Will there be fewer applicants to Harvard, Penn, MIT next year?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[google]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I truly believe the Ivy schools were already in decline other than legacy kids who wouldn’t have stood a prayer otherwise. But I do think there are more smart kids today choosing NOT to go to an Ivy and in todays climate will continue to choose a diff path.

Due to costs not politics.

Maybe, but the net result is the same. Also, it’s not so much politics but the fact that the Ivies have become filled with oppressive and dull people, not smart people. I don’t think it’s specific politics so much as a stultifying environment. Smart kids want intellectual freedom and challenges, not dull authoritarianism.

Dude, your refrain about "dull" students at the Ivies isn't really sticking. So many people on DCUM have legacy status or kids currently attending. You won't get much traction calling their kids "dull" smh

Dude, I’m a graduate myself. I know of what I speak.

Just because you’re dull and dimwitted doesn’t mean we should assume your classmates were

It’s not me you need to worry about. It’s all the hiring managers who now think Ivy grads are dull little authoritarians.

Not worried at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I truly believe the Ivy schools were already in decline other than legacy kids who wouldn’t have stood a prayer otherwise. But I do think there are more smart kids today choosing NOT to go to an Ivy and in todays climate will continue to choose a diff path.

Due to costs not politics.

Maybe, but the net result is the same. Also, it’s not so much politics but the fact that the Ivies have become filled with oppressive and dull people, not smart people. I don’t think it’s specific politics so much as a stultifying environment. Smart kids want intellectual freedom and challenges, not dull authoritarianism.

Maybe but it’s ironic you’d post this when arguing that speech should be punished under codes of conduct

I don’t actually think it should be punished. However, if they want to enforce oppressive code of conduct rules, then they need to be consistent, which they aren’t.

In other words, you cannot expel a student who says something like transwomen aren’t women but praise and protect a student who calls for Jewish genocide. That’s completely inconsistent application of the rules.

I would encourage a dismantling of the rules that oppress challenging speech on campus entirely. But if they are going down the speech oppression route, they need to be consistent.

+1 Well said.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will there be fewer applicants to these universities next year because of the failure of their presidents to provide clear responses against anti-semitism in congressional testimony this week? Each president embarrassed herself and her institution, although the Harvard president was particularly noteworthy.

We will not be applying to any of those because of allowing anti semiotic language to be allowed and some actions ie: assaulting Jewish students at Harvard - kid allowed to stay.

"Anti-semiotic"? Ah well, your family won't be missed.

[Anonymous]

They came off like Victorian boffins in a boxing ring. Read the book. Knew the rules by heart. Then got into it with street fighters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problems these schools have is that they’re starting to be primarily associated with dim students. For many years their trade-off was that they’d allow in smart students that they didn’t actually want (of all backgrounds) provided that they could continue to admit the dim ideologues. It worked for awhile. The smart students would go on to become successful donors while the schools could still boast about the dim ideologues they admitted. But issues started to pop up: the smart students started challenging the dim ideologues. This was unacceptable and so the schools implemented strict speech limits, to spare the feelings of the dim ideologues. But that meant the smart students started to quietly look elsewhere.

That was already happening, but recent events have sped it up. I have heard more alumni of all backgrounds express disgust at MIT than I’ve heard before in my life. And they aren’t Jewish, they’re just disgusted at what has happened to MIT, which used to be a place for the best and brightest, but now just wants the dim ideologues. It is sad to watch.

Best response on this thread. They'll still get all the apps they need from all the name chasers and the diehard Ivy or bust alumni. Those same alumni will pound their chests and howl that they are hallowed institutions above reproach, dripping with prestige and the golden ticket to life. No, the mask has been torn off. They are just like a Ferrari, overpriced, wrought with problems, and driven by spoiled whiners that pose as someone they’re not. The hard-working well-adjusted kids that are raised right see through it and prefer the Porsche…attainable, reliable, amazing driving character and every bit as fast. These “elite” schools aren’t the only way to achieve success in life, it’s a mirage.

This is a weird analogy…you substituted a good for the top 0.1% with a good for the top 1%.

You are basically saying, kids will not care about a top 5 school…as long as they still go to a top 40 school. This implies that if you don’t pick top 40 at least…well you are SOL.

[Anonymous]

No, but there will be a lot of legacy rejects whose parents lie and say , "We just couldn't have Larlo apply after all that's gone on .. it's not the Penn we went to!"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes definitely. Not only will there be no Jewish students applying, but many non-Jewish will look elsewhere. The schools are getting blacklisted by quite a few CEOs and others will be hesitant to welcome a graduate into a diverse working atmosphere.

