Five Ivy League colleges vie for DC student (Banneker HS)

[Anonymous]

Wow, what a thread.

I am totally sending my kids to Banneker now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good God, all of the tit-for-tat on white versus black. Why don't we call a spade a spade here: I was excited to read this article because it's rare to find a young, black male, growing up in a poor, crime-ridden area and attending a sub-par school where the dropout and graduation rates are well beyond acceptable, succeed against those odds and be accepted to not one but five Ivy League schools. Good for him for persevering. He's a good-news story for Banneker, for the colleges who have accepted him, and, most importantly, for himself.

+1000 except the sub-par school, maybe generally sub-par school system. What more is there to say, really some people on DCUM love misery and are plain racist.

Banneker is our "stem" school, but the avg SAT score is below the national avg. It is also admission only, and 99% AA. So..... not really possible for kids of any other race to go there, does not look like from the SATs that the kids are all that smart/educated, and it is ranked in US News & World report very very low - type it in, see what you get. The one thing that seems good about this story is that the kid appears like he will be able to hack it in the Ivies although they did not mention what his actual standardized test scores were, but obviously the IB program there cannot possibly be that rigorous or the school would be ranked higher, the SATs would be higher, and the exmissions in general would be better. So I hope he actually can hack it - spelling bees are ultimately about memorizing the spelling of numerous arcane antediluvian words that are no longer in our lexicon, not about intelligence. While people can argue whether SATs measure intelligence, Banneker and SWW's DC CAS scores are fantastic but their ratings nationally suck so we know DC CAS is irrelevant. I just hope he can rapidly compensate for his poor education. I had a lot of friends come in to Princeton having been admitted as Engineers only to realize that they were so far behind they could never catch up, or that they really did not have natural talent they just thought so because they were in a crappy school and they were the best there...............

The most important thing I ever did as a Princeton students was be part of a sit in where we demanded a 9th semester of financial aid - so many of these kids come unprepared without realizing it, get paralyzed and fail out, and at the time if they dropped out to avoid having the grades on their transcript or flunked a lot of classes there was no way for them to come back financially. We changed that.

But I hope the summer program they offer now to high risk kids (kids from bad high schools, mostly minority, and athletes who got recruited for athletics not academics) is better on education. It certainly gave people a community to commiserate with, but not that many solutions at the time for what really turned out to be shitty educations - not knowing how to write 5 paragraph essays, analyze text, do research, cite sources, much less go from their precalculus classes to calculus at Princeton.

That being said, I hear the AP exams are a lot harder now - don't know if it is true - but if it was it would give the schools and the kids another way to evaluate whether or not they were prepared for an Ivy League school. A lot would have benefited from a post senior year at a good school but it wasn't as if they could pay for it. Many rich kids did it to get IN to good colleges after having messed up in high school, but I never heard of any of my friends doing anything - even going to community college might not have been such a bad idea...........

This kid did IB courses. And the IB exams are graded outside this country - in Europe. SO, it does not matter which school they go to in the US, their papers are being graded by impartial graders outside this country. That is precisely the reason, IB kids have to work so hard because they are not adhering to the standards of the education system here. And AP is easy compared to IB.

He will not be needing remedial courses in any Ivy League college he chooses - and that's why they are offering him scholarships. He is more than capable and the college will not have to waste time, energy, money to get him up to par.

IF he was a rising sports star and got admissions in the Ivy colleges based on his skills in the sports arena, it would have been more palatable to the haters. To think he made it because of his academic merit is killing these jealous cats!

Ivies don't offer merit scholarships. His are purely needs-based.

He was offered admission because of his academic merit, and he was offered scholarships because of need. People are jealous because they are used to seeing many AA students celebrated and getting into colleges because of their sports skills, and being offered need-based scholarships.

THANK YOU! Jealousy indeed.

It's scary to see such a lack of self-awareness from supposed educated people. PP attempted to veil her contempt for this child in 'concern' that he may not be up to par academically and perhaps *gasp!* flunk out! In truth, all she did was reveal her racist beliefs that a poor black child is less than and not truly deserving of a seat in the Ivy Leagues. Her attempts to dismiss and explain away his IB program and spelling bee win is proof of that.

