Dartmouth finally publishes their SAT data in the Common Data Set after dropping TO; white enrollment surges

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If I recall correctly, Dartmouth did an analysis of things in the test optional era. And they didn’t like what they saw. Very strong rural and urban students without access to test prep who scored in the 1300/1400s weren’t applying anymore. All the benefits of test optional went to rich kids.

Dartmouth wants a diverse class. Being test mandatory helps them get that. Everyone knows a 1350 from Anacostia High School is more impressive than a 1500 from Sidwell Friends. And being test mandatory helps them get those students. But naturally, test score averages will go down.

Whether or not all these diverse students commingle at Dartmouth is a different question. That’s about school culture. Some are good at it. And some aren’t.

Why didn't rural and urban kids have access to practice test workbooks? Come on.

Their base education is worse than those at ritzy private schools. I don’t know why inequality is so hard to get through the heads of wealthy people.

This theory is always being brought up, but there are very bad private too, and there are lots of good public can crush private.
TJ probably has best faculties and most resources in Fairfax, plus most talented student body, but, there still quite some kids go to mediocre colleges, like Marymount, it's up to individual after all.

Rural kids dont have TJs, nor do a majority of students in inner city public schools. Can yo stay on topic?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If I recall correctly, Dartmouth did an analysis of things in the test optional era. And they didn’t like what they saw. Very strong rural and urban students without access to test prep who scored in the 1300/1400s weren’t applying anymore. All the benefits of test optional went to rich kids.

Dartmouth wants a diverse class. Being test mandatory helps them get that. Everyone knows a 1350 from Anacostia High School is more impressive than a 1500 from Sidwell Friends. And being test mandatory helps them get those students. But naturally, test score averages will go down.

Whether or not all these diverse students commingle at Dartmouth is a different question. That’s about school culture. Some are good at it. And some aren’t.

Why didn't rural and urban kids have access to practice test workbooks? Come on.

DP. My kid attends a public high school. 50% of the kids, including some high performing students, have to worry about whether they’ll have enough food to eat dinner.

Test workbooks? Not in a million years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If I recall correctly, Dartmouth did an analysis of things in the test optional era. And they didn’t like what they saw. Very strong rural and urban students without access to test prep who scored in the 1300/1400s weren’t applying anymore. All the benefits of test optional went to rich kids.

Dartmouth wants a diverse class. Being test mandatory helps them get that. Everyone knows a 1350 from Anacostia High School is more impressive than a 1500 from Sidwell Friends. And being test mandatory helps them get those students. But naturally, test score averages will go down.

Whether or not all these diverse students commingle at Dartmouth is a different question. That’s about school culture. Some are good at it. And some aren’t.

Why didn't rural and urban kids have access to practice test workbooks? Come on.

DP. My kid attends a public high school. 50% of the kids, including some high performing students, have to worry about whether they’ll have enough food to eat dinner.

Test workbooks? Not in a million years.

I am sorry, you take media too seriously, here is not Gaza. Food is last thing you need to worry about in this country, do you know anyone turned away by food bank?

[Anonymous]

Kooky for cocoa puffs!!!!!!!! Classic DCUM explosive diarrhea convo!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Strivers: are Asian applicants now hooked at Dartmouth?

Affirmative Action ban and test required did not help Asian at all.

Funny because it all started after an Asian kid was shut out and claimed discrimination. That didn’t go as he planned!

(I’m Asian btw )

Oh it did go as planned, this was planned by white people in power who planned to manipulate Asian people. It’s like when MAGA manipulates low income whites into voting against their own best interest.

Well, let's see.

The asian population at Ivy schools had been stalled at ~20% for decades then the lawsuit started and in the last 10 years that number has gone up to 30% after decades of stagnation. Places like MIT saw their asian population grow from 30% to ~50%. Dartmouth is low but it has never really been a target for asians.

In the aftermath of the Supreme Court verdict we saw a lot of volatility and while some schools saw exactly the sort of racial shifts in their admitted class that their models predicted a few schools were able to maintain pretty much the same racial profile they always had. They are being sued again to enforce compliance with SFFA. Racists always resist efforts to stop their racism, because they are convinced in the virtue of their particular form of racism. Princeton seems to be reisting and yale in particular seems to be cooking the nooks.

