Sure. Comparing today to 30 years ago makes a lot of sense. |
Is Forbes a real magazine anymore? |
Where is the Wisco booster? This is their moment |
You mean Indiana University? It really is IU, it’s not like CU-Boulder. |
disagree with the article. William&Mary is THE public ivy, has pre-TO SATs that are the same as UVa and higher than half the publics above, AND William &Mary is the most similar to an ivy of all the public Us, based on seminar classes, intellectualism and smalelr undergrad populatiion. The private they left off is WashU. Bump University of Spoiled Children and put in WashU. Much more similar to Ivy type vibes. USC does not have the same intellectual dynamics. I do not have a kid at either but I have kids at ivies, toured and know many students at both, and these two schools are ivy-like and should not have been left off. |
Per the article these are the schools that are “next” after ivies+Stanford,MIT, Duke, Chicago (The 4 original ivy-plus schools). Some of them are, some of them are not. Based on phD feeders and MBB recruiting, as well as T14 law over-representation, this list leaves out the obvious “near ivies”: the top LACs, Williams/Amherst/Pomona/Swat. Williams and Amherst especially make the MBB lists and punch well above their size for phD and top law/med. very strange and not well researched article (My kid is ivy, no skin in this game, but the list is not based on how grad school admissions and employers act) |
False. UVA and W&M were both "public ivies" when the term was coined 40-50 years ago. Now UVA is more difficult to get knto and has higher goa and test scores. look up "Public Ivy" in wikipedia. |
Now do hidden Ivies and little Ivies. Hell, it’s all Ivies now. No exclusion. You get an Ivy degree, and you get an Ivy degree. Except Barnard |
Boston college is the obvious one that doesn't belong in the private ones. |
More than likely he/she started this whole thread. |
And I ooop. You're right pp, Tufts never makes lists like these. However, WashU should be there over Boston College. |
Well if the respondents don’t hire many kids from WashU…how would it make the list? I assume it made the cut to 32 schools at which point the respondents indicate if they hire many kids from the school or not. |
I don’t get why you’d exclude Duke and Chicago but not northwestern which is as hard to get into as those. I think it’s harder to get into that Chicago now, and for Duke it probably depends on the year and the student. |
Interesting. I have a DC at Stanford who talks a lot about the poison of privilege and how Stanford is full of extremely privileged kids who, while usually driven, are not necessarily exceptionally bright (DC considers herself one of the privileged). She relates this to narratives around ethnic supremacy and entitlement and is very uncomfortable about it. Most (not all) of DC's friends at Stanford went to expensive private schools or public schools in very nice neighborhoods and have multi-million dollar vacation homes. Many have traveled widely and/or enjoyed spectacularly exciting and enriching gap years. Above all, they usually have very supportive parents who are willing to invest in them in every way. DC feels the highly-polished cubic zirconia squeeze out the internally flawless diamonds in the rough and that this should be taken into account when hiring or selecting for grad school. I wonder if there is a backlash against the "$40K a year private school to Ivy to powerful and influential positions pipeline," which favors those with early privilege over those with genuine talent, leading to a pool of mediocrities having disproportionate power in the U.S. |
Lists like this are click bait. |