where would top SLACs fall in an overall college ranking list?

[Anonymous]

personally would put Williams and Amherst right around Georgetown USC CMU at the lower end of T20-T25, but firmly in that category. These are powerful brands in the world of hiring managers

[Anonymous]

^ and the job placement from these top LACs is ridiculous- as others call it, rabid alumni support

[Anonymous]

be careful when reading these rankings unless you're prepare/able to look at methodology.

for example, for salaries on the WSJ ranking, they use two numbers. here they are. if you thought it was something to do with "salary", you'd be wrong.


Salary impact (67%): This measures the extent to which a college boosts its graduates’ salaries beyond what they would be expected to earn regardless of which college they attended. We used statistical modeling to estimate what we would expect the median earnings of a college’s graduates to be on the basis of the exam results of its students prior to attending the college and the cost of living in the state in which the college is based. We then scored the college on its performance against that estimate. These scores were then combined with scores for raw graduate salaries to factor in absolute performance alongside performance relative to our estimates. Our analysis for this metric used research on this topic by the policy-research think tank the Brookings Institution as a guide.

Years to pay off net price (33%): This measure combines two figures—the average net price of attending the college, and the value added to graduates’ median salary attributable to attending the college. The value added to graduates’ median salary by a college was estimated on the basis of the difference between the median earnings of the school’s graduates and the median earnings of high-school graduates in the state where the college is located and across the U.S. in proportion to the ratio of students who are in-state versus out-of-state. We then took the average annual net price of attending the college—including costs like tuition and fees, room and board, and books and supplies, taking into account any grants and scholarships, for students who received federal financial aid—and multiplied it by four to reflect an estimated cost of a four-year program. We then divided this overall net-price figure by the value added to a graduate’s salary, to provide an estimate of how quickly an education at the college pays for itself through the salary boost it provides. Our analysis for this metric used research on this topic by the policy-research think tank Third Way as a guide.

---

this is really about the distance a college propels a student. so a immigrant kid from stuy who goes to MIT - who also has a low Net Price - that's a great outcome.

a rich kid who would have done just fine at Middlebury or Vandy? who paid full price for either? and would also have been just as rich and connected if they went to UVM? less a distance traveled story. lower salary number. even though kid 2 here might be making more (with those great connections!) than kid 1.

[Anonymous]

People disagree when ranking national universities. People disagree where WASP fits in even more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:be careful when reading these rankings unless you're prepare/able to look at methodology.

for example, for salaries on the WSJ ranking, they use two numbers. here they are. if you thought it was something to do with "salary", you'd be wrong.


Salary impact (67%): This measures the extent to which a college boosts its graduates’ salaries beyond what they would be expected to earn regardless of which college they attended. We used statistical modeling to estimate what we would expect the median earnings of a college’s graduates to be on the basis of the exam results of its students prior to attending the college and the cost of living in the state in which the college is based. We then scored the college on its performance against that estimate. These scores were then combined with scores for raw graduate salaries to factor in absolute performance alongside performance relative to our estimates. Our analysis for this metric used research on this topic by the policy-research think tank the Brookings Institution as a guide.

Years to pay off net price (33%): This measure combines two figures—the average net price of attending the college, and the value added to graduates’ median salary attributable to attending the college. The value added to graduates’ median salary by a college was estimated on the basis of the difference between the median earnings of the school’s graduates and the median earnings of high-school graduates in the state where the college is located and across the U.S. in proportion to the ratio of students who are in-state versus out-of-state. We then took the average annual net price of attending the college—including costs like tuition and fees, room and board, and books and supplies, taking into account any grants and scholarships, for students who received federal financial aid—and multiplied it by four to reflect an estimated cost of a four-year program. We then divided this overall net-price figure by the value added to a graduate’s salary, to provide an estimate of how quickly an education at the college pays for itself through the salary boost it provides. Our analysis for this metric used research on this topic by the policy-research think tank Third Way as a guide.

---

this is really about the distance a college propels a student. so a immigrant kid from stuy who goes to MIT - who also has a low Net Price - that's a great outcome.

a rich kid who would have done just fine at Middlebury or Vandy? who paid full price for either? and would also have been just as rich and connected if they went to UVM? less a distance traveled story. lower salary number. even though kid 2 here might be making more (with those great connections!) than kid 1.

