NYTs: if affirmative action goes, say buy-bye to legacy, EA/ED, and most athletic preferences

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the interesting unintended consequence will be the explosion of women in selective colleges. Right now, women make up 60% of colleges students. It’s not exactly a shock that women also need better credential to get into non-engineering programs at selective colleges.

https://feed.georgetown.edu/access-affordability/women-increasingly-outnumber-men-at-u-s-colleges-but-why/

It will be interesting to watch UVA Arts & Sciences, WM, IVpvys etc become gender blind in admissions and hit 70% women. Because race, national origin, gender and religion are the big protected classes. It’s hard to imagine prohibiting consideration of race but allowing gender consideration.

It’s interesting to watch as women become more educated than men and less dependent on them. There is a society wide shift underway that is creating the Incels and MAGAs, who are pushing to legally restrict women. This decision will make womens power and mens resentment explode.

Just because women are becoming more educated does not mean that they are becoming wealthier or better off. Men tend to join the military and trades which provide good careers while women tend to major in the humanities for which jobs are rare and pay is very low - they tend to take low-level administrative positions that are quickly getting automated by tech.

It simply means that a larger number of educated women will be chasing after a smaller number of educated men, becoming the men's 2nd/3rd/4th choices, ironically losing power in the relationships. Unless women are happy to become lesbians or single forever, it's not an ideal situation.

Uneducated men meanwhile will continue going down the rabbit hole of video games, drugs, porn, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


I want universities to be blind to everything except academic, and academic-adjacent, achievement. No legacy, athletics, development, family or ethnic background considerations.

If that happens schools like Harvard will cease to be Harvard. What gives the elite schools, especially Ivy League, cultural and social capital in the US is all that you seek to eliminate. I don’t personally care but I recognize the world we live in.

That’s bs. The lure of places like Harvard was the claim that it attracted the best and brightest around the world, and that the US was the top country to migrate to. Now with “holistic” admissions people can see that is not the case, coupled with the US in general decaying. Replacing an emphasis on academic achievement would actually reenergize Harvard.

What you describe is more recent history. The Ivy League brand was not built on the best and the brightest.

Forgot to add: consider Caltech and MIT. Full of smart kids but don’t have the cultural capital of Harvard.

+1000 Who wants to go to an Ivy League with a bunch of kids selected solely for their test scores and grades? The allure and social capital is attending with the people whose families rule the world — Kennedys, Hollywood kids, CEO kids, Supreme Court Justice’s kids, Presidents kids or grandkids, famous musicians kids, etc.

Exactly. All this outrage among certain groups is perplexing. The point of the ivies isn't grinder grades-win-all, but the mixing with the actual, not just aspiring, elite. And all the advantages that leads to for the kids who attend.

There is intense academic pressure and competition at these schools. Sorry but there is not much sitting around hob nobbing with nepo kids. Prepare to work.

I went to two and we worked but mostly hob nobbed. Met my husband, my best friend and a kid who introduced me to his dad who got me my first job. Networking is why you go to Ivys and no offense but Asian Americans will be left out. They do better at schools like MIT.

----
Asians now have a big enough cohort at top colleges that they can network among themselves as well. Silicon Valley and Wall Street now have enough Asians that our kids don't have to depend on racists like you.

Asians in Silicon Valley and Wall Street en masse? LOL! Delusional.

It might not be en masse but Asian partners at firms like Goldman are steadily increasing. Percentage of Asians at quant and VC firms is pretty high so LOL all you want.

"Goldman also promoted a greater share of Asian and Black employees to partner this time around. Asians represent 24% of the new class, up from 17% in 2020. About 9% of new partners are Black, up from 7% two years ago."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most fair way is to have comprehensive tests on each subjects, and give every kid a chance to show his/her knowledge (achievement in HS) and learning aptitude (potential). All the soft and subjective criteria result in unfairness.

