Low Income Application: Fill & Download for Free

Companies that Donald Trump and his father owned in the early 1970s were accused of not renting apartments to potential African American tenants.Trump's claim was that he didn't want to rent to "low income" applicants and that his decision was not based upon race. He eventually settled with the US Justice Department without having to admit that either he or his actions were racist.References:https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/inside-the-governments-racial-bias-case-against-donald-trumps-company-and-how-he-fought-it/2016/01/23/fb90163e-bfbe-11e5-bcda-62a36b394160_story.htmlhttp://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/12/15/doj-trump-s-early-businesses-blocked-blacks.htmlhttp://www.nytimes.com/times-insider/2015/07/30/1973-meet-donald-trump/?_r=0

The pure lack of economic diversity on campus.From how they dress to their ZIP codes, most students who attend my school, Johns Hopkins University, come from well-off families. In fact, in January 2017, the New York Times released a study on the economic diversity at Hopkins and other similar schools. It found that the median family income for a student attending Hopkins is $177,300, and 72% come from the top 20 percent. Less than 2.9% of students come from the bottom 20%. For a school that proclaims every year that its incoming class is the “most diverse in the university's history,” there is an apparent class issue that needs mended.Is this issue improving or getting worse? It’s hard to tell. On one hand, Hopkins continues to expand the number of applicants it accepts through its early decision (ED) admissions process—the number of accepted applicants grew 16% for the class of 2024 from the class of 2023. Students accepted through the ED process make up more than 52% of the class of 2024, compared to just 46% for my class of 2022. Students can only apply to one school through ED, and if they are accepted, they must attend, unless the financial package they receive does not work for them and their family. If the financial aid is not enough, students must forfeit the right to attend the university. Also, students who apply through ED lose the ability to compare financial offers from other universities and negotiate for more aid. Therefore, when applying through ED, students and their families must be willing to pay the full price of admission, or they will have to decline the offer if accepted. Most families who cannot pay the sticker price decide against ED as a result, instead opting for the more competitive regular admissions process where they can compare offers from different schools. ED and its expansion may favor the wealthy and appears to be wedging a greater class divide. By accepting more students through ED every year while keeping the size of its incoming class constant, Hopkins is accepting students who are willing and able to pay the full price.On the other hand, Michael Bloomberg donated $1.8 billion to make the Hopkins admissions process need-blind and to assist low-income students in affording the $54,160 yearly tuition (not including room and board). Before this donation, Hopkins could compare the financial records of applicants and choose one applicant over the other simply due to the ability to pay. With this donation, Hopkins has made it a goal to accept an increasing number of low-income students, so I would expect the number of students from the bottom 20% to increase, which is great in my opinion.However, someone has to lose, right? If wealthy students applying through ED are being accepted in larger numbers and low-income students are now being sought out, what happens to the middle-class, those whose families make $50k to $100k? Time will tell, I guess.My main takeaway is that diversity is composed of more than just race, ethnicity, and gender, which are typically well-highlighted by university ads and brochures. Diversity in other areas, like socioeconomic, sexual orientation, and ability, are also crucial to developing a stronger, better community.

Oxford, because it’s a meritocracy or at least strives to be.Harvard, on the other hand, has an admissions policy which is, in my opinion, just plain disgusting.Here’s what the Harvard Crimson wrote a few weeks ago:Harvard’s internal research office concluded the College’s admissions policies produce “negative effects” for Asian Americans in a series of confidential reports circulated among top administrators in 2013, according to court documents filed early Friday morning in an ongoing lawsuit against the University.In the reports, which were never made public, Harvard’s Office of Institutional Research also concluded the College’s admissions process advantages legacy students and athletes more than it does low-income students.Legacy students? So if your dad went to Harvard you get priority? In the incoming class of 2021, 29% of students are legacy, so we’re not talking about the odd place here or there being given this way.Sickening.Not surprisingly, Harvard is being sued over bias against Asian American applicants.