[Anonymous]

Lol. Test prep resources consists of College Board's free services, Khan academy (free), Uworld, 1600,io for $100, free books at the library, plus thousands of youtube videos and hundreds of free sites.

Test prep means foregoing tik tok, snap, discord, video games and studying. Nothing rich or poor about that. It is effort.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At the other end of the spectrum, Hopkins saw 50% of their class of 2029 made up of Asian Americans. What gives?

At a guess, high-scoring white kids tend to pick Dartmouth over Hopkins, while high-scoring Asian kids tend to pick Hopkins over Dartmouth.

Also, Dartmouth really focuses on taking kids from the top 10% of their high school class. That might hurt Asian kids, because they tend to be clustered in a small number of high-performing high schools.

If someone knows this off the top of their head - is this data for applicants or enrolled students?

The common data set typically only has racial data for enrolled students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dartmouth has always leaned conservative, white frat type. Partly due to location.

I think this is correct. I also think less Asians apply to Dartmouth - but not that much less that the percentage would go down. There is still bias (conscious or not) for white applicants (and against Asian applicants). Dartmouth probably doesn't want the Asian population to grow exponentially as it did on other campuses. There are definitely markers on the application that point to the applicant's race and background.

Dartmouth doesn't have engineering, which limits its appeal for many students, including many Asians. You generally don't see many Asians interested in SLACs in the middle of nowhere, which is essentially what Dartmouth is.

False.

Saying Dartmouth does not have engineering is like saying Brown does not have engineering. The two schools are similar in that respect, yet Brown is now close to 40% Asian.

Dartmouth should still be attractive to many Asian applicants, especially premed students, and also students interested in economics, government, and the humanities. Georgetown does not have engineering at all, and it is close to 30% Asian.

As a PP pointed out, some SLACs have a higher percentage of Asian students than Dartmouth. Carleton and Wellesley are good examples.

So I do not buy the “no engineering” explanation. The numbers look much more like the result of active discrimination, and the surge in white enrollment only reinforces that impression.

Dartmouth has an AB in “engineering science” that us possible in 4 yrs. For the BE, which is the only ABET accredited degree, it takes a 5th year at Dartmouth.
Engineering at Brown may be weak but at least a 4 yr BS in engineering is possible at Brown.

The 5th yr to get a real engineering degree is a major turnoff and yes it disproportionally affects asian applicants

All DC's friends are getting their engineering BS in 4. Oh, and they are also involved in fraternities, and by the way, the greek average GPA is higher than the schoolwide GPA

That greek GPA point is true at most selective schools (look at Cornell, Penn, Northwestern, Vanderbilt)

Is that b/c they have file cabinets full of old tests & distribute them to fellow fraternity members to prepare?

You watch too much TV. No one has "files" - they do have study groups and advise younger members on which classes/teachers to take for easier grading. Better peer mentorship, perhaps? Also, peer pressure on grades.
At least what I've seen.

I went to college in the 1980s so maybe its different now but we definitely had test banks to the point where the entire pledge class would have like a quarter of their classes in common with anyone else from their pledge class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a Dartmouth freshman. Disclaimer: they're our oldest child so I don't have experience with another current day college and I didn't attend an Ivy or similar school myself.

Admission trends there are hard to pin down. Since our kid enrolled we've heard from half dozen legacy families in our larger circle of friends/coworkers/etc whose kids were rejected for the classes of 2029 and 2030. The perhaps most noteworthy is a friend's child whose parents both attended (and met there), are reasonably active alums, sibling attends, had great grades/scores/etc and yet was ultimately rejected. Got into Hopkins, Duke and Princeton (!) unhooked and attends one of these. This stands out as the most wild of the legacy rejections I personally now know but I could share almost a half dozen more that are almost as noteworthy.