But soft skills are really important in the workplace. I’d rather hire a slightly less academically inclined person who has a strong EQ. Ability to work with others, integrity, and grit matter a lot in life. I think that is why you see many high performers and CEOs that were not top of their class. Intelligence and academic achievement are not the whole picture.

I agree. But I also agree to the post you cited.
Admitting students based on comprehensive tests gives kids an equal opportunity for getting into suitable education. But getting opportunities for job or future work could be based on academics as well as EQ. They are not the same thing

I also think it’s a horrible misperception that the (largely Asian) students getting top GPAs and test scores are getting rejected because they somehow aren’t participating at high levels in leadership positions and extracurricular activities compared to other groups, but Harvard’s own data shows that this isn’t the case. The EQ is there with these kids. These schools simply just don’t want too many Asians today just like they didn’t want too many Jews in the past, so they are effectively playing into pernicious stereotypes (“They’re just test-taking robots!”) despite claiming to be open-minded and fair. The elite colleges need to come to grips with this. I pretty much don’t agree with anything with this current Supreme Court, but on this particular issue, they may finally end up being the check on these schools brazenly finding any way to address the “problem” of “too many Asians” and thinly disguising it under the imprimatur of DEI efforts.

There's a general stereotype of Asians being far too submissive to become leaders and only focused on studies, and Americans are happy to peddle that stereotype to justify discrimination against them.

The reality is that, as you said, Asian Americans have better extracurriculars including leadership than blacks/Hispanics and whites based on the Harvard data, but they still get discriminated.

Then the next stereotype is that they do stereotypically Asian extracurriculars like violin, etc. That is also not true anymore, but what is wrong with being Asian and taking violin? Why is that worse than a black student being part of the track team or Hispanic students being part of the soccer team?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They can’t get rid of athletic preferences or they won’t be able to field a team. It makes no sense.

I still don’t see how colleges won’t be able to still keep doing it with.holistic admissions . The whole process is such a random crapshoot anyway,

Maybe sports really shouldn't be that important to colleges. Much better things to spend the money on.

It's customer-driven, and you don't get to decide where I should spend my money.

what customer? if they want to be business, they should pay taxes like businesses and don't get any State/Federal supports

I am the customer. I am full-pay for multiple kids. I get to choose who gets my money. Others have the same choice. If a school wants that money, they better provide the product I want. Otherwise that money goes to their competitor.

Ok, how much are you paying per year. How much is a football team making from season ticket holders, their conference's TV deal, even donors who only care about football or basketball?

For the elite D3 schools with sports, it's the full-paying customers like me that ensure sports always be there. Those schools will need to ensure that their teams are filled, and athletes will have a preference in admissions.

Money is money. The schools can collect it from the nerds as easily as the jocks.

Feel free to start a nerd school and let us know how it goes. If anyone agreed with you, the market would drive these schools to be "nerd schools". Seems like one Olin is enough to satisfy the need.

What? Who do you think attends the top 20 schools, jocks? Most high school jocks don't even attend college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


I want universities to be blind to everything except academic, and academic-adjacent, achievement. No legacy, athletics, development, family or ethnic background considerations.

If that happens schools like Harvard will cease to be Harvard. What gives the elite schools, especially Ivy League, cultural and social capital in the US is all that you seek to eliminate. I don’t personally care but I recognize the world we live in.

That’s bs. The lure of places like Harvard was the claim that it attracted the best and brightest around the world, and that the US was the top country to migrate to. Now with “holistic” admissions people can see that is not the case, coupled with the US in general decaying. Replacing an emphasis on academic achievement would actually reenergize Harvard.

What you describe is more recent history. The Ivy League brand was not built on the best and the brightest.

Forgot to add: consider Caltech and MIT. Full of smart kids but don’t have the cultural capital of Harvard.

+1000 Who wants to go to an Ivy League with a bunch of kids selected solely for their test scores and grades? The allure and social capital is attending with the people whose families rule the world — Kennedys, Hollywood kids, CEO kids, Supreme Court Justice’s kids, Presidents kids or grandkids, famous musicians kids, etc.