PP does have a point about substandard schools not adequately preparing its children for college. However, she easily dismissed his accomplishments simply because he's a poor black child. If Scripps National Spelling Bee was so darned easy that anyone can win it simply by memorizing outdated words, it wouldn't be such a big deal. And it IS indeed a big deal. PP acts as if he was given the list of words to memorize by heart beforehand. And thank you for pointing out to Supposed Princeton Grad the difference between IB and whatever "advanced coursework" her child is taking.

As a grad of 2 Ivy League schools, I find it IMPOSSIBLE to believe poor dumb black kids were flunking out right and left. (I'm sure PP can provide data to support her claims. ) It truly is much more difficult--if not impossible-to flunk out of the Ivies than it is to get into one. Once you're in, you're supported and not allowed to fail.

But in PP's world, black and poor means uneducated, underprepared and doomed to failure. That's what bothers her about this young man so much.

[Anonymous]

I totally agree with you PP, but two points:

This does not apply to Avery, however:

1) In the 1970s (probably when some of these ignorant posters went to college) black students were done a terrible disservice by Ivies and did frequently fail because they weren't well prepared.

2) Today top colleges have summer minority programs to help catch up minorities, Puerto Ricans, and students from rural areas (I knew one Iowan and one from Maine). So, unfortunately, some people may interpret the top college minority prep programs as the idea that minorities don't come prepared. Rather than seeing the programs as a investment in students' success.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good God, all of the tit-for-tat on white versus black. Why don't we call a spade a spade here: I was excited to read this article because it's rare to find a young, black male, growing up in a poor, crime-ridden area and attending a sub-par school where the dropout and graduation rates are well beyond acceptable, succeed against those odds and be accepted to not one but five Ivy League schools. Good for him for persevering. He's a good-news story for Banneker, for the colleges who have accepted him, and, most importantly, for himself.

+1000 except the sub-par school, maybe generally sub-par school system. What more is there to say, really some people on DCUM love misery and are plain racist.

Banneker is our "stem" school, but the avg SAT score is below the national avg. It is also admission only, and 99% AA. So..... not really possible for kids of any other race to go there, does not look like from the SATs that the kids are all that smart/educated, and it is ranked in US News & World report very very low - type it in, see what you get. The one thing that seems good about this story is that the kid appears like he will be able to hack it in the Ivies although they did not mention what his actual standardized test scores were, but obviously the IB program there cannot possibly be that rigorous or the school would be ranked higher, the SATs would be higher, and the exmissions in general would be better. So I hope he actually can hack it - spelling bees are ultimately about memorizing the spelling of numerous arcane antediluvian words that are no longer in our lexicon, not about intelligence. While people can argue whether SATs measure intelligence, Banneker and SWW's DC CAS scores are fantastic but their ratings nationally suck so we know DC CAS is irrelevant. I just hope he can rapidly compensate for his poor education. I had a lot of friends come in to Princeton having been admitted as Engineers only to realize that they were so far behind they could never catch up, or that they really did not have natural talent they just thought so because they were in a crappy school and they were the best there...............

The most important thing I ever did as a Princeton students was be part of a sit in where we demanded a 9th semester of financial aid - so many of these kids come unprepared without realizing it, get paralyzed and fail out, and at the time if they dropped out to avoid having the grades on their transcript or flunked a lot of classes there was no way for them to come back financially. We changed that.

But I hope the summer program they offer now to high risk kids (kids from bad high schools, mostly minority, and athletes who got recruited for athletics not academics) is better on education. It certainly gave people a community to commiserate with, but not that many solutions at the time for what really turned out to be shitty educations - not knowing how to write 5 paragraph essays, analyze text, do research, cite sources, much less go from their precalculus classes to calculus at Princeton.