But all schools are ranked the same on this metric and a school like Princeton comes out on top while Williams drops to 245.

Williams also is very generous with FA, so the two schools are fairly comparable in terms of student body.

It’s all a bit of a black box.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:be careful when reading these rankings unless you're prepare/able to look at methodology.

for example, for salaries on the WSJ ranking, they use two numbers. here they are. if you thought it was something to do with "salary", you'd be wrong.


Salary impact (67%): This measures the extent to which a college boosts its graduates’ salaries beyond what they would be expected to earn regardless of which college they attended. We used statistical modeling to estimate what we would expect the median earnings of a college’s graduates to be on the basis of the exam results of its students prior to attending the college and the cost of living in the state in which the college is based. We then scored the college on its performance against that estimate. These scores were then combined with scores for raw graduate salaries to factor in absolute performance alongside performance relative to our estimates. Our analysis for this metric used research on this topic by the policy-research think tank the Brookings Institution as a guide.

Years to pay off net price (33%): This measure combines two figures—the average net price of attending the college, and the value added to graduates’ median salary attributable to attending the college. The value added to graduates’ median salary by a college was estimated on the basis of the difference between the median earnings of the school’s graduates and the median earnings of high-school graduates in the state where the college is located and across the U.S. in proportion to the ratio of students who are in-state versus out-of-state. We then took the average annual net price of attending the college—including costs like tuition and fees, room and board, and books and supplies, taking into account any grants and scholarships, for students who received federal financial aid—and multiplied it by four to reflect an estimated cost of a four-year program. We then divided this overall net-price figure by the value added to a graduate’s salary, to provide an estimate of how quickly an education at the college pays for itself through the salary boost it provides. Our analysis for this metric used research on this topic by the policy-research think tank Third Way as a guide.

---

this is really about the distance a college propels a student. so a immigrant kid from stuy who goes to MIT - who also has a low Net Price - that's a great outcome.

a rich kid who would have done just fine at Middlebury or Vandy? who paid full price for either? and would also have been just as rich and connected if they went to UVM? less a distance traveled story. lower salary number. even though kid 2 here might be making more (with those great connections!) than kid 1.

But all schools are ranked the same on this metric and a school like Princeton comes out on top while Williams drops to 245.

Williams also is very generous with FA, so the two schools are fairly comparable in terms of student body.

It’s all a bit of a black box.

It's hard to believe there is that big a difference in outcome between Princeton and Williams. If you look at things like law school and med school placement adjusted for student body size, Williams is near the top.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:be careful when reading these rankings unless you're prepare/able to look at methodology.

for example, for salaries on the WSJ ranking, they use two numbers. here they are. if you thought it was something to do with "salary", you'd be wrong.


Salary impact (67%): This measures the extent to which a college boosts its graduates’ salaries beyond what they would be expected to earn regardless of which college they attended. We used statistical modeling to estimate what we would expect the median earnings of a college’s graduates to be on the basis of the exam results of its students prior to attending the college and the cost of living in the state in which the college is based. We then scored the college on its performance against that estimate. These scores were then combined with scores for raw graduate salaries to factor in absolute performance alongside performance relative to our estimates. Our analysis for this metric used research on this topic by the policy-research think tank the Brookings Institution as a guide.

Years to pay off net price (33%): This measure combines two figures—the average net price of attending the college, and the value added to graduates’ median salary attributable to attending the college. The value added to graduates’ median salary by a college was estimated on the basis of the difference between the median earnings of the school’s graduates and the median earnings of high-school graduates in the state where the college is located and across the U.S. in proportion to the ratio of students who are in-state versus out-of-state. We then took the average annual net price of attending the college—including costs like tuition and fees, room and board, and books and supplies, taking into account any grants and scholarships, for students who received federal financial aid—and multiplied it by four to reflect an estimated cost of a four-year program. We then divided this overall net-price figure by the value added to a graduate’s salary, to provide an estimate of how quickly an education at the college pays for itself through the salary boost it provides. Our analysis for this metric used research on this topic by the policy-research think tank Third Way as a guide.

