Wealth, privilege and college admissions

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the majority of smartest kids will eventually attend flagship state schools. Ivies will be a thing of the past.

Ivies will remain what it was back before the 1960s -- well connected, mostly very wealthy white families. The very brightest, not connected families will end up in the big flagships.

I think that's where we're heading. Even the bulk professional class is starting to get priced out now. Harvard will be filled with very rich kids, very poor kids, and kids whose parents are willing to go deep into debt

Yes. Schools like Harvard and Yale will effectively become country clubs that run a charity for underprivileged students. Their value and reputation in the public perception will decline over time. The genuine talent will go to other schools - as they already do. But it won't matter to Harvard or Yale because their primary function is to provide networking opportunities for the rich. Wealth begets wealth. And it will continue to self-perpetuate. Socially and intellectually they will whither into mediocrity, which is already happening. But Harvard will always rule Wall Street.

This is already how most of us have seen them for a long time. I wonder what your upbringing was, that you didn’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Harvard’s reputation has been withering for years.

If that were true, fewer people would be applying. The number has been around 60K for the last three years, a big jump from before that. So the market disagrees with you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the majority of smartest kids will eventually attend flagship state schools. Ivies will be a thing of the past.

Ivies will remain what it was back before the 1960s -- well connected, mostly very wealthy white families. The very brightest, not connected families will end up in the big flagships.

I think that's where we're heading. Even the bulk professional class is starting to get priced out now. Harvard will be filled with very rich kids, very poor kids, and kids whose parents are willing to go deep into debt

Yes. Schools like Harvard and Yale will effectively become country clubs that run a charity for underprivileged students. Their value and reputation in the public perception will decline over time. The genuine talent will go to other schools - as they already do. But it won't matter to Harvard or Yale because their primary function is to provide networking opportunities for the rich. Wealth begets wealth. And it will continue to self-perpetuate. Socially and intellectually they will whither into mediocrity, which is already happening. But Harvard will always rule Wall Street.

Which ones? The ones with race blind/ no legacy admissions?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are going to see more and more reports like this, and school like the Big 3 are going to take college admissions hit as a result. It won’t happen overnight, but it will happen. Slowly but surely, it will happen.

https://www.axios.com/local/washington-dc/2023/08/07/georgetown-admissions-advantage-report

I doubt it. Because the big 3 are dominated by wealthy kids. Going to elite colleges. Why would that change? The reports just revealed what was already long known, if unofficially.

Are you dense? Being “long known” is one thing. Being talked about and criticized in the open is another. There will be more and more pressure on colleges to rethink how they evaluate candidates, especially with the demise of race-based admissions. This will only hurt, not help, private school applications.

It’s kinda cool.

It will not change. Someone has to pay for college. These students do. No I do not think there will be any hit. If anything I think this group will grow for most colleges not shrink.

Only if the market crashes. Endowments have ballooned in the past couple of years. If anything, schools now have more freedom to ignore wealth in admissions.

So you actually think that colleges with large endowments are going to “ignore wealth in admissions”? If so, you are incredibly naive.

They are more free to now than ever ever before. MIT JHU CMU and Amherst have already made that decision.

A few schools have/will eliminate legacy admissions. Many won’t. That has nothing to do with the size of the endowments. These schools will continue to disproportionately admit wealthy students (legacy or not).

The schools doing it are the ones who can afford to and it is because their endowments are big enough to support increased financial aid.

the elite schools have enough endowment to at least lower the COA. But they won't, and use the "but we need rich people to pay for the poor" excuse to keep legacy alive.

Those schools do not care about middle class and UMC kids. Tuition is free for poor kids and easily affordable for the rich at elite schools. Academics' disdain for the bourgeoisie is nothing new; it's just that as coa approaches 100k it's now glaringly obvious

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard’s reputation has been withering for years.

If that were true, fewer people would be applying. The number has been around 60K for the last three years, a big jump from before that. So the market disagrees with you.

Their academic reputation had been withering. Not their market value. These are not the same thing.

[Anonymous]

If their academic reputation is "withering," why wouldn't that be reflected in fewer applicants?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m a Yale graduate. I was a regular middle class kid from a public high school (both my parents were teachers, so maybe on the lower edge of upper middle class). I had a very good experience at Yale, got good grades, married a classmate, went to an R1 state university for my PhD, and I have a nice professional life.

Most of my friends from Yale are like me. MC or UMC kids who became professionals. We mostly married each other and we have nice lives.

But, there was another Yale that we had nothing to do with. The Yale that was filled with rich, well-connected kids who all knew each other from prep schools, summer camps, country clubs. They pretty much hung out with each other at Yale and with their high school friends from other colleges. After graduation, they got jobs through connections, worked for family companies, married each other. Where they went to college didn’t really matter. The ones from Yale and the ones who went to Michigan or Emory are all still rich and all still friends.