That being said, I hear the AP exams are a lot harder now - don't know if it is true - but if it was it would give the schools and the kids another way to evaluate whether or not they were prepared for an Ivy League school. A lot would have benefited from a post senior year at a good school but it wasn't as if they could pay for it. Many rich kids did it to get IN to good colleges after having messed up in high school, but I never heard of any of my friends doing anything - even going to community college might not have been such a bad idea...........

This kid did IB courses. And the IB exams are graded outside this country - in Europe. SO, it does not matter which school they go to in the US, their papers are being graded by impartial graders outside this country. That is precisely the reason, IB kids have to work so hard because they are not adhering to the standards of the education system here. And AP is easy compared to IB.

He will not be needing remedial courses in any Ivy League college he chooses - and that's why they are offering him scholarships. He is more than capable and the college will not have to waste time, energy, money to get him up to par.

IF he was a rising sports star and got admissions in the Ivy colleges based on his skills in the sports arena, it would have been more palatable to the haters. To think he made it because of his academic merit is killing these jealous cats!

Ivies don't offer merit scholarships. His are purely needs-based.

He was offered admission because of his academic merit, and he was offered scholarships because of need. People are jealous because they are used to seeing many AA students celebrated and getting into colleges because of their sports skills, and being offered need-based scholarships.

THANK YOU! Jealousy indeed.

It's scary to see such a lack of self-awareness from supposed educated people. PP attempted to veil her contempt for this child in 'concern' that he may not be up to par academically and perhaps *gasp!* flunk out! In truth, all she did was reveal her racist beliefs that a poor black child is less than and not truly deserving of a seat in the Ivy Leagues. Her attempts to dismiss and explain away his IB program and spelling bee win is proof of that.

PP does have a point about substandard schools not adequately preparing its children for college. However, she easily dismissed his accomplishments simply because he's a poor black child. If Scripps National Spelling Bee was so darned easy that anyone can win it simply by memorizing outdated words, it wouldn't be such a big deal. And it IS indeed a big deal. PP acts as if he was given the list of words to memorize by heart beforehand. And thank you for pointing out to Supposed Princeton Grad the difference between IB and whatever "advanced coursework" her child is taking.

As a grad of 2 Ivy League schools, I find it IMPOSSIBLE to believe poor dumb black kids were flunking out right and left. (I'm sure PP can provide data to support her claims. ) It truly is much more difficult--if not impossible-to flunk out of the Ivies than it is to get into one. Once you're in, you're supported and not allowed to fail.

But in PP's world, black and poor means uneducated, underprepared and doomed to failure. That's what bothers her about this young man so much.

"racist" but actually concerned PP here who has just been schooled on the stats of IB diplomas at Banneker and is no longer concerned about this kid surviving academically because he rose above Banneker as well, and never was concerned about him surviving socially. Still don't have as much respect for winners of spelling bees as those of it's academic or science bowl or whatever. I did go to school with a lot of kids who were the "onlies" from their crappy schools in California and were completely unprepared to cope academically despite the summer school with academics at Princeton. HTH they have gotten better at it, but it was always even from the get go a bad combination - blue collar athletes with poor minority students, and insufficient instruction for courses where midterms and finals were todo. And where kids trying to take calculus just flailed and had to drop out as engineers (and they would have made good ones). But they were brown, not black, Chicanos and Chicanas not African Americans (although we did our fair share of mixing) so sorry for my misplaced concern, but my concern was primarily about the school not the kid, since I went to college with a lot of kids who had risen above their circumstances and their schools to go to the East Coast but had not had access to an education that would allow them to survive, much less an IB education, and were never given a fair shot to catch up, or the safety net the athletes got the minute their grades dropped. I do not think I am a racist. I think I am a product of my college experiences and environment, and clearly Banneker is better than Roosevelt in East LA, and we had never heard of IB diplomas, and since you had to pay for AP's, honestly, a lot of them never took them. But yes, at least if you looked at the drop out rates of minority students in the late 80s/ early 90s we far outpaced everyone else, but part of that as I explained was because Princeton had this blind spot about the 9th semester of financial aid - whether you dropped out to save your grades or were in such denial that you flunked out, there was no financial way to swing that last semester. Once that changed, and we got MAA's (minority affairs advisers) in the Residential Colleges as well as Resident Advisors, and got people of color who understood the culture shock in the counseling center things got better. I'm sure they are better now. I just remember how hard we had to fight and exactly the attitude you were thinking I got from the people in the USG and administration "oh poor me I got this tremendous opportunity and I cannot cope" but we would have loved some paternalism right about them. As I said, clear he got an education that was IB not Banneker, so he set.