Exactly. All this outrage among certain groups is perplexing. The point of the ivies isn't grinder grades-win-all, but the mixing with the actual, not just aspiring, elite. And all the advantages that leads to for the kids who attend.

There is intense academic pressure and competition at these schools. Sorry but there is not much sitting around hob nobbing with nepo kids. Prepare to work.

I went to two and we worked but mostly hob nobbed. Met my husband, my best friend and a kid who introduced me to his dad who got me my first job. Networking is why you go to Ivys and no offense but Asian Americans will be left out. They do better at schools like MIT.

----
Asians now have a big enough cohort at top colleges that they can network among themselves as well. Silicon Valley and Wall Street now have enough Asians that our kids don't have to depend on racists like you.

Asians in Silicon Valley and Wall Street en masse? LOL! Delusional.

It might not be en masse but Asian partners at firms like Goldman are steadily increasing. Percentage of Asians at quant and VC firms is pretty high so LOL all you want.

"Goldman also promoted a greater share of Asian and Black employees to partner this time around. Asians represent 24% of the new class, up from 17% in 2020. About 9% of new partners are Black, up from 7% two years ago."

Is it a coincidence that at the same time companies are pushing diversity initiatives about who gets promoted and who doesn't? I think not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I remember reading a NYTimes article 12 years ago about when women outnumber men at colleges dating culture becomes skewed. This happened at UNC when they had to favor qualified kids in regardless of gender. It worsened hookup culture. https://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/07/fashion/07campus.html

Clarification, it promoted hookup culture and worsened healthy relationships.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They can’t get rid of athletic preferences or they won’t be able to field a team. It makes no sense.

I still don’t see how colleges won’t be able to still keep doing it with.holistic admissions . The whole process is such a random crapshoot anyway,

Maybe sports really shouldn't be that important to colleges. Much better things to spend the money on.

It's customer-driven, and you don't get to decide where I should spend my money.

what customer? if they want to be business, they should pay taxes like businesses and don't get any State/Federal supports

I am the customer. I am full-pay for multiple kids. I get to choose who gets my money. Others have the same choice. If a school wants that money, they better provide the product I want. Otherwise that money goes to their competitor.

Ok, how much are you paying per year. How much is a football team making from season ticket holders, their conference's TV deal, even donors who only care about football or basketball?

For the elite D3 schools with sports, it's the full-paying customers like me that ensure sports always be there. Those schools will need to ensure that their teams are filled, and athletes will have a preference in admissions.

Money is money. The schools can collect it from the nerds as easily as the jocks.

Feel free to start a nerd school and let us know how it goes. If anyone agreed with you, the market would drive these schools to be "nerd schools". Seems like one Olin is enough to satisfy the need.

What? Who do you think attends the top 20 schools, jocks? Most high school jocks don't even attend college.

T20s tend to be small private schools which tend to have very high percentages of students who are jocks. If you care about elite SLACs, at Williams a third of students are athletes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


I want universities to be blind to everything except academic, and academic-adjacent, achievement. No legacy, athletics, development, family or ethnic background considerations.

If that happens schools like Harvard will cease to be Harvard. What gives the elite schools, especially Ivy League, cultural and social capital in the US is all that you seek to eliminate. I don’t personally care but I recognize the world we live in.

That’s bs. The lure of places like Harvard was the claim that it attracted the best and brightest around the world, and that the US was the top country to migrate to. Now with “holistic” admissions people can see that is not the case, coupled with the US in general decaying. Replacing an emphasis on academic achievement would actually reenergize Harvard.

What you describe is more recent history. The Ivy League brand was not built on the best and the brightest.

Forgot to add: consider Caltech and MIT. Full of smart kids but don’t have the cultural capital of Harvard.

+1000 Who wants to go to an Ivy League with a bunch of kids selected solely for their test scores and grades? The allure and social capital is attending with the people whose families rule the world — Kennedys, Hollywood kids, CEO kids, Supreme Court Justice’s kids, Presidents kids or grandkids, famous musicians kids, etc.

