dont be in the 60th to 99th percentile in income

[Anonymous]

There is an interesting article by the New York Times https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/07/24/upshot/ivy-league-elite-college-admissions.html

Look at the graph. Small preference for the poor, large preference for the 0.1%. At the cost of the 60th to 99th percentile.

that's you DCUM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is an interesting article by the New York Times https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/07/24/upshot/ivy-league-elite-college-admissions.html

Look at the graph. Small preference for the poor, large preference for the 0.1%. At the cost of the 60th to 99th percentile.

that's you DCUM.

That really stuck out to me, too. But it’s not the story the writer wants to tell…

[Anonymous]

What is the 60-99th percentile? I don't have a NY Times subscription so I can't read that article.

[Anonymous]

“The new data shows that among students with the same test scores, the colleges gave preference to the children of alumni and to recruited athletes, and gave children from private schools higher nonacademic ratings. The result is the clearest picture yet of how America’s elite colleges perpetuate the intergenerational transfer of wealth and opportunity.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What is the 60-99th percentile? I don't have a NY Times subscription so I can't read that article.

Annual HHI of roughly $90k to $600k.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:“The new data shows that among students with the same test scores, the colleges gave preference to the children of alumni and to recruited athletes, and gave children from private schools higher nonacademic ratings. The result is the clearest picture yet of how America’s elite colleges perpetuate the intergenerational transfer of wealth and opportunity.”

cool.But what are the "elite" colleges? Are we talking about the Ivies only, or those in the top 25 USNWR? or what?

[Anonymous]

“A large new study, released Monday, shows that it has not been because these children had more impressive grades on average or took harder classes. They tended to have higher SAT scores and finely honed résumés, and applied at a higher rate — but they were overrepresented even after accounting for those things.”

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“The new data shows that among students with the same test scores, the colleges gave preference to the children of alumni and to recruited athletes, and gave children from private schools higher nonacademic ratings. The result is the clearest picture yet of how America’s elite colleges perpetuate the intergenerational transfer of wealth and opportunity.”

cool.But what are the "elite" colleges? Are we talking about the Ivies only, or those in the top 25 USNWR? or what?

“The analysis is based on federal records of college attendance and parental income taxes for nearly all college students from 1999 to 2015, and standardized test scores from 2001 to 2015. It focuses on the eight Ivy League universities, as well as Stanford, Duke, M.I.T. and the University of Chicago.”

[Anonymous]

Well duh. The 0.1% are probably either highly connected or donors (or both).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:“A large new study, released Monday, shows that it has not been because these children had more impressive grades on average or took harder classes. They tended to have higher SAT scores and finely honed résumés, and applied at a higher rate — but they were overrepresented even after accounting for those things.”

this is about the 0.1%. But to me that is not the interesting story. the interesting story, which the author of the article mostly ignores (she has one sentence) is that the 60-99% percentile is the loser.

[Anonymous]

As colleges revamp their policies, they really need to reconsider early decision. It can be a huge bump, and yet kids who need the flexibility to compare financial offers can't take advantage of it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well duh. The 0.1% are probably either highly connected or donors (or both).

right. but they are not the interesting part. what do you think of the results for the 60-99%?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Who wants to bet Asian American households are the inverse of this graph.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As colleges revamp their policies, they really need to reconsider early decision. It can be a huge bump, and yet kids who need the flexibility to compare financial offers can't take advantage of it.

kids in the 60-99 percentile use early admissions? the poor have higher acceptance. it is the 60-99 that have lower.