[Anonymous]

I'm the third PP. I suppose there are legacies that are subpar. The ones I know graduated summa, magna,... and got into top graduate programs. Obviously not slouches by any measure.

The legacies admit of course exist but I doubt Ivies want to "dilute their brand" by admitting stupid ones.

2014 Legacy admits to HYP (generally white students) 33% overall admit rate = 5%

1950 ?


1900 ?


1800 ?


1700 ?


I suspect the HYP legacy admit rate (e.g., sibs, cousins, uncles, multi-generational relations ... even without a building) is likely >>>> 50% for most of the 300 years of existence of these institutions.

Stop whining you vacuous fools.

[Anonymous]

Those century-old legacy admits making up > 50% of all those IVY classes were not the sharpest tools in the academic shed. GW Bush was sharper than alot of them.

[Anonymous]

014 Legacy admits to HYP (generally white students) = 33%; overall admit rate = 5%

1950 ?


1900 ?


1800 ?


1700 ?


I suspect the HYP legacy admit rate (e.g., sibs, cousins, uncles, multi-generational relations ... even without a building) is likely >>>> 50% for most of the 300 years of existence of these institutions.


_____________________________________________



An interesting family-tree study of the history of HYP graduates. Some of the these family-tree legacy studies are rather prominent at Eton/Harrow; Exeter/Andover; and Saint Paul's/Groton. I suspect HYP is no different!



Stop whining you vacuous fools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:014 Legacy admits to HYP (generally white students) = 33%; overall admit rate = 5%

1950 ?


1900 ?


1800 ?


1700 ?


I suspect the HYP legacy admit rate (e.g., sibs, cousins, uncles, multi-generational relations ... even without a building) is likely >>>> 50% for most of the 300 years of existence of these institutions.


_____________________________________________



An interesting family-tree study of the history of HYP graduates. Some of the these family-tree legacy studies are rather prominent at Eton/Harrow; Exeter/Andover; and Saint Paul's/Groton. I suspect HYP is no different!



Stop whining you vacuous fools.

So we should all publicly hurrah because the boy in the article succeeded, because he unlikely, given his situation. But then we should also be surprised legacies have much better outcomes. How does that make sense? I thought the whole point was that children of higher SES parents and/or ivy or equivalent educated parents were expected to do very well academically due to all the benefits they received. I'd think that is just playing out here, with no more advantage to legacy kids than athletes or URMs? I went to an ivy, as did my husband, in both cases for undergrad and graduate school. We expect our children will likely do the same. They have both tested 99% or higher on all aspects of testing so far, and there's no reason to think that that won't continue. If they have issues with academics, they will work the very late nights I did, and they will figure it out. Not one person my family has gone to an ivy or other top school with any legacy connection. We gone, collectively, to MiIT, Stanford, Harvard, Yale, Princeton and Cal Tech based on intellectual capabilities and a family ethic that hard work is critical. The idea that only the u under-privileged can have a work ethic is bullshit, but it does make a good story. And minimizing the accomishments of kids whose parents stated married and who aren't URMs is a great story line. For my part, I'll keep working hard, on my marriage and professionally, and will continue teaching my kids to do the same, even though the "underdogs" make the headlines. You do f have to make headlines, in the end you just have to be at the top of your field.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good God, all of the tit-for-tat on white versus black. Why don't we call a spade a spade here: I was excited to read this article because it's rare to find a young, black male, growing up in a poor, crime-ridden area and attending a sub-par school where the dropout and graduation rates are well beyond acceptable, succeed against those odds and be accepted to not one but five Ivy League schools. Good for him for persevering. He's a good-news story for Banneker, for the colleges who have accepted him, and, most importantly, for himself.