The student body is a real mixed group. You have the children of actual billionaires (at maybe the highest concentration anywhere) and many of multi millionaires. They tend to have graduated at or near the very top of prep or boarding school classes. Bright and well trained. Many of this group are Dartmouth legacies.

Then you have the upper middle or professional class kids who are very smart and typical of what one thinks of as high achieving, Ivy level kids. Decent number of Asians in this group. My own child is in here.

Then you have a lot of kids who frankly aren't very remarkable. Most bring rural/geographic diversity and economic diversity. Many struggle. Since we're talking SAT scores, this group often had SAT scores in the 1400s, even 1300s (my kids knows or knew because apparently at some point in early freshman year this comes out in chatter). Dartmouth currently seems to love admitting this demographic (there are many of them) and views admitting them as being a large part of their current mission. I don't know if this is similar at other Ivies or other top 20s as I don't have another kid in college.

Which brings up the question of what the point of an Ivy is. Is it to educate the best and brightest, regardless of prior opportunity? Or is it to give a top opportunity to kids who will benefit most from it? Dartmouth appears to believe very strongly in the second. However, it's meant that kids like mine (a pretty typical DMV high-achiever) are skating through college and not really being challenged. To be frank, my child has a 4.0 and hasn't worked very hard. They will tell you that their high school cohort was by-in-large brighter than many classmates at college. In this regard it's been disappointing. I'm not sure what the rest of the years will hold. I'd be interested in hearing what other Dartmouth parents think.

So, your analysis is that only rich people and their children are intelligent (please don't start screaming about unfair characterizations, wealthy and upper middle class professional people's children are the only one receiving your praise in your words), and you believe that a large population of students are economic diversity or rural diversity. For starters, in a given class, maybe 10-15 students from underrepresented states make up that diversity. Second, being poor doesn't mean you received a poor education-many low income students attended top boarding schools, magnet programs or had academic opportunities through other means. Lastly, it sounds like Dartmouth is "educat[ing] the best and brightest, regardless of prior opportunity," just not falling into the trap that only the wealthy aristocracy deserve a seat. Education has been democratized. Live with it.

NP adding that those 1500s often don’t come naturally. There’s accommodations for extra time and incredible amounts of studying. The reading section is typically much easier for someone who grew up in an English speaking home where reading was modeled and encouraged. Some kids spend their whole lives doing outside tutoring for math. Some kids study for the SAT every summer. I’ve met plenty of applicants who did cram schools. Those 1400s and horrors 1300s aren’t necessarily any less intelligent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a Dartmouth freshman. Disclaimer: they're our oldest child so I don't have experience with another current day college and I didn't attend an Ivy or similar school myself.

Admission trends there are hard to pin down. Since our kid enrolled we've heard from half dozen legacy families in our larger circle of friends/coworkers/etc whose kids were rejected for the classes of 2029 and 2030. The perhaps most noteworthy is a friend's child whose parents both attended (and met there), are reasonably active alums, sibling attends, had great grades/scores/etc and yet was ultimately rejected. Got into Hopkins, Duke and Princeton (!) unhooked and attends one of these. This stands out as the most wild of the legacy rejections I personally now know but I could share almost a half dozen more that are almost as noteworthy.

The student body is a real mixed group. You have the children of actual billionaires (at maybe the highest concentration anywhere) and many of multi millionaires. They tend to have graduated at or near the very top of prep or boarding school classes. Bright and well trained. Many of this group are Dartmouth legacies.

Then you have the upper middle or professional class kids who are very smart and typical of what one thinks of as high achieving, Ivy level kids. Decent number of Asians in this group. My own child is in here.

Then you have a lot of kids who frankly aren't very remarkable. Most bring rural/geographic diversity and economic diversity. Many struggle. Since we're talking SAT scores, this group often had SAT scores in the 1400s, even 1300s (my kids knows or knew because apparently at some point in early freshman year this comes out in chatter). Dartmouth currently seems to love admitting this demographic (there are many of them) and views admitting them as being a large part of their current mission. I don't know if this is similar at other Ivies or other top 20s as I don't have another kid in college.