Exactly. All this outrage among certain groups is perplexing. The point of the ivies isn't grinder grades-win-all, but the mixing with the actual, not just aspiring, elite. And all the advantages that leads to for the kids who attend.

There is intense academic pressure and competition at these schools. Sorry but there is not much sitting around hob nobbing with nepo kids. Prepare to work.

I went to two and we worked but mostly hob nobbed. Met my husband, my best friend and a kid who introduced me to his dad who got me my first job. Networking is why you go to Ivys and no offense but Asian Americans will be left out. They do better at schools like MIT.

----
Asians now have a big enough cohort at top colleges that they can network among themselves as well. Silicon Valley and Wall Street now have enough Asians that our kids don't have to depend on racists like you.

Asians in Silicon Valley and Wall Street en masse? LOL! Delusional.

It might not be en masse but Asian partners at firms like Goldman are steadily increasing. Percentage of Asians at quant and VC firms is pretty high so LOL all you want.

"Goldman also promoted a greater share of Asian and Black employees to partner this time around. Asians represent 24% of the new class, up from 17% in 2020. About 9% of new partners are Black, up from 7% two years ago."

Is it a coincidence that at the same time companies are pushing diversity initiatives about who gets promoted and who doesn't? I think not.

You know these diversity measures are not aimed at Asians. But whatever it is, there is a growing large Asian network.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


I want universities to be blind to everything except academic, and academic-adjacent, achievement. No legacy, athletics, development, family or ethnic background considerations.

If that happens schools like Harvard will cease to be Harvard. What gives the elite schools, especially Ivy League, cultural and social capital in the US is all that you seek to eliminate. I don’t personally care but I recognize the world we live in.

That’s bs. The lure of places like Harvard was the claim that it attracted the best and brightest around the world, and that the US was the top country to migrate to. Now with “holistic” admissions people can see that is not the case, coupled with the US in general decaying. Replacing an emphasis on academic achievement would actually reenergize Harvard.

What you describe is more recent history. The Ivy League brand was not built on the best and the brightest.

Forgot to add: consider Caltech and MIT. Full of smart kids but don’t have the cultural capital of Harvard.

+1000 Who wants to go to an Ivy League with a bunch of kids selected solely for their test scores and grades? The allure and social capital is attending with the people whose families rule the world — Kennedys, Hollywood kids, CEO kids, Supreme Court Justice’s kids, Presidents kids or grandkids, famous musicians kids, etc.

Exactly. All this outrage among certain groups is perplexing. The point of the ivies isn't grinder grades-win-all, but the mixing with the actual, not just aspiring, elite. And all the advantages that leads to for the kids who attend.

There is intense academic pressure and competition at these schools. Sorry but there is not much sitting around hob nobbing with nepo kids. Prepare to work.

I went to two and we worked but mostly hob nobbed. Met my husband, my best friend and a kid who introduced me to his dad who got me my first job. Networking is why you go to Ivys and no offense but Asian Americans will be left out. They do better at schools like MIT.

----
Asians now have a big enough cohort at top colleges that they can network among themselves as well. Silicon Valley and Wall Street now have enough Asians that our kids don't have to depend on racists like you.

Asians in Silicon Valley and Wall Street en masse? LOL! Delusional.

It might not be en masse but Asian partners at firms like Goldman are steadily increasing. Percentage of Asians at quant and VC firms is pretty high so LOL all you want.

"Goldman also promoted a greater share of Asian and Black employees to partner this time around. Asians represent 24% of the new class, up from 17% in 2020. About 9% of new partners are Black, up from 7% two years ago."

Is it a coincidence that at the same time companies are pushing diversity initiatives about who gets promoted and who doesn't? I think not.

You know these diversity measures are not aimed at Asians. But whatever it is, there is a growing large Asian network.

Of course they count in these measures.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


I want universities to be blind to everything except academic, and academic-adjacent, achievement. No legacy, athletics, development, family or ethnic background considerations.