+1000 except the sub-par school, maybe generally sub-par school system. What more is there to say, really some people on DCUM love misery and are plain racist.

Banneker is our "stem" school, but the avg SAT score is below the national avg. It is also admission only, and 99% AA. So..... not really possible for kids of any other race to go there, does not look like from the SATs that the kids are all that smart/educated, and it is ranked in US News & World report very very low - type it in, see what you get. The one thing that seems good about this story is that the kid appears like he will be able to hack it in the Ivies although they did not mention what his actual standardized test scores were, but obviously the IB program there cannot possibly be that rigorous or the school would be ranked higher, the SATs would be higher, and the exmissions in general would be better. So I hope he actually can hack it - spelling bees are ultimately about memorizing the spelling of numerous arcane antediluvian words that are no longer in our lexicon, not about intelligence. While people can argue whether SATs measure intelligence, Banneker and SWW's DC CAS scores are fantastic but their ratings nationally suck so we know DC CAS is irrelevant. I just hope he can rapidly compensate for his poor education. I had a lot of friends come in to Princeton having been admitted as Engineers only to realize that they were so far behind they could never catch up, or that they really did not have natural talent they just thought so because they were in a crappy school and they were the best there...............

The most important thing I ever did as a Princeton students was be part of a sit in where we demanded a 9th semester of financial aid - so many of these kids come unprepared without realizing it, get paralyzed and fail out, and at the time if they dropped out to avoid having the grades on their transcript or flunked a lot of classes there was no way for them to come back financially. We changed that.

But I hope the summer program they offer now to high risk kids (kids from bad high schools, mostly minority, and athletes who got recruited for athletics not academics) is better on education. It certainly gave people a community to commiserate with, but not that many solutions at the time for what really turned out to be shitty educations - not knowing how to write 5 paragraph essays, analyze text, do research, cite sources, much less go from their precalculus classes to calculus at Princeton.

That being said, I hear the AP exams are a lot harder now - don't know if it is true - but if it was it would give the schools and the kids another way to evaluate whether or not they were prepared for an Ivy League school. A lot would have benefited from a post senior year at a good school but it wasn't as if they could pay for it. Many rich kids did it to get IN to good colleges after having messed up in high school, but I never heard of any of my friends doing anything - even going to community college might not have been such a bad idea...........

This kid did IB courses. And the IB exams are graded outside this country - in Europe. SO, it does not matter which school they go to in the US, their papers are being graded by impartial graders outside this country. That is precisely the reason, IB kids have to work so hard because they are not adhering to the standards of the education system here. And AP is easy compared to IB.

He will not be needing remedial courses in any Ivy League college he chooses - and that's why they are offering him scholarships. He is more than capable and the college will not have to waste time, energy, money to get him up to par.

IF he was a rising sports star and got admissions in the Ivy colleges based on his skills in the sports arena, it would have been more palatable to the haters. To think he made it because of his academic merit is killing these jealous cats!

Ivies don't offer merit scholarships. His are purely needs-based.

He was offered admission because of his academic merit, and he was offered scholarships because of need. People are jealous because they are used to seeing many AA students celebrated and getting into colleges because of their sports skills, and being offered need-based scholarships.

THANK YOU! Jealousy indeed.

It's scary to see such a lack of self-awareness from supposed educated people. PP attempted to veil her contempt for this child in 'concern' that he may not be up to par academically and perhaps *gasp!* flunk out! In truth, all she did was reveal her racist beliefs that a poor black child is less than and not truly deserving of a seat in the Ivy Leagues. Her attempts to dismiss and explain away his IB program and spelling bee win is proof of that.

