might take and however painful it may be. Hoya Saxa
|
|
eagle54
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,471
|
Post by eagle54 on Sept 1, 2016 22:48:40 GMT -5
That whole release by our fearless leader sounds like more PC pandering than it does action.
He's going to add some faculty and a new department? That will be shut down once the microscope goes away and it's not feasible to maintain.
He'll give special considerations for the descendants? I'll be looking for how they are monitoring that other than highlighting one or two case studies in the near term.
Taking the names of the buildings is likely the only actionable item that will be noticed in the long-term but that to will be forgotten.
|
|
|
Post by HoyaSinceBirth on Sept 2, 2016 7:31:32 GMT -5
That whole release by our fearless leader sounds like more PC pandering than it does action. He's going to add some faculty and a new department? That will be shut down once the microscope goes away and it's not feasible to maintain. He'll give special considerations for the descendants? I'll be looking for how they are monitoring that other than highlighting one or two case studies in the near term. Taking the names of the buildings is likely the only actionable item that will be noticed in the long-term but that to will be forgotten. and what would you recommend be done?
|
|
SirSaxa
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 15,620
|
Post by SirSaxa on Sept 2, 2016 11:53:00 GMT -5
If I carry that same line of reasoning to the descendants of slaves who helped build the university then logically we should give them a similar boost. I am not sure how many hundreds of years later that lineage should count for something though. If my great grandfather went to GU and that is it then I dont think that should be considered a current connection to GU and thus no "legacy advantage" for the applicant. Where do we draw the line with other contributions? TGO, are you equating "contributions" and "helping to build the university" from some tuition paying great grandfather and that of slaves? One chose to pay tuition, attend the university, go to classes, gain an education and earn a degree - and maybe even make some donations in subsequent years, with the forced labor of slavery? Then to suffer even greater horrors by being sold off, families -- mothers, fathers, sons and daughters to different locations, and into even worse conditions? Whipping, beatings, doing whatever whims their new owners might choose to satisfy? Really? I must have misread your comments because "comparing" two entirely differing circumstances and suggesting their is any similarity whatsoever to the "contribtutions" is mindboggling.
|
|
tgo
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 803
|
Post by tgo on Sept 2, 2016 12:32:08 GMT -5
If I carry that same line of reasoning to the descendants of slaves who helped build the university then logically we should give them a similar boost. I am not sure how many hundreds of years later that lineage should count for something though. If my great grandfather went to GU and that is it then I dont think that should be considered a current connection to GU and thus no "legacy advantage" for the applicant. Where do we draw the line with other contributions? TGO, are you equating "contributions" and "helping to build the university" from some tuition paying great grandfather and that of slaves? One chose to pay tuition, attend the university, go to classes, gain an education and earn a degree - and maybe even make some donations in subsequent years, with the forced labor of slavery? Then to suffer even greater horrors by being sold off, families -- mothers, fathers, sons and daughters to different locations, and into even worse conditions? Whipping, beatings, doing whatever whims their new owners might choose to satisfy? Really? I must have misread your comments because "comparing" two entirely differing circumstances and suggesting their is any similarity whatsoever to the "contribtutions" is mindboggling. Not at all, I was explaining the basis for a point of view in that if you logically believe point A and B (which I do and I tend to find that everyone I speak to does as well so I presume A and B to be widely held opinions) - then you cant help but believe point C. That doesnt equate a, b and c as being necessarily equal nor does it compare their merits but says that they are logically and ethically consistent while to deny C after affirming A and B would not be consistent. If you think that students, professors, administrators etc today help make the University what it will be tomorrow, then I think that contribution should mean something when their children come knocking at the door to benefit from what their parents helped create/perpetuate. But I dont think that contribution is great enough that just because my grandfather or some random uncle was an average Hoya that I should get extra consideration for admission so there are limits. The slaves and their families obviously didnt do so willingly but from recent accounts this sale that did so much harm also provided funding that helped make it possible for making the university what it is today. The slave families gave much much more of course on a scale that cant be compared which is why I think it is ok for us to be looking to pay back their "contribution" for far longer, but how long? That part I don’t know and I would be curious to hear what people think are the limits to such a policy where we treat the descendants of this group of slaves the way we treat the child of a recent alum with regards to admissions. For how many generations does this continue?
|
|
hoyainspirit
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
When life puts that voodoo on me, music is my gris-gris.
Posts: 8,394
|
Post by hoyainspirit on Sept 2, 2016 16:42:37 GMT -5
My experience as an alum, former AAP interviewer, and father of 3 GU grads and 2 other children that were not admitted by GU, is that there is a slight legacy advantage in admissions. The vast majority of the applicants are high performing children, and the legacy advantage appears to increase a legacy applicant's chances of admission from say 15% to maybe 22%. I'd rather see the University give financial aid to these descendants instead of funding another useless African American Studies program. Well that statement sucks.
|
|
DallasHoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,636
|
Post by DallasHoya on Sept 2, 2016 18:17:07 GMT -5
I'd rather see the University give financial aid to these descendants instead of funding another useless African American Studies program. Well that statement sucks. Let me elaborate. If forced to choose between (i) giving financial aid to individuals who are unable to afford attending Georgetown and who are descendants of human beings actually owned and sold by Jesuits for the benefit of Georgetown or (ii) paying over-educated and overpaid academics who are for the most duplicating work that is done at many dozens if not hundreds of other institutions of higher learning, then I think the choice is clear. I did not mean to imply that all African American Studies departments are useless. I meant that adding another one won't add a whole lot to the field. I'd rather help individuals than institutions, which is the opposite of what happened in 1838.
|
|
DanMcQ
Moderator
Posts: 30,607
|
Post by DanMcQ on Sept 3, 2016 4:22:22 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by FrostbackHoya on Sept 3, 2016 9:35:39 GMT -5
Well that statement sucks. Let me elaborate. If forced to choose between (i) giving financial aid to individuals who are unable to afford attending Georgetown and who are descendants of human beings actually owned and sold by Jesuits for the benefit of Georgetown or (ii) paying over-educated and overpaid academics who are for the most duplicating work that is done at many dozens if not hundreds of other institutions of higher learning, then I think the choice is clear. I did not mean to imply that all African American Studies departments are useless. I meant that adding another one won't add a whole lot to the field. I'd rather help individuals than institutions, which is the opposite of what happened in 1838. Solid clarification. Financial aid is the first priority, IMHO.
|
|