If that happens schools like Harvard will cease to be Harvard. What gives the elite schools, especially Ivy League, cultural and social capital in the US is all that you seek to eliminate. I don’t personally care but I recognize the world we live in.

That’s bs. The lure of places like Harvard was the claim that it attracted the best and brightest around the world, and that the US was the top country to migrate to. Now with “holistic” admissions people can see that is not the case, coupled with the US in general decaying. Replacing an emphasis on academic achievement would actually reenergize Harvard.

What you describe is more recent history. The Ivy League brand was not built on the best and the brightest.

Forgot to add: consider Caltech and MIT. Full of smart kids but don’t have the cultural capital of Harvard.

+1000 Who wants to go to an Ivy League with a bunch of kids selected solely for their test scores and grades? The allure and social capital is attending with the people whose families rule the world — Kennedys, Hollywood kids, CEO kids, Supreme Court Justice’s kids, Presidents kids or grandkids, famous musicians kids, etc.

Exactly. All this outrage among certain groups is perplexing. The point of the ivies isn't grinder grades-win-all, but the mixing with the actual, not just aspiring, elite. And all the advantages that leads to for the kids who attend.

There is intense academic pressure and competition at these schools. Sorry but there is not much sitting around hob nobbing with nepo kids. Prepare to work.

I went to two and we worked but mostly hob nobbed. Met my husband, my best friend and a kid who introduced me to his dad who got me my first job. Networking is why you go to Ivys and no offense but Asian Americans will be left out. They do better at schools like MIT.

----
Asians now have a big enough cohort at top colleges that they can network among themselves as well. Silicon Valley and Wall Street now have enough Asians that our kids don't have to depend on racists like you.

Asians in Silicon Valley and Wall Street en masse? LOL! Delusional.

Not delusional - tech companies like Google, Microsoft have Indian CEOs. Both my husband and I went to Ivy leagues and have a broad network of successful classmates both white and non-white who are doing very well in tech and finance. We work on Wall Street. My kids are at an Ivy after attending private NYC schools and are doing great. They seem to be having no problems making friends with people from all races. Fortunately they are smart enough to get great internships without needing help from a classmates' dad.

+1 and who gets a job from a classmate’s dad. Couldn’t cut it with campus recruiting. What a loser.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most fair way is to have comprehensive tests on each subjects, and give every kid a chance to show his/her knowledge (achievement in HS) and learning aptitude (potential). All the soft and subjective criteria result in unfairness.

But soft skills are really important in the workplace. I’d rather hire a slightly less academically inclined person who has a strong EQ. Ability to work with others, integrity, and grit matter a lot in life. I think that is why you see many high performers and CEOs that were not top of their class. Intelligence and academic achievement are not the whole picture.

Academic success is a strong indicator of integrity, grit and the ability to work with others. To claim otherwise is laughable. The top students make study groups, tutor, become teaching assistants, etc. Just because they aren't also playing lacrosse, dancing ballroom, and holding positions in meaningless clubs doesn't mean that they don't have soft skills.

As for CEOs, look at the academic credentials of the top tech company CEOs. The time where being in the same fraternity and having a firm handshake is long gone, something that women should be very happy about ironically.

Bezos - public magnet high school valedictorian, national merit scholar, took STEM programs at University of Florida as a high schooler, summa cum laude with 4.2 GPA at Princeton in electrical engineering and computer science

Zuckerberg - Phillips Exeter with honors, Harvard

Gates - Lakeside Prep, wrote first programs as a 13 year old in the late 1960's, Harvard

The fact is that social skills is very common and easy to develop if you grow up in a healthy environment, because humans are naturally social. Academic skills are not.