---

this is really about the distance a college propels a student. so a immigrant kid from stuy who goes to MIT - who also has a low Net Price - that's a great outcome.

a rich kid who would have done just fine at Middlebury or Vandy? who paid full price for either? and would also have been just as rich and connected if they went to UVM? less a distance traveled story. lower salary number. even though kid 2 here might be making more (with those great connections!) than kid 1.

But all schools are ranked the same on this metric and a school like Princeton comes out on top while Williams drops to 245.

Williams also is very generous with FA, so the two schools are fairly comparable in terms of student body.

It’s all a bit of a black box.

Not really a black box. They have the data right in the table.

the salary list has these schools in their top 20

Babson
Missouri University of Science and Technology
Milwaukee School of Engineering
Lehigh University
Bentley University
Michigan Technological University
Colorado School of Mines
San José State University
Kettering University
Manhattan University

it's about the impact. and also engineering. the salary numbers are first year employment. mid career would look different - that data is out there too

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:be careful when reading these rankings unless you're prepare/able to look at methodology.

for example, for salaries on the WSJ ranking, they use two numbers. here they are. if you thought it was something to do with "salary", you'd be wrong.


Salary impact (67%): This measures the extent to which a college boosts its graduates’ salaries beyond what they would be expected to earn regardless of which college they attended. We used statistical modeling to estimate what we would expect the median earnings of a college’s graduates to be on the basis of the exam results of its students prior to attending the college and the cost of living in the state in which the college is based. We then scored the college on its performance against that estimate. These scores were then combined with scores for raw graduate salaries to factor in absolute performance alongside performance relative to our estimates. Our analysis for this metric used research on this topic by the policy-research think tank the Brookings Institution as a guide.

Years to pay off net price (33%): This measure combines two figures—the average net price of attending the college, and the value added to graduates’ median salary attributable to attending the college. The value added to graduates’ median salary by a college was estimated on the basis of the difference between the median earnings of the school’s graduates and the median earnings of high-school graduates in the state where the college is located and across the U.S. in proportion to the ratio of students who are in-state versus out-of-state. We then took the average annual net price of attending the college—including costs like tuition and fees, room and board, and books and supplies, taking into account any grants and scholarships, for students who received federal financial aid—and multiplied it by four to reflect an estimated cost of a four-year program. We then divided this overall net-price figure by the value added to a graduate’s salary, to provide an estimate of how quickly an education at the college pays for itself through the salary boost it provides. Our analysis for this metric used research on this topic by the policy-research think tank Third Way as a guide.

---

this is really about the distance a college propels a student. so a immigrant kid from stuy who goes to MIT - who also has a low Net Price - that's a great outcome.

a rich kid who would have done just fine at Middlebury or Vandy? who paid full price for either? and would also have been just as rich and connected if they went to UVM? less a distance traveled story. lower salary number. even though kid 2 here might be making more (with those great connections!) than kid 1.

But all schools are ranked the same on this metric and a school like Princeton comes out on top while Williams drops to 245.

Williams also is very generous with FA, so the two schools are fairly comparable in terms of student body.

It’s all a bit of a black box.

It's hard to believe there is that big a difference in outcome between Princeton and Williams. If you look at things like law school and med school placement adjusted for student body size, Williams is near the top.

Again…not by WSJ rankings which only looks at the kids that get jobs (so grad school doesn’t impact this at all).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:be careful when reading these rankings unless you're prepare/able to look at methodology.

for example, for salaries on the WSJ ranking, they use two numbers. here they are. if you thought it was something to do with "salary", you'd be wrong.


Salary impact (67%): This measures the extent to which a college boosts its graduates’ salaries beyond what they would be expected to earn regardless of which college they attended. We used statistical modeling to estimate what we would expect the median earnings of a college’s graduates to be on the basis of the exam results of its students prior to attending the college and the cost of living in the state in which the college is based. We then scored the college on its performance against that estimate. These scores were then combined with scores for raw graduate salaries to factor in absolute performance alongside performance relative to our estimates. Our analysis for this metric used research on this topic by the policy-research think tank the Brookings Institution as a guide.

