Though Princeton's undergraduates have diverse talents, backgrounds and aspirations, they share the common bond of having entered the University as freshmen. Unlike its elite peers, Princeton does not allow transfer students. Though the goals of this policy are lofty, the ...(back to the article)
The opinions expressed here are those of the individual commenters and do not necessarily represent the views of The Daily Princetonian Publishing Company, Inc. We do not take responsibility for the opinions, facts, or claims presented by individual commenters, and reserve the right to moderate or delete inappropriate comments.
Maybe the University should focus on being able to house all of its current students before contemplating bringing more in.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
"There are NO socioeconomic reasons why a student cannot attend PU." Is this supposed to be a joke? Seriously?
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
No. Terrible. Bad. No. The comment system just ate my last post, so I will be brief and more blunt. The CC example is awful. There are NO socioeconomic reasons why a student cannot attend PU. That's why the policy changed under Shapiro, and it's a great policy. If an economically disadvanted applicant cannot figure out that s/he can attend PU for free, I have no sympathy for them, nor do I think they belong at the school. It's called self-help. Even more offensively, I believe a CC is the equivalent of a good high school, I don't think "extraordinary potential" can be shown coming out of one, if any is shown I believe it would have been evident from their high school record. Those people will go on to be fabulously successful, they'll just do it from a local school, not from Princeton (undergrad). The campus body does not need "a booster shot." I also do not agree with the current policy rationale of "oh, our "elite peers" are doing this, so we should too." Since I do believe in diversity, it'd be nice to see some institutional diversity in addition to the sole focus on individual diversity.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
It doesn't seem that this argument is complete, without an examination of the reasons the "no-transfer" policy was implemented in the first place.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!