>I would put my chips on someone who has at least proven themselves academically.
everyone seems to be conflating academics with person-building in this thread.
Why don't these same people seem to have any problem with non-academic scholarships?
Here's the grand reason why it's a good idea to make schools mixing-pots : You can expose the really effective students to ideas and concepts that they may have never experienced, which they may use more constructively than other individuals.
In other words : Colleges need people that create the idea of Napster , but they also need the folks that can implement it. Both groups are only marginally effective without the other.
Similar line of philosophical questioning : 'Why do managers exist?'