Years to pay off net price (33%): This measure combines two figures—the average net price of attending the college, and the value added to graduates’ median salary attributable to attending the college. The value added to graduates’ median salary by a college was estimated on the basis of the difference between the median earnings of the school’s graduates and the median earnings of high-school graduates in the state where the college is located and across the U.S. in proportion to the ratio of students who are in-state versus out-of-state. We then took the average annual net price of attending the college—including costs like tuition and fees, room and board, and books and supplies, taking into account any grants and scholarships, for students who received federal financial aid—and multiplied it by four to reflect an estimated cost of a four-year program. We then divided this overall net-price figure by the value added to a graduate’s salary, to provide an estimate of how quickly an education at the college pays for itself through the salary boost it provides. Our analysis for this metric used research on this topic by the policy-research think tank Third Way as a guide.

---

this is really about the distance a college propels a student. so a immigrant kid from stuy who goes to MIT - who also has a low Net Price - that's a great outcome.

a rich kid who would have done just fine at Middlebury or Vandy? who paid full price for either? and would also have been just as rich and connected if they went to UVM? less a distance traveled story. lower salary number. even though kid 2 here might be making more (with those great connections!) than kid 1.

But all schools are ranked the same on this metric and a school like Princeton comes out on top while Williams drops to 245.

Williams also is very generous with FA, so the two schools are fairly comparable in terms of student body.

It’s all a bit of a black box.

Not really a black box. They have the data right in the table.

the salary list has these schools in their top 20

Babson
Missouri University of Science and Technology
Milwaukee School of Engineering
Lehigh University
Bentley University
Michigan Technological University
Colorado School of Mines
San José State University
Kettering University
Manhattan University

it's about the impact. and also engineering. the salary numbers are first year employment. mid career would look different - that data is out there too

So why is Princeton #3 and Williams #245 just looking at salary?

I get why some of those other schools that are nearly all business or engineering do well on this metric.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:be careful when reading these rankings unless you're prepare/able to look at methodology.

for example, for salaries on the WSJ ranking, they use two numbers. here they are. if you thought it was something to do with "salary", you'd be wrong.


Salary impact (67%): This measures the extent to which a college boosts its graduates’ salaries beyond what they would be expected to earn regardless of which college they attended. We used statistical modeling to estimate what we would expect the median earnings of a college’s graduates to be on the basis of the exam results of its students prior to attending the college and the cost of living in the state in which the college is based. We then scored the college on its performance against that estimate. These scores were then combined with scores for raw graduate salaries to factor in absolute performance alongside performance relative to our estimates. Our analysis for this metric used research on this topic by the policy-research think tank the Brookings Institution as a guide.

Years to pay off net price (33%): This measure combines two figures—the average net price of attending the college, and the value added to graduates’ median salary attributable to attending the college. The value added to graduates’ median salary by a college was estimated on the basis of the difference between the median earnings of the school’s graduates and the median earnings of high-school graduates in the state where the college is located and across the U.S. in proportion to the ratio of students who are in-state versus out-of-state. We then took the average annual net price of attending the college—including costs like tuition and fees, room and board, and books and supplies, taking into account any grants and scholarships, for students who received federal financial aid—and multiplied it by four to reflect an estimated cost of a four-year program. We then divided this overall net-price figure by the value added to a graduate’s salary, to provide an estimate of how quickly an education at the college pays for itself through the salary boost it provides. Our analysis for this metric used research on this topic by the policy-research think tank Third Way as a guide.

---

this is really about the distance a college propels a student. so a immigrant kid from stuy who goes to MIT - who also has a low Net Price - that's a great outcome.

a rich kid who would have done just fine at Middlebury or Vandy? who paid full price for either? and would also have been just as rich and connected if they went to UVM? less a distance traveled story. lower salary number. even though kid 2 here might be making more (with those great connections!) than kid 1.

But all schools are ranked the same on this metric and a school like Princeton comes out on top while Williams drops to 245.

Williams also is very generous with FA, so the two schools are fairly comparable in terms of student body.

It’s all a bit of a black box.

It's hard to believe there is that big a difference in outcome between Princeton and Williams. If you look at things like law school and med school placement adjusted for student body size, Williams is near the top.