PP does have a point about substandard schools not adequately preparing its children for college. However, she easily dismissed his accomplishments simply because he's a poor black child. If Scripps National Spelling Bee was so darned easy that anyone can win it simply by memorizing outdated words, it wouldn't be such a big deal. And it IS indeed a big deal. PP acts as if he was given the list of words to memorize by heart beforehand. And thank you for pointing out to Supposed Princeton Grad the difference between IB and whatever "advanced coursework" her child is taking.

As a grad of 2 Ivy League schools, I find it IMPOSSIBLE to believe poor dumb black kids were flunking out right and left. (I'm sure PP can provide data to support her claims. ) It truly is much more difficult--if not impossible-to flunk out of the Ivies than it is to get into one. Once you're in, you're supported and not allowed to fail.

But in PP's world, black and poor means uneducated, underprepared and doomed to failure. That's what bothers her about this young man so much.

"racist" but actually concerned PP here who has just been schooled on the stats of IB diplomas at Banneker and is no longer concerned about this kid surviving academically because he rose above Banneker as well, and never was concerned about him surviving socially. Still don't have as much respect for winners of spelling bees as those of it's academic or science bowl or whatever. I did go to school with a lot of kids who were the "onlies" from their crappy schools in California and were completely unprepared to cope academically despite the summer school with academics at Princeton. HTH they have gotten better at it, but it was always even from the get go a bad combination - blue collar athletes with poor minority students, and insufficient instruction for courses where midterms and finals were todo. And where kids trying to take calculus just flailed and had to drop out as engineers (and they would have made good ones). But they were brown, not black, Chicanos and Chicanas not African Americans (although we did our fair share of mixing) so sorry for my misplaced concern, but my concern was primarily about the school not the kid, since I went to college with a lot of kids who had risen above their circumstances and their schools to go to the East Coast but had not had access to an education that would allow them to survive, much less an IB education, and were never given a fair shot to catch up, or the safety net the athletes got the minute their grades dropped. I do not think I am a racist. I think I am a product of my college experiences and environment, and clearly Banneker is better than Roosevelt in East LA, and we had never heard of IB diplomas, and since you had to pay for AP's, honestly, a lot of them never took them. But yes, at least if you looked at the drop out rates of minority students in the late 80s/ early 90s we far outpaced everyone else, but part of that as I explained was because Princeton had this blind spot about the 9th semester of financial aid - whether you dropped out to save your grades or were in such denial that you flunked out, there was no financial way to swing that last semester. Once that changed, and we got MAA's (minority affairs advisers) in the Residential Colleges as well as Resident Advisors, and got people of color who understood the culture shock in the counseling center things got better. I'm sure they are better now. I just remember how hard we had to fight and exactly the attitude you were thinking I got from the people in the USG and administration "oh poor me I got this tremendous opportunity and I cannot cope" but we would have loved some paternalism right about them. As I said, clear he got an education that was IB not Banneker, so he set.

Thank you for the response. And thank you for being open-minded enough to be "schooled".

[Anonymous]

So we should all publicly hurrah because the boy in the article succeeded, because he unlikely, given his situation. But then we should also be surprised legacies have much better outcomes. How does that make sense? I thought the whole point was that children of higher SES parents and/or ivy or equivalent educated parents were expected to do very well academically due to all the benefits they received. I'd think that is just playing out here, with no more advantage to legacy kids than athletes or URMs? I went to an ivy, as did my husband, in both cases for undergrad and graduate school. We expect our children will likely do the same. They have both tested 99% or higher on all aspects of testing so far, and there's no reason to think that that won't continue. If they have issues with academics, they will work the very late nights I did, and they will figure it out. Not one person my family has gone to an ivy or other top school with any legacy connection. We gone, collectively, to MiIT, Stanford, Harvard, Yale, Princeton and Cal Tech based on intellectual capabilities and a family ethic that hard work is critical. The idea that only the u under-privileged can have a work ethic is bullshit, but it does make a good story. And minimizing the accomishments of kids whose parents stated married and who aren't URMs is a great story line. For my part, I'll keep working hard, on my marriage and professionally, and will continue teaching my kids to do the same, even though the "underdogs" make the headlines. You do f have to make headlines, in the end you just have to be at the top of your field.

