MSA removed cutoffs by replacing conditions with medians

The MSA decided as of April 2023 to drop requirements for all multiplication schools, and instead rank the schools based off of reported medians complied from their enrollment running total. I'm not sure how I feel about it, but it is neat that the MSA is keeping their commitment to accessibility. How does everyone else feel about it?

I think it's fine. The schools are still going to want to maintain their medians so they will keep their admit stats more or less the same. I do think this approach will allow for applicants below medians to have a higher likelihood of being admitted.

I don't like it because it means that people less qualified than me now have a chance that I didn't have. I'm prepared to take the downvotes for this but I know I'm not alone.

regi wrote:I don't like it because it means that people less qualified than me now have a chance that I didn't have. I'm prepared to take the downvotes for this but I know I'm not alone.

It's not like they're about to admit a bunch of applicants below medians -- they'll fall. It'll be more like what  @gretchen said. Stop complaining.

Ewen wrote:

regi wrote:I don't like it because it means that people less qualified than me now have a chance that I didn't have. I'm prepared to take the downvotes for this but I know I'm not alone.

It's not like they're about to admit a bunch of applicants below medians -- they'll fall. It'll be more like what  @gretchen said. Stop complaining.

It's important to recognize that removing restrictions on admission criteria can lead to the admission of students who fall below the medians. Removing restrictions opens the door to more underqualified applicants. This is why it's important to have clear and consistent admission standards that are applied fairly to all applicants, regardless of their background or circumstances. So, respectfully, it's not accurate to say that concerns about the removal of restrictions are merely "complaining." These concerns are valid and should be taken seriously in order to ensure the integrity of the admissions process. Fuck off.

First and foremost, removing restrictions can increase access to higher education for students who may have previously been excluded. This can help to promote diversity and inclusivity within the student body and ensure that all students have the opportunity to pursue their academic goals.
Additionally, removing restrictions can help to reduce bias and discrimination in the admissions process. By focusing on a more holistic evaluation of applicants, institutions can ensure that all students are evaluated based on their individual strengths and potential rather than solely on their academic achievements or other standardized metrics.
It's a good thing, and it won't kill the admissions process. Let's go outside, y'all.

gus wrote:First and foremost, removing restrictions can increase access to higher education for students who may have previously been excluded. This can help to promote diversity and inclusivity within the student body and ensure that all students have the opportunity to pursue their academic goals.
Additionally, removing restrictions can help to reduce bias and discrimination in the admissions process. By focusing on a more holistic evaluation of applicants, institutions can ensure that all students are evaluated based on their individual strengths and potential rather than solely on their academic achievements or other standardized metrics.
It's a good thing, and it won't kill the admissions process. Let's go outside, y'all.

While increasing access to higher education and promoting diversity and inclusivity are important goals, it's equally important to maintain high academic standards and ensure that students are adequately prepared for the rigors of college-level coursework. Restrictions in the admissions process can help to ensure that admitted students have the necessary academic qualifications and skills to succeed in their studies. Furthermore, restrictions can help to promote fairness and equity in the admissions process by providing clear and consistent criteria for evaluation. This can help to prevent bias and ensure that all applicants are evaluated based on their qualifications and merit, rather than other factors such as socioeconomic status or personal connections. Finally, restrictions can help to ensure that the institution is admitting students who are a good fit for the program and who will be able to contribute to the academic and social life of the community. This is critical not only for the success of individual students, but also for the overall success and reputation of the institution. Overall, while there may be arguments in favor of removing certain restrictions, it's important to maintain high academic standards and ensure fairness and equity in the admissions process. Restrictions can help to ensure that the best and most qualified students are admitted, and that the institution maintains a strong and vibrant academic community.

kenny wrote:

gus wrote:First and foremost, removing restrictions can increase access to higher education for students who may have previously been excluded. This can help to promote diversity and inclusivity within the student body and ensure that all students have the opportunity to pursue their academic goals.
Additionally, removing restrictions can help to reduce bias and discrimination in the admissions process. By focusing on a more holistic evaluation of applicants, institutions can ensure that all students are evaluated based on their individual strengths and potential rather than solely on their academic achievements or other standardized metrics.
It's a good thing, and it won't kill the admissions process. Let's go outside, y'all.

