[econjack]

I was a prof at a university you would all recognize and served for two years on the University Admissions Committee. Our charge was to review the admission applications of students who were "at the margin" of meeting the minimum admissions standards. Back then, the standards were mainly: SAT/ACT scores, their grades in high school, and "outside" activities. There was no published quota numbers, but it was clearly assumed that we were expected to review minority applications under a different microscope.

I argued that, in many cases, the student had no chance of making it past the first year and that we were just taking their money and wasting their time. Privately, I tracked those who I said we should not admit, but was overruled by the rest of the committee. As I recall, just under 95% of those who I thought wouldn't make it through the first year didn't. Most were minority students. At the end of my term, I presented the stats of our record for the previous two years confirming my suspicion that we were deluding too many students with our "false" acceptance.

To my knowledge, the university did not change its policy standards.

[moovova]

"At the end of my term, I presented the stats of our record for the previous two years confirming my suspicion that we were deluding too many students with our "false" acceptance."

You're lucky you kept your job. The man behind the green curtain does not like to be mocked.