Tag Archives: Legacy

The 04/05/13 Joy Jar

4 Apr

April 4 was the 45th Anniversary of the death of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. When one talks of legacy, can one have a greater impact than Dr. King? Just because most of us will never have the stature of a Dr. King doesn’t mean that our lives are not important to making the world a better place. Today’s deposit into the ‘Joy Jar’ is the legacy of a life of contribution.




Everyone must leave something behind when he dies, my grandfather said. A child or a book or a painting or a house or a wall built or a pair of shoes made. Or a garden planted. Something your hand touched some way so your soul has somewhere to go when you die, and when people look at that tree or that flower you planted, you’re there.



It doesn’t matter what you do, he said, so long as you change something from the way it was before you touched it into something that’s like you after you take your hands away. The difference between the man who just cuts lawns and a real gardener is in the touching, he said. The lawn-cutter might just as well not have been there at all; the gardener will be there a lifetime.”
Ray Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451





Carve your name on hearts, not tombstones. A legacy is etched into the minds of others and the stories they share about you.”
Shannon L. Alder




The choices we make about the lives we live determine the kinds of legacies we leave.”
Tavis Smiley, The Other Wes Moore: One Name, Two Fates




Be ashamed to die until you have won some victory for humanity.

Horace Mann




You are not here merely to make a living. You are here to enable the world to live more amply, with greater vision, and with a finer spirit of hope and achievement. You are here to enrich the world. You impoverish yourself if you forget this errand.

Woodrow Wilson




No legacy is so rich as honesty.”
William Shakespeare

The 1% is maintaining the status quo: Colleges return to early admissions

22 Nov

There is an “arms race” in education from granting more advanced degrees to colleges vying for top undergraduate students. One weapon to attract top students has been the admissions policy of “early admission.” There is a difference between “early admission” and “early decision” according to the College Board:

Early decision plans are binding—a student who is accepted as an ED applicant must attend the college. Early action plans are nonbinding—students receive an early response to their application but do not have to commit to the college until the normal reply date of May 1. Counselors need to make sure that students understand this key distinction between the two plans: binding is binding.

There are reasons why colleges prefer the process and why for a time top institutions like Harvard and Princeton abandoned the process for a time.

The Daily Princetonian described some of the issues involving the “early admission” process in the September 18th, 2006 article, An unfair process: Princeton should follow Harvard in dropping the early admission option:

Perhaps the biggest problem with the early admissions process is that it tends to favor wealthier students at elite high schools. Many schools — Princeton included — tend to accept a higher percentage of students who apply early. Yet, students in need of financial aid have a huge disincentive to apply early because it prevents them from comparing financial aid and scholarship options. At the same time, students from schools with more established college advising programs are given a head start in applying for admissions and are often more aware of early admission programs to begin with. As interim Harvard president Derek Bok put it, early decision programs tend to “advantage the advantaged.”

Early admission programs also hurt students because they encourage increased gamesmanship in the college admission process. High schools seniors are encouraged to choose the most selective school on their list of schools to apply to, instead of taking the time to consider which schools are really their best matches.


Princeton did drop “early admission” for a time.

There are about 400 colleges which offer early admission The College Board also has an excellent time line for those who may be seeking early admission. Inside Higher Education has an article about the Harvard and Princeton decision to return to early admission. In, Surrender to Early Admissions Scott Jaschik writes:

In the fall of 2006, first Harvard University, then Princeton University, and then the University of Virginia announced that they would end programs in which applicants applied earlier than the regular deadline — and also found out months early whether they had been admitted. With those decisions by elite institutions, the many critics of early admissions policies thought that they had momentum to end practices that many saw as creating needless anxiety and favoring wealthy applicants.

That momentum never materialized — and other colleges and universities did not abandon their early programs….

Many colleges also reported that their early applicants were more likely than those in the regular pool to be white, wealthy and from good high schools. That’s not surprising, of course, since those who would need to compare financial aid packages from different colleges would be hesitant to pledge to enroll at one college before seeing all available aid packages. A series of articles — most notably a 2001 piece by James Fallows in The Atlantic Monthly — led to much hand-wringing at admissions gatherings about early admissions being out of control.