While increasing access to higher education and promoting diversity and inclusivity are important goals, it's equally important to maintain high academic standards and ensure that students are adequately prepared for the rigors of college-level coursework. Restrictions in the admissions process can help to ensure that admitted students have the necessary academic qualifications and skills to succeed in their studies. Furthermore, restrictions can help to promote fairness and equity in the admissions process by providing clear and consistent criteria for evaluation. This can help to prevent bias and ensure that all applicants are evaluated based on their qualifications and merit, rather than other factors such as socioeconomic status or personal connections. Finally, restrictions can help to ensure that the institution is admitting students who are a good fit for the program and who will be able to contribute to the academic and social life of the community. This is critical not only for the success of individual students, but also for the overall success and reputation of the institution. Overall, while there may be arguments in favor of removing certain restrictions, it's important to maintain high academic standards and ensure fairness and equity in the admissions process. Restrictions can help to ensure that the best and most qualified students are admitted, and that the institution maintains a strong and vibrant academic community.

High academic standards and ensuring fairness and equity in the admissions process are important, but removing certain restrictions can still achieve these goals while also increasing access to higher education and promoting diversity and inclusivity. For example, by utilizing a more holistic evaluation process, institutions can still ensure that admitted students have the necessary qualifications and skills to succeed in their studies, while also taking into account a broader range of factors that may impact an applicant's potential for success. This can help to identify talented and motivated students who may have been overlooked by traditional admission criteria. Additionally, while restrictions can help to prevent bias and ensure fairness, they can also create barriers for students from underrepresented backgrounds who may not have had access to the same resources and opportunities as other applicants. By removing certain restrictions, institutions can help to level the playing field and provide greater opportunities for these students. Finally, removing restrictions can also help to promote innovation and creativity in the admissions process, encouraging institutions to think outside of traditional metrics and criteria and find new and innovative ways to evaluate applicants. Overall, while there are valid arguments in favor of restrictions, removing certain restrictions can still maintain high academic standards and promote fairness and equity while also increasing access to higher education and promoting diversity and inclusivity.

ugh, i knew this was going to happen. and of course a vale scholar is going to support this shit. this is not okay! I worked hard for my acceptances and it pisses me off that underqualfied applicants even have a fucking shot at some of these schools. i better not see a thread about a guy getting into Columbia with a 183/366. i will go insane.

xjdog wrote:ugh, i knew this was going to happen. and of course a vale scholar is going to support this shit. this is not okay! I worked hard for my acceptances and it pisses me off that underqualfied applicants even have a fucking shot at some of these schools. i better not see a thread about a guy getting into Columbia with a 183/366. i will go insane.

you've gotta chill lmfao

xjdog wrote:ugh, i knew this was going to happen. and of course a vale scholar is going to support this shit. this is not okay! I worked hard for my acceptances and it pisses me off that underqualfied applicants even have a fucking shot at some of these schools. i better not see a thread about a guy getting into Columbia with a 183/366. i will go insane.

why do you just assume schools like C are going to start admitting applicants with stats like that lol?

xjdog wrote:ugh, i knew this was going to happen. and of course a vale scholar is going to support this shit. this is not okay! I worked hard for my acceptances and it pisses me off that underqualfied applicants even have a fucking shot at some of these schools. i better not see a thread about a guy getting into Columbia with a 183/366. i will go insane.

Okay, this is ridiculous given that you're already committed. What's your problem?

xjdog wrote:ugh, i knew this was going to happen. and of course a vale scholar is going to support this shit. this is not okay! I worked hard for my acceptances and it pisses me off that underqualfied applicants even have a fucking shot at some of these schools. i better not see a thread about a guy getting into Columbia with a 183/366. i will go insane.

Weston students these days smh...

hannah wrote:

xjdog wrote:ugh, i knew this was going to happen. and of course a vale scholar is going to support this shit. this is not okay! I worked hard for my acceptances and it pisses me off that underqualfied applicants even have a fucking shot at some of these schools. i better not see a thread about a guy getting into Columbia with a 183/366. i will go insane.

Weston students these days smh...

i'd just like to say that he is not representative of Weston, like, at all.