Which brings up the question of what the point of an Ivy is. Is it to educate the best and brightest, regardless of prior opportunity? Or is it to give a top opportunity to kids who will benefit most from it? Dartmouth appears to believe very strongly in the second. However, it's meant that kids like mine (a pretty typical DMV high-achiever) are skating through college and not really being challenged. To be frank, my child has a 4.0 and hasn't worked very hard. They will tell you that their high school cohort was by-in-large brighter than many classmates at college. In this regard it's been disappointing. I'm not sure what the rest of the years will hold. I'd be interested in hearing what other Dartmouth parents think.

NP This is happening at other Ivies too. I posted last week that an Ivy professor friend of ours talked about so many kids being unprepared. I didn't feel like being controversial at the time so didn't add the important missing insight our friend shared: it was mostly FGLI who came in shockingly unprepared. Not all of them, but many. Many can't write and will take years to get them up to university-level writing. Friend said a lot of the athletes are actually great students because so many come from good prep schools and have parents who are college educated. They also say it's self-selecting – the athletes who come from struggling schools, who only want to play ball self select to go to colleges in southern states, whereas the ones who are more prepared academically choose to come to Ivies or at least UT Austin even if they too could have been recruited by Ole Miss because they want to have career options beyond the NFL. Friend said this is happening across Ivies, professor friends from other Ivies are complaining about the same things and university leaderships know.

BUT...

Friend also said the reason is more complex than 26-year-old admissions officers trying to be woke. They know AI is coming, and soon the window could close forever to lift up those in the bottom with no access to any tool or means of upward mobility. This is why there is so much focus on applicants in rural areas now. They are the ones most at risk because if they can't get a full ride from an Ivy (all expenses paid, flights to go home for Christmas or even money for groceries in the summer), these kids can't even go to the nearest state schools in their own states. Some can't even go to community college (many may start but they can't stay) because they can't afford the transportation, a $5K tuition or annual expense. They need to join the work force if they don't attend a very wealthy Ivy that would feed them.

My family is UMC/UC. Our DCs are top 5-10% at feeder privates outside DMV with SAT at top 0.5% and great ECs. They don't have tutors and work their asses off. Am I disappointed that they likely won't get into HYP? Maybe a little. But when I heard what my friend said, it makes sense and I know why ivies are doing this. So rural FGLI who score 1400 will go to HYP and my kids hopefully will go to Rice or Tufts. I am more than ok with that.

A couple of things.

How does AI prevent colleges from having a poor rural preference?

Also, why is it so important that the poor rural kid go to Harvard? If they're really that poor, student aid exists. One of the reasons for the glut of college students is that we have made college affordable for pretty much everyone. This is great but we have at the same time denigrated non-college path careers,m and this is much less great.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dartmouth has always leaned conservative, white frat type. Partly due to location.

I think this is correct. I also think less Asians apply to Dartmouth - but not that much less that the percentage would go down. There is still bias (conscious or not) for white applicants (and against Asian applicants). Dartmouth probably doesn't want the Asian population to grow exponentially as it did on other campuses. There are definitely markers on the application that point to the applicant's race and background.

Dartmouth doesn't have engineering, which limits its appeal for many students, including many Asians. You generally don't see many Asians interested in SLACs in the middle of nowhere, which is essentially what Dartmouth is.

False.

Saying Dartmouth does not have engineering is like saying Brown does not have engineering. The two schools are similar in that respect, yet Brown is now close to 40% Asian.

Dartmouth should still be attractive to many Asian applicants, especially premed students, and also students interested in economics, government, and the humanities. Georgetown does not have engineering at all, and it is close to 30% Asian.

As a PP pointed out, some SLACs have a higher percentage of Asian students than Dartmouth. Carleton and Wellesley are good examples.

So I do not buy the “no engineering” explanation. The numbers look much more like the result of active discrimination, and the surge in white enrollment only reinforces that impression.

Dartmouth has an AB in “engineering science” that us possible in 4 yrs. For the BE, which is the only ABET accredited degree, it takes a 5th year at Dartmouth.
Engineering at Brown may be weak but at least a 4 yr BS in engineering is possible at Brown.