George Bush is a typical legacy at Andover and Yale and then Harvard. He did not have better outcomes, then or now. Poor student. Failed businesses. Failed US Presidency. The test scores and grades were average to below average. What he did have, as other legacies had over the centuries, is the opportunities (multiple) and the presumption of excellence (despite reality). And the young man in the article gets the presumption of less than excellence (despite reality). This has always been the American way; from the framers of the US constitution restrictive meaning of WE the people to present day core Republican teabaggers who yearn for the days of Bush-like entitlement and to maintain the status quo of inequality much as the framers of the US constitution in 1778.

Who are WE the people? The raped and pillaged native American Indians, the blacks working on the plantations in Virginia and the South, or even our women... Who are WE the people? the 47% of Americans Romney is hiding his loot from outside our shores to avoid paying taxes to his country.

[Anonymous]

http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2005/10/10/051010crat_atlarge?currentPage=all

The Ivy league justification for the admission of centuries of G.W. Bush Jrs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:014 Legacy admits to HYP (generally white students) = 33%; overall admit rate = 5%

1950 ?


1900 ?


1800 ?


1700 ?


I suspect the HYP legacy admit rate (e.g., sibs, cousins, uncles, multi-generational relations ... even without a building) is likely >>>> 50% for most of the 300 years of existence of these institutions.


_____________________________________________



An interesting family-tree study of the history of HYP graduates. Some of the these family-tree legacy studies are rather prominent at Eton/Harrow; Exeter/Andover; and Saint Paul's/Groton. I suspect HYP is no different!



Stop whining you vacuous fools.

So we should all publicly hurrah because the boy in the article succeeded, because he unlikely, given his situation. But then we should also be surprised legacies have much better outcomes. How does that make sense? I thought the whole point was that children of higher SES parents and/or ivy or equivalent educated parents were expected to do very well academically due to all the benefits they received. I'd think that is just playing out here, with no more advantage to legacy kids than athletes or URMs? I went to an ivy, as did my husband, in both cases for undergrad and graduate school. We expect our children will likely do the same. They have both tested 99% or higher on all aspects of testing so far, and there's no reason to think that that won't continue. If they have issues with academics, they will work the very late nights I did, and they will figure it out. Not one person my family has gone to an ivy or other top school with any legacy connection. We gone, collectively, to MiIT, Stanford, Harvard, Yale, Princeton and Cal Tech based on intellectual capabilities and a family ethic that hard work is critical. The idea that only the u under-privileged can have a work ethic is bullshit, but it does make a good story. And minimizing the accomishments of kids whose parents stated married and who aren't URMs is a great story line. For my part, I'll keep working hard, on my marriage and professionally, and will continue teaching my kids to do the same, even though the "underdogs" make the headlines. You do f have to make headlines, in the end you just have to be at the top of your field.

WTF is wrong with you?

[Anonymous]

So we should all publicly hurrah because the boy in the article succeeded, because he unlikely, given his situation. But then we should also be surprised legacies have much better outcomes. How does that make sense? I thought the whole point was that children of higher SES parents and/or ivy or equivalent educated parents were expected to do very well academically due to all the benefits they received. I'd think that is just playing out here, with no more advantage to legacy kids than athletes or URMs? I went to an ivy, as did my husband, in both cases for undergrad and graduate school. We expect our children will likely do the same. They have both tested 99% or higher on all aspects of testing so far, and there's no reason to think that that won't continue. If they have issues with academics, they will work the very late nights I did, and they will figure it out. Not one person my family has gone to an ivy or other top school with any legacy connection. We gone, collectively, to MiIT, Stanford, Harvard, Yale, Princeton and Cal Tech based on intellectual capabilities and a family ethic that hard work is critical. The idea that only the u under-privileged can have a work ethic is bullshit, but it does make a good story. And minimizing the accomishments of kids whose parents stated married and who aren't URMs is a great story line. For my part, I'll keep working hard, on my marriage and professionally, and will continue teaching my kids to do the same, even though the "underdogs" make the headlines. You do f have to make headlines, in the end you just have to be at the top of your field.