Even as educators talked about all of the downsides of early admissions, applicants from good high schools continued to apply early in greater and greater numbers — until Harvard and then others announced their shifts. In restoring early action, both Harvard and Princeton stressed that they believed they could offer an early option without placing any groups of students at a disadvantage.

See, Harvard and Princeton Restore Early Admission

Eric Hoover is reporting in the Chronicle of Higher Education article, The Flock of Early Birds Keeps Growing about the return of prestige colleges to “early admission.”

In 2007, Georgetown University’s admissions staff expected a flood, and it got one. The university received 6,000 early-admission applications, a 31-percent increase from the previous year.

The rise was striking, but not shocking. After all, three of Georgetown’s high-profile competitors—Harvard and Princeton Universities, and the University of Virginia—had eliminated their early-admission programs that year. Scores of eager, high-achieving students apparently jumped into Georgetown’s nonbinding “early-action” pool instead. More and more applications came each year after that, climbing to 6,658 in 2010.

But this fall would be different. At least that’s what Charles A. Deacon predicted after Harvard, Princeton, and Virginia reinstated early-admission programs this year. The two Ivy League universities adopted restrictive early-action policies that bar applicants from applying early to other private colleges. So Mr. Deacon, Georgetown’s dean of admissions, suspected that his university would see early-action applications drop by as much as 30 percent.

That didn’t happen. Georgetown’s final tally was 6,750 applications, a handful more than last year. “The question is, Why hasn’t the same change reversing the increase of four years ago occurred?” Mr. Deacon says. “It just becomes ever less predictable.”

Another early-admission season is winding down, and this one has a back-to-the-future vibe. The same three institutions that had won praise for abandoning their early-admission programs became symbols of application-saturation this fall. Princeton received 3,547 early applications—nearly three times the number of seats in its freshman class. Virginia, which has a nonrestrictive early-action program like Georgetown, received 11,417 early applications; that’s about 9,000 more than the university saw back in 2007, when it had a binding early-decision program. As of Friday afternoon, Harvard had yet to announce its total, but it’s safe to guess that the number is gigantic…


CBS. News has early admission statistics in the article, Early Decision Applications Are Soaring: Here’s Why by Lynn O’Shaughnessy.

2011-2012 Early Decision Statistics

Percentage increase or decrease in early decision applications from last year:

  • Amherst College -5%
  • Bates College 4%
  • Brown University -3%
  • Bowdoin College 10%
  • Bucknell College 30%
  • Columbia University 8%
  • Dartmouth College 12%
  • Dickinson College 15%
  • Duke University 14%
  • Elon University -15%
  • George Washington U. 19%
  • Haverford College 14%
  • Johns Hopkins U. 14%
  • Lehigh University 14%
  • Middlebury College < 1%
  • Northwestern U. 26%
  • U. of Pennsylvania 18%
  • Pomona College <1%
  • U. of Rochester 0%
  • Sarah Lawrence 15%
  • Vanderbilt U. 30%
  • Virginia Tech <1%
  • Williams College 1%

2011-2012 Early Action Statistics

Percentage increase or decrease in early action applications from last year:

  • University of Chicago 18.5%
  • Emerson College 11%
  • Fordham University 8%
  • MIT 14%
  • Santa Clara U. 27%
  • Villanova U. 25%
  • Boston College 7%
  • Stanford U. 7%
  • Yale University < 1%


Early admission” seems to be one element of the growing income inequality in America.


Harvard, Princeton return to early admission by Daniel de Vise http://voices.washingtonpost.com/college-inc/2011/02/harvard_returns_to_early_actio.html

The College Board’s Early Decision & Early Action The benefits and drawbacks of applying early http://professionals.collegeboard.com/portal/site/Professionals/menuitem.b6b1a9bc0c5615493883234011a161ca/?vgnextoid=eb6ccf9a10494110vcm-02000000aaa514acRCRD&vgnextchannel=7c72247eb2814110VgnVCM200000121a16acRCRD&vgnextfmt=print

Debating Legacy Admissions at Yale, and Elsewhere by Jenny Anderson http://thechoice.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/04/29/legacy-2/

Dr. Wilda says this about that ©