The 5th yr to get a real engineering degree is a major turnoff and yes it disproportionally affects asian applicants

All DC's friends are getting their engineering BS in 4. Oh, and they are also involved in fraternities, and by the way, the greek average GPA is higher than the schoolwide GPA

That greek GPA point is true at most selective schools (look at Cornell, Penn, Northwestern, Vanderbilt)

Is that b/c they have file cabinets full of old tests & distribute them to fellow fraternity members to prepare?

You watch too much TV. No one has "files" - they do have study groups and advise younger members on which classes/teachers to take for easier grading. Better peer mentorship, perhaps? Also, peer pressure on grades.
At least what I've seen.

I went to college in the 1980s so maybe its different now but we definitely had test banks to the point where the entire pledge class would have like a quarter of their classes in common with anyone else from their pledge class.

Dartmouth in the 90s did. And I assume 2000s - wasn’t that in a Mindy Project episode?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fall 2020 freshmen data sets, ivies:
(Best correlation to today as it was after the 2016 recentering)

25—50(est)--75

Harvard 1460-1520–1580
UPenn. 1460- 1515-1570
Yale. 1470- 1515-1560
Princeton. 1460- 1510–1560
Brown. 1440- 1495- 1550
Dartmouth 1430–1490—1550
Cornell. 1410–1475–1530

Columbia’s does not appear to be available. They had a long history of not publishing it.

Dartmouth ‘s new data set is stronger not weaker; Dartmouth likely remains bottom three in the Ivy League

our high school college counselor very helpfully told my kids that unhooked kids with no major national awards need to be right in btw that 50% and 75% number as a rule. which was helpful when they were doing SAT prep. And my kids were coming from known feeders. Get that SAT up in the 1530/1540 range

How about unhooked kids with good grades and 1570+? What are the chance this kid could get into at least one T15 if applying to all of them assuming ECs are decent and teachers' recs are amazing?

DP, then it's worth a shot. it is possible. But it's only a lottery ticket.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fall 2020 freshmen data sets, ivies:
(Best correlation to today as it was after the 2016 recentering)

25—50(est)--75

Harvard 1460-1520–1580
UPenn. 1460- 1515-1570
Yale. 1470- 1515-1560
Princeton. 1460- 1510–1560
Brown. 1440- 1495- 1550
Dartmouth 1430–1490—1550
Cornell. 1410–1475–1530

Columbia’s does not appear to be available. They had a long history of not publishing it.

Dartmouth ‘s new data set is stronger not weaker; Dartmouth likely remains bottom three in the Ivy League

our high school college counselor very helpfully told my kids that unhooked kids with no major national awards need to be right in btw that 50% and 75% number as a rule. which was helpful when they were doing SAT prep. And my kids were coming from known feeders. Get that SAT up in the 1530/1540 range

How about unhooked kids with good grades and 1570+? What are the chance this kid could get into at least one T15 if applying to all of them assuming ECs are decent and teachers' recs are amazing?

Very high chance. Statistically better than a 60% chance of admission to one T15.

That sounds extremely high. Do you have a cite?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a Dartmouth freshman. Disclaimer: they're our oldest child so I don't have experience with another current day college and I didn't attend an Ivy or similar school myself.

Admission trends there are hard to pin down. Since our kid enrolled we've heard from half dozen legacy families in our larger circle of friends/coworkers/etc whose kids were rejected for the classes of 2029 and 2030. The perhaps most noteworthy is a friend's child whose parents both attended (and met there), are reasonably active alums, sibling attends, had great grades/scores/etc and yet was ultimately rejected. Got into Hopkins, Duke and Princeton (!) unhooked and attends one of these. This stands out as the most wild of the legacy rejections I personally now know but I could share almost a half dozen more that are almost as noteworthy.

The student body is a real mixed group. You have the children of actual billionaires (at maybe the highest concentration anywhere) and many of multi millionaires. They tend to have graduated at or near the very top of prep or boarding school classes. Bright and well trained. Many of this group are Dartmouth legacies.