Wall Street is not blacklisting the Wharton School. Get real.

Idk. The Wharton school doesn’t look so great now. No NYC business wants to hire brain-dead ideologues. It’s bad for business.

Wishful thinking. Our company will definitely continue hiring there, as well as Harvard and MIT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. The education the congresswoman received at Harvard appeared to serve her well. This is a sickening political theater. I agree the educators could be prepared better to play in a political theater. But they are educators and not used to mostly useless grandstanding hearings. But they didn't yield under pressure. I commend them for that.

They certainly didn’t come across as very competent educators.

They came across as arrogant and misguided elite who think they had the answers and didn't. Cue: Magill's groveling post testimony.

She’s rightfully worried about her job. She’s done such a terrible job lately that she should be worried.

But yes, all three came across as arrogant and out of touch. Certainly not good educators.

Agreed. I think Magill is gone by the end of the day, Gay is being protected, and Kornbluth has managed to escape most of the dust-up.

I think there are those who do not consider presidents "educators", rather stewards of the educational institution. Either way, they have done a terrible job and in private industry they would be fired. At the very least their job is to bring in donations, not run them off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They came off like Victorian boffins in a boxing ring. Read the book. Knew the rules by heart. Then got into it with street fighters.

This is a weirdly on point analogy. I like it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[google]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I truly believe the Ivy schools were already in decline other than legacy kids who wouldn’t have stood a prayer otherwise. But I do think there are more smart kids today choosing NOT to go to an Ivy and in todays climate will continue to choose a diff path.

Due to costs not politics.

Maybe, but the net result is the same. Also, it’s not so much politics but the fact that the Ivies have become filled with oppressive and dull people, not smart people. I don’t think it’s specific politics so much as a stultifying environment. Smart kids want intellectual freedom and challenges, not dull authoritarianism.

Dude, your refrain about "dull" students at the Ivies isn't really sticking. So many people on DCUM have legacy status or kids currently attending. You won't get much traction calling their kids "dull" smh

Dude, I’m a graduate myself. I know of what I speak.

Just because you’re dull and dimwitted doesn’t mean we should assume your classmates were

It’s not me you need to worry about. It’s all the hiring managers who now think Ivy grads are dull little authoritarians.

Not worried at all.

Okay, good for you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No, but there will be a lot of legacy rejects whose parents lie and say , "We just couldn't have Larlo apply after all that's gone on .. it's not the Penn we went to!"

Good point!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They came off like Victorian boffins in a boxing ring. Read the book. Knew the rules by heart. Then got into it with street fighters.

This is a weirdly on point analogy. I like it.

Ha! And agreed. Very out of touch, living in a bubble world of theory, and frankly picking and choosing the rules they want to uphold. But that is getting off the point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes definitely. Not only will there be no Jewish students applying, but many non-Jewish will look elsewhere. The schools are getting blacklisted by quite a few CEOs and others will be hesitant to welcome a graduate into a diverse working atmosphere.

Wall Street is not blacklisting the Wharton School. Get real.

Idk. The Wharton school doesn’t look so great now. No NYC business wants to hire brain-dead ideologues. It’s bad for business.

Wishful thinking. Our company will definitely continue hiring there, as well as Harvard and MIT.

Idk. I’ve been hearing about employers moving away from the Ivies for some time now. It’s not that they don’t hire from them, but they’ve expanded outward because Ivy students are getting a reputation as entitled prima donnas. So yes people will still hire them but the assumption that these students are the best and brightest is and has faded.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I truly believe the Ivy schools were already in decline other than legacy kids who wouldn’t have stood a prayer otherwise. But I do think there are more smart kids today choosing NOT to go to an Ivy and in todays climate will continue to choose a diff path.

Due to costs not politics.

Maybe, but the net result is the same. Also, it’s not so much politics but the fact that the Ivies have become filled with oppressive and dull people, not smart people. I don’t think it’s specific politics so much as a stultifying environment. Smart kids want intellectual freedom and challenges, not dull authoritarianism.

You are trying to wish your biases into reality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will there be fewer applicants to these universities next year because of the failure of their presidents to provide clear responses against anti-semitism in congressional testimony this week? Each president embarrassed herself and her institution, although the Harvard president was particularly noteworthy.

Maybe Jewish people won't apply, but it will still be more applicants than the school can accept so it won't matter.

Exactly. Many posters don’t seem to understand that Jews are a small minority in the world. There are thousands and thousands of Uber wealthy international students who will gladly take their places at these fine institutions.