Very few students study in groups, tutor or are teaching assistants. It may seem like that from what's portrayed in movies, but it's not so in reality. The ability to work with others, for those who develop it before getting to the workforce, comes from working together in common interests, including sports, band, theater, clubs, etc. Those who hold jobs or internships get those skills there. To say otherwise is to show how little time you've spent in a high school or on a college campus recently.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most fair way is to have comprehensive tests on each subjects, and give every kid a chance to show his/her knowledge (achievement in HS) and learning aptitude (potential). All the soft and subjective criteria result in unfairness.

But soft skills are really important in the workplace. I’d rather hire a slightly less academically inclined person who has a strong EQ. Ability to work with others, integrity, and grit matter a lot in life. I think that is why you see many high performers and CEOs that were not top of their class. Intelligence and academic achievement are not the whole picture.

I agree. But I also agree to the post you cited.
Admitting students based on comprehensive tests gives kids an equal opportunity for getting into suitable education. But getting opportunities for job or future work could be based on academics as well as EQ. They are not the same thing

I also think it’s a horrible misperception that the (largely Asian) students getting top GPAs and test scores are getting rejected because they somehow aren’t participating at high levels in leadership positions and extracurricular activities compared to other groups, but Harvard’s own data shows that this isn’t the case. The EQ is there with these kids. These schools simply just don’t want too many Asians today just like they didn’t want too many Jews in the past, so they are effectively playing into pernicious stereotypes (“They’re just test-taking robots!”) despite claiming to be open-minded and fair. The elite colleges need to come to grips with this. I pretty much don’t agree with anything with this current Supreme Court, but on this particular issue, they may finally end up being the check on these schools brazenly finding any way to address the “problem” of “too many Asians” and thinly disguising it under the imprimatur of DEI efforts.

There's a general stereotype of Asians being far too submissive to become leaders and only focused on studies, and Americans are happy to peddle that stereotype to justify discrimination against them.

The reality is that, as you said, Asian Americans have better extracurriculars including leadership than blacks/Hispanics and whites based on the Harvard data, but they still get discriminated.

Then the next stereotype is that they do stereotypically Asian extracurriculars like violin, etc. That is also not true anymore, but what is wrong with being Asian and taking violin? Why is that worse than a black student being part of the track team or Hispanic students being part of the soccer team?

+1 or football and being black? Or lacrosse and being white?

Still acceptable to have racist stereotypes against Asian Americans, but god save you from progressive liberals if you stereotype a black person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


I want universities to be blind to everything except academic, and academic-adjacent, achievement. No legacy, athletics, development, family or ethnic background considerations.

If that happens schools like Harvard will cease to be Harvard. What gives the elite schools, especially Ivy League, cultural and social capital in the US is all that you seek to eliminate. I don’t personally care but I recognize the world we live in.

That’s bs. The lure of places like Harvard was the claim that it attracted the best and brightest around the world, and that the US was the top country to migrate to. Now with “holistic” admissions people can see that is not the case, coupled with the US in general decaying. Replacing an emphasis on academic achievement would actually reenergize Harvard.

What you describe is more recent history. The Ivy League brand was not built on the best and the brightest.

Forgot to add: consider Caltech and MIT. Full of smart kids but don’t have the cultural capital of Harvard.

+1000 Who wants to go to an Ivy League with a bunch of kids selected solely for their test scores and grades? The allure and social capital is attending with the people whose families rule the world — Kennedys, Hollywood kids, CEO kids, Supreme Court Justice’s kids, Presidents kids or grandkids, famous musicians kids, etc.

Exactly. All this outrage among certain groups is perplexing. The point of the ivies isn't grinder grades-win-all, but the mixing with the actual, not just aspiring, elite. And all the advantages that leads to for the kids who attend.

There is intense academic pressure and competition at these schools. Sorry but there is not much sitting around hob nobbing with nepo kids. Prepare to work.

I went to two and we worked but mostly hob nobbed. Met my husband, my best friend and a kid who introduced me to his dad who got me my first job. Networking is why you go to Ivys and no offense but Asian Americans will be left out. They do better at schools like MIT.

----
Asians now have a big enough cohort at top colleges that they can network among themselves as well. Silicon Valley and Wall Street now have enough Asians that our kids don't have to depend on racists like you.