Then you have the upper middle or professional class kids who are very smart and typical of what one thinks of as high achieving, Ivy level kids. Decent number of Asians in this group. My own child is in here.

Then you have a lot of kids who frankly aren't very remarkable. Most bring rural/geographic diversity and economic diversity. Many struggle. Since we're talking SAT scores, this group often had SAT scores in the 1400s, even 1300s (my kids knows or knew because apparently at some point in early freshman year this comes out in chatter). Dartmouth currently seems to love admitting this demographic (there are many of them) and views admitting them as being a large part of their current mission. I don't know if this is similar at other Ivies or other top 20s as I don't have another kid in college.

Which brings up the question of what the point of an Ivy is. Is it to educate the best and brightest, regardless of prior opportunity? Or is it to give a top opportunity to kids who will benefit most from it? Dartmouth appears to believe very strongly in the second. However, it's meant that kids like mine (a pretty typical DMV high-achiever) are skating through college and not really being challenged. To be frank, my child has a 4.0 and hasn't worked very hard. They will tell you that their high school cohort was by-in-large brighter than many classmates at college. In this regard it's been disappointing. I'm not sure what the rest of the years will hold. I'd be interested in hearing what other Dartmouth parents think.

NP This is happening at other Ivies too. I posted last week that an Ivy professor friend of ours talked about so many kids being unprepared. I didn't feel like being controversial at the time so didn't add the important missing insight our friend shared: it was mostly FGLI who came in shockingly unprepared. Not all of them, but many. Many can't write and will take years to get them up to university-level writing. Friend said a lot of the athletes are actually great students because so many come from good prep schools and have parents who are college educated. They also say it's self-selecting – the athletes who come from struggling schools, who only want to play ball self select to go to colleges in southern states, whereas the ones who are more prepared academically choose to come to Ivies or at least UT Austin even if they too could have been recruited by Ole Miss because they want to have career options beyond the NFL. Friend said this is happening across Ivies, professor friends from other Ivies are complaining about the same things and university leaderships know.

BUT...

Friend also said the reason is more complex than 26-year-old admissions officers trying to be woke. They know AI is coming, and soon the window could close forever to lift up those in the bottom with no access to any tool or means of upward mobility. This is why there is so much focus on applicants in rural areas now. They are the ones most at risk because if they can't get a full ride from an Ivy (all expenses paid, flights to go home for Christmas or even money for groceries in the summer), these kids can't even go to the nearest state schools in their own states. Some can't even go to community college (many may start but they can't stay) because they can't afford the transportation, a $5K tuition or annual expense. They need to join the work force if they don't attend a very wealthy Ivy that would feed them.

My family is UMC/UC. Our DCs are top 5-10% at feeder privates outside DMV with SAT at top 0.5% and great ECs. They don't have tutors and work their asses off. Am I disappointed that they likely won't get into HYP? Maybe a little. But when I heard what my friend said, it makes sense and I know why ivies are doing this. So rural FGLI who score 1400 will go to HYP and my kids hopefully will go to Rice or Tufts. I am more than ok with that.

Accurate assessment here. This isn't wrong.
And your kids will be fine - and likely 10x better in terms of lifetime earnings as the FGLI kid going to HYP. AOs know that. It's why your kids need "more" for HYP admissions - natl awards, something unique/compelling/unusual/highly desirable. But with those stats they'll do well enough and the outcome won't be materially different.

- parent with top stat DCs at feeder private outside DMV now at two different private T20 and thriving.

The woke admissions officers have been doing this waay before AI.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Lol. Test prep resources consists of College Board's free services, Khan academy (free), Uworld, 1600,io for $100, free books at the library, plus thousands of youtube videos and hundreds of free sites.

Test prep means foregoing tik tok, snap, discord, video games and studying. Nothing rich or poor about that. It is effort.

Please. It’s also knowing about those resources, having the equipment to utilize them, the time to do so (hard when you’re working 20+ hrs/wk, as many of these kids are), and a safe and stable location in which to study.

Plenty of kids don’t have those things, and those that persevere through those challenges make privileged kids look pretty pathetic by comparison.