Again…not by WSJ rankings which only looks at the kids that get jobs (so grad school doesn’t impact this at all).

let's be clear. this has very little to do with salary.

it has to do with impact (this is about kids socioeconomic background) (67%) and net price after FA (33%).

MIT
Average Net Price
$20,338
Value Added to Graduate Salary
$104,544
Years to Pay Off Net Price
9 months

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:be careful when reading these rankings unless you're prepare/able to look at methodology.

for example, for salaries on the WSJ ranking, they use two numbers. here they are. if you thought it was something to do with "salary", you'd be wrong.


Salary impact (67%): This measures the extent to which a college boosts its graduates’ salaries beyond what they would be expected to earn regardless of which college they attended. We used statistical modeling to estimate what we would expect the median earnings of a college’s graduates to be on the basis of the exam results of its students prior to attending the college and the cost of living in the state in which the college is based. We then scored the college on its performance against that estimate. These scores were then combined with scores for raw graduate salaries to factor in absolute performance alongside performance relative to our estimates. Our analysis for this metric used research on this topic by the policy-research think tank the Brookings Institution as a guide.

Years to pay off net price (33%): This measure combines two figures—the average net price of attending the college, and the value added to graduates’ median salary attributable to attending the college. The value added to graduates’ median salary by a college was estimated on the basis of the difference between the median earnings of the school’s graduates and the median earnings of high-school graduates in the state where the college is located and across the U.S. in proportion to the ratio of students who are in-state versus out-of-state. We then took the average annual net price of attending the college—including costs like tuition and fees, room and board, and books and supplies, taking into account any grants and scholarships, for students who received federal financial aid—and multiplied it by four to reflect an estimated cost of a four-year program. We then divided this overall net-price figure by the value added to a graduate’s salary, to provide an estimate of how quickly an education at the college pays for itself through the salary boost it provides. Our analysis for this metric used research on this topic by the policy-research think tank Third Way as a guide.

---

this is really about the distance a college propels a student. so a immigrant kid from stuy who goes to MIT - who also has a low Net Price - that's a great outcome.

a rich kid who would have done just fine at Middlebury or Vandy? who paid full price for either? and would also have been just as rich and connected if they went to UVM? less a distance traveled story. lower salary number. even though kid 2 here might be making more (with those great connections!) than kid 1.

What about Questbridge students, for example, who attend the top (20ish) SLACs essentially for free? At many of those schools Questbridge students make up a large percentage of the class. And are we to assume that no students of privilege attend MIT? You are obviously one of the many on the board who don’t understand the value of a small liberal arts education. That’s fine, they are not for everyone. But please don’t base your “analysis” on lazy assumptions that reflect your biases. One of the many reasons why this entire exercise is a fool’s errand.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:be careful when reading these rankings unless you're prepare/able to look at methodology.

for example, for salaries on the WSJ ranking, they use two numbers. here they are. if you thought it was something to do with "salary", you'd be wrong.


Salary impact (67%): This measures the extent to which a college boosts its graduates’ salaries beyond what they would be expected to earn regardless of which college they attended. We used statistical modeling to estimate what we would expect the median earnings of a college’s graduates to be on the basis of the exam results of its students prior to attending the college and the cost of living in the state in which the college is based. We then scored the college on its performance against that estimate. These scores were then combined with scores for raw graduate salaries to factor in absolute performance alongside performance relative to our estimates. Our analysis for this metric used research on this topic by the policy-research think tank the Brookings Institution as a guide.

Years to pay off net price (33%): This measure combines two figures—the average net price of attending the college, and the value added to graduates’ median salary attributable to attending the college. The value added to graduates’ median salary by a college was estimated on the basis of the difference between the median earnings of the school’s graduates and the median earnings of high-school graduates in the state where the college is located and across the U.S. in proportion to the ratio of students who are in-state versus out-of-state. We then took the average annual net price of attending the college—including costs like tuition and fees, room and board, and books and supplies, taking into account any grants and scholarships, for students who received federal financial aid—and multiplied it by four to reflect an estimated cost of a four-year program. We then divided this overall net-price figure by the value added to a graduate’s salary, to provide an estimate of how quickly an education at the college pays for itself through the salary boost it provides. Our analysis for this metric used research on this topic by the policy-research think tank Third Way as a guide.