Asians in Silicon Valley and Wall Street en masse? LOL! Delusional.

It might not be en masse but Asian partners at firms like Goldman are steadily increasing. Percentage of Asians at quant and VC firms is pretty high so LOL all you want.

"Goldman also promoted a greater share of Asian and Black employees to partner this time around. Asians represent 24% of the new class, up from 17% in 2020. About 9% of new partners are Black, up from 7% two years ago."

Is it a coincidence that at the same time companies are pushing diversity initiatives about who gets promoted and who doesn't? I think not.

You know these diversity measures are not aimed at Asians. But whatever it is, there is a growing large Asian network.

In most companies I’ve worked with, it’s about including those who have not been included. On some teams, it may mean that Asians will “count” as diversity and on other teams, they may be told to look for candidates that are diverse in other ways. I’m in financial services and we have some teams that are entirely Asian American, and they are asked to look for diverse hires. It’s about diversity, representation and opportunity. Where that is lacking for Asian Americans, companies will seek to improve it. Where Asian Americans already have opportunities and representation, they will not be a focus. It’s not binary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most fair way is to have comprehensive tests on each subjects, and give every kid a chance to show his/her knowledge (achievement in HS) and learning aptitude (potential). All the soft and subjective criteria result in unfairness.

But soft skills are really important in the workplace. I’d rather hire a slightly less academically inclined person who has a strong EQ. Ability to work with others, integrity, and grit matter a lot in life. I think that is why you see many high performers and CEOs that were not top of their class. Intelligence and academic achievement are not the whole picture.

Academic success is a strong indicator of integrity, grit and the ability to work with others. To claim otherwise is laughable. The top students make study groups, tutor, become teaching assistants, etc. Just because they aren't also playing lacrosse, dancing ballroom, and holding positions in meaningless clubs doesn't mean that they don't have soft skills.

As for CEOs, look at the academic credentials of the top tech company CEOs. The time where being in the same fraternity and having a firm handshake is long gone, something that women should be very happy about ironically.

Bezos - public magnet high school valedictorian, national merit scholar, took STEM programs at University of Florida as a high schooler, summa cum laude with 4.2 GPA at Princeton in electrical engineering and computer science

Zuckerberg - Phillips Exeter with honors, Harvard

Gates - Lakeside Prep, wrote first programs as a 13 year old in the late 1960's, Harvard

The fact is that social skills is very common and easy to develop if you grow up in a healthy environment, because humans are naturally social. Academic skills are not.

What about CEOs outside of tech? Do a Google search. I think you would be surprised. It’s easy to cherry pick the tech CEOs, but there are many other industries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They can’t get rid of athletic preferences or they won’t be able to field a team. It makes no sense.

I still don’t see how colleges won’t be able to still keep doing it with.holistic admissions . The whole process is such a random crapshoot anyway,

Maybe sports really shouldn't be that important to colleges. Much better things to spend the money on.

It's customer-driven, and you don't get to decide where I should spend my money.

what customer? if they want to be business, they should pay taxes like businesses and don't get any State/Federal supports

I am the customer. I am full-pay for multiple kids. I get to choose who gets my money. Others have the same choice. If a school wants that money, they better provide the product I want. Otherwise that money goes to their competitor.

Ok, how much are you paying per year. How much is a football team making from season ticket holders, their conference's TV deal, even donors who only care about football or basketball?

For the elite D3 schools with sports, it's the full-paying customers like me that ensure sports always be there. Those schools will need to ensure that their teams are filled, and athletes will have a preference in admissions.

Money is money. The schools can collect it from the nerds as easily as the jocks.

Feel free to start a nerd school and let us know how it goes. If anyone agreed with you, the market would drive these schools to be "nerd schools". Seems like one Olin is enough to satisfy the need.

What? Who do you think attends the top 20 schools, jocks? Most high school jocks don't even attend college.

Yes. And they tend to be full pay, which makes them even more desirable.