The reporter of the story and the paper editor are responsible for publishing the article (motives aside). I doubt the young man in the article was chasing the reporters for attention. Let's not forget how our press works here as we bash in the youngster for his accomplishments.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

So we should all publicly hurrah because the boy in the article succeeded, because he unlikely, given his situation. But then we should also be surprised legacies have much better outcomes. How does that make sense? I thought the whole point was that children of higher SES parents and/or ivy or equivalent educated parents were expected to do very well academically due to all the benefits they received. I'd think that is just playing out here, with no more advantage to legacy kids than athletes or URMs? I went to an ivy, as did my husband, in both cases for undergrad and graduate school. We expect our children will likely do the same. They have both tested 99% or higher on all aspects of testing so far, and there's no reason to think that that won't continue. If they have issues with academics, they will work the very late nights I did, and they will figure it out. Not one person my family has gone to an ivy or other top school with any legacy connection. We gone, collectively, to MiIT, Stanford, Harvard, Yale, Princeton and Cal Tech based on intellectual capabilities and a family ethic that hard work is critical. The idea that only the u under-privileged can have a work ethic is bullshit, but it does make a good story. And minimizing the accomishments of kids whose parents stated married and who aren't URMs is a great story line. For my part, I'll keep working hard, on my marriage and professionally, and will continue teaching my kids to do the same, even though the "underdogs" make the headlines. You do f have to make headlines, in the end you just have to be at the top of your field.

George Bush is a typical legacy at Andover and Yale and then Harvard. He did not have better outcomes, then or now. Poor student. Failed businesses. Failed US Presidency. The test scores and grades were average to below average. What he did have, as other legacies had over the centuries, is the opportunities (multiple) and the presumption of excellence (despite reality). And the young man in the article gets the presumption of less than excellence (despite reality). This has always been the American way; from the framers of the US constitution restrictive meaning of WE the people to present day core Republican teabaggers who yearn for the days of Bush-like entitlement and to maintain the status quo of inequality much as the framers of the US constitution in 1778.

Who are WE the people? The raped and pillaged native American Indians, the blacks working on the plantations in Virginia and the South, or even our women... Who are WE the people? the 47% of Americans Romney is hiding his loot from outside our shores to avoid paying taxes to his country.

"We" also includes lower and middle class whites, as well as high SES people of all races. I'm sure your omission of these groups as people who count was completely inadvertent. "We" includes everyone, those birn with silver spoons as much as those without a drop to drink.

[Anonymous]

So we should all publicly hurrah because the boy in the article succeeded, because he unlikely, given his situation. But then we should also be surprised legacies have much better outcomes. How does that make sense? I thought the whole point was that children of higher SES parents and/or ivy or equivalent educated parents were expected to do very well academically due to all the benefits they received. I'd think that is just playing out here, with no more advantage to legacy kids than athletes or URMs? I went to an ivy, as did my husband, in both cases for undergrad and graduate school. We expect our children will likely do the same. They have both tested 99% or higher on all aspects of testing so far, and there's no reason to think that that won't continue. If they have issues with academics, they will work the very late nights I did, and they will figure it out. Not one person my family has gone to an ivy or other top school with any legacy connection. We gone, collectively, to MiIT, Stanford, Harvard, Yale, Princeton and Cal Tech based on intellectual capabilities and a family ethic that hard work is critical. The idea that only the u under-privileged can have a work ethic is bullshit, but it does make a good story. And minimizing the accomishments of kids whose parents stated married and who aren't URMs is a great story line. For my part, I'll keep working hard, on my marriage and professionally, and will continue teaching my kids to do the same, even though the "underdogs" make the headlines. You do f have to make headlines, in the end you just have to be at the top of your field.

Perhaps the press (Wall Street Journal) will one day do a story on you and your outstanding and remarkable family. What a wonderful, siring, and inspiring life lesson for us to emulate.