---

this is really about the distance a college propels a student. so a immigrant kid from stuy who goes to MIT - who also has a low Net Price - that's a great outcome.

a rich kid who would have done just fine at Middlebury or Vandy? who paid full price for either? and would also have been just as rich and connected if they went to UVM? less a distance traveled story. lower salary number. even though kid 2 here might be making more (with those great connections!) than kid 1.

But all schools are ranked the same on this metric and a school like Princeton comes out on top while Williams drops to 245.

Williams also is very generous with FA, so the two schools are fairly comparable in terms of student body.

It’s all a bit of a black box.

It's hard to believe there is that big a difference in outcome between Princeton and Williams. If you look at things like law school and med school placement adjusted for student body size, Williams is near the top.

Again…not by WSJ rankings which only looks at the kids that get jobs (so grad school doesn’t impact this at all).

let's be clear. this has very little to do with salary.

it has to do with impact (this is about kids socioeconomic background) (67%) and net price after FA (33%).

MIT
Average Net Price
$20,338
Value Added to Graduate Salary
$104,544
Years to Pay Off Net Price
9 months

Ok…but Williams net price is $26k and salary value add is $52k.

So, the net price isn’t much different but the salary value add is.

[Anonymous]

yes, because there are more kids of privilege at williams.

using older data from NYT, percentage of kids from top 1% (630k):
Williams College 18.1%
Massachusetts Institute of Technology 5.7%

[Anonymous]

(I'm not here to say I'd rank Williams overall better than MIT. I wouldn't. Just using this as an example)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:be careful when reading these rankings unless you're prepare/able to look at methodology.

for example, for salaries on the WSJ ranking, they use two numbers. here they are. if you thought it was something to do with "salary", you'd be wrong.


Salary impact (67%): This measures the extent to which a college boosts its graduates’ salaries beyond what they would be expected to earn regardless of which college they attended. We used statistical modeling to estimate what we would expect the median earnings of a college’s graduates to be on the basis of the exam results of its students prior to attending the college and the cost of living in the state in which the college is based. We then scored the college on its performance against that estimate. These scores were then combined with scores for raw graduate salaries to factor in absolute performance alongside performance relative to our estimates. Our analysis for this metric used research on this topic by the policy-research think tank the Brookings Institution as a guide.

Years to pay off net price (33%): This measure combines two figures—the average net price of attending the college, and the value added to graduates’ median salary attributable to attending the college. The value added to graduates’ median salary by a college was estimated on the basis of the difference between the median earnings of the school’s graduates and the median earnings of high-school graduates in the state where the college is located and across the U.S. in proportion to the ratio of students who are in-state versus out-of-state. We then took the average annual net price of attending the college—including costs like tuition and fees, room and board, and books and supplies, taking into account any grants and scholarships, for students who received federal financial aid—and multiplied it by four to reflect an estimated cost of a four-year program. We then divided this overall net-price figure by the value added to a graduate’s salary, to provide an estimate of how quickly an education at the college pays for itself through the salary boost it provides. Our analysis for this metric used research on this topic by the policy-research think tank Third Way as a guide.

---

this is really about the distance a college propels a student. so a immigrant kid from stuy who goes to MIT - who also has a low Net Price - that's a great outcome.

a rich kid who would have done just fine at Middlebury or Vandy? who paid full price for either? and would also have been just as rich and connected if they went to UVM? less a distance traveled story. lower salary number. even though kid 2 here might be making more (with those great connections!) than kid 1.

What about Questbridge students, for example, who attend the top (20ish) SLACs essentially for free? At many of those schools Questbridge students make up a large percentage of the class. And are we to assume that no students of privilege attend MIT? You are obviously one of the many on the board who don’t understand the value of a small liberal arts education. That’s fine, they are not for everyone. But please don’t base your “analysis” on lazy assumptions that reflect your biases. One of the many reasons why this entire exercise is a fool’s errand.

Williams doesnt release questbridge numbers but say they've enrolled 500 since 2004, so 25 a year? I wouldnt call that a large percentage of the class. MIT enrolled 100 last year.

You're missing my point entirely since I was defending Williams, but just want to point this out. Williams is a far more privileged student body overall. That's just in the numbers.