If your kid wants to go to an Ivy, that is a nice dream and they should pursue it. But, it’s not likely to be transformational. Upper middle class kids are mostly going to become upper middle class adults. Rich, well-connected kids are mostly going to become rich, well-connected adults. A few from each group will float up or down.

I don’t get the obsession with who gets into the Ivy League schools. That is not where class change happens. A Yale full of nice upper middle class kids will mostly produce professionals and academics but not an outsized number of the rich or powerful in society. That is fine but I’m not sure it’s worth fighting each other over.

I went to Dartmouth and this is spot on. A few people crossed boundaries due to sports teams but most of us stayed with the social classes we were born into and are now UMC professionals.

Someone who went to HYPS here and agree. Athletics and engineering were the only real driver of class change that I saw. Hardworking good athletes did extremely well after college. Engineering students also changed course.

But otherwise, no.

Dh went to Yale. I went to Harvard. I do agree that the uber rich kids hung out together and married one another. Dh and I are children of poor immigrants and we ended up marrying one another.

DH is very successful and earns a seven figure income. He is well connected and I don’t think he would have had the same opportunities had he gone to Penn State. We live a very UMC lifestyle. Some people may think we are rich. All would not have been possible had we not done so well academically. This may be an Asian way of thinking. We are taught that education is our ticket.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m a Yale graduate. I was a regular middle class kid from a public high school (both my parents were teachers, so maybe on the lower edge of upper middle class). I had a very good experience at Yale, got good grades, married a classmate, went to an R1 state university for my PhD, and I have a nice professional life.

Most of my friends from Yale are like me. MC or UMC kids who became professionals. We mostly married each other and we have nice lives.

But, there was another Yale that we had nothing to do with. The Yale that was filled with rich, well-connected kids who all knew each other from prep schools, summer camps, country clubs. They pretty much hung out with each other at Yale and with their high school friends from other colleges. After graduation, they got jobs through connections, worked for family companies, married each other. Where they went to college didn’t really matter. The ones from Yale and the ones who went to Michigan or Emory are all still rich and all still friends.

If your kid wants to go to an Ivy, that is a nice dream and they should pursue it. But, it’s not likely to be transformational. Upper middle class kids are mostly going to become upper middle class adults. Rich, well-connected kids are mostly going to become rich, well-connected adults. A few from each group will float up or down.

I don’t get the obsession with who gets into the Ivy League schools. That is not where class change happens. A Yale full of nice upper middle class kids will mostly produce professionals and academics but not an outsized number of the rich or powerful in society. That is fine but I’m not sure it’s worth fighting each other over.

I went to Dartmouth and this is spot on. A few people crossed boundaries due to sports teams but most of us stayed with the social classes we were born into and are now UMC professionals.

Someone who went to HYPS here and agree. Athletics and engineering were the only real driver of class change that I saw. Hardworking good athletes did extremely well after college. Engineering students also changed course.

But otherwise, no.

Dh went to Yale. I went to Harvard. I do agree that the uber rich kids hung out together and married one another. Dh and I are children of poor immigrants and we ended up marrying one another.

DH is very successful and earns a seven figure income. He is well connected and I don’t think he would have had the same opportunities had he gone to Penn State. We live a very UMC lifestyle. Some people may think we are rich. All would not have been possible had we not done so well academically. This may be an Asian way of thinking. We are taught that education is our ticket.

It’s not just Asians. My mom’s choices were to be a teacher or a nurse and then a stay at home mom. My dad had no college. I went to MIT and Stanford Law. DH went to a great state school, crushed it at a top 10 MBA program (his parents were just like mine) and we both now make mid-seven figures. My daughters are what the target should be - hard workers who are really smart from stable, highly successful families. They have great grades, great sports, great service engagement, etc etc. The best schools should be fighting for them. If doing what we did (coming from nowhere with no hooks) hurts my kids, then feminism has been poorly served.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the majority of smartest kids attend flagship state schools. Ivies will be a thing of the past.

I think the actual numbers have long supported this slight revision. Ivies have not been harmed.

[Anonymous]

harmed

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m a Yale graduate. I was a regular middle class kid from a public high school (both my parents were teachers, so maybe on the lower edge of upper middle class). I had a very good experience at Yale, got good grades, married a classmate, went to an R1 state university for my PhD, and I have a nice professional life.

Most of my friends from Yale are like me. MC or UMC kids who became professionals. We mostly married each other and we have nice lives.

But, there was another Yale that we had nothing to do with. The Yale that was filled with rich, well-connected kids who all knew each other from prep schools, summer camps, country clubs. They pretty much hung out with each other at Yale and with their high school friends from other colleges. After graduation, they got jobs through connections, worked for family companies, married each other. Where they went to college didn’t really matter. The ones from Yale and the ones who went to Michigan or Emory are all still rich and all still friends.

If your kid wants to go to an Ivy, that is a nice dream and they should pursue it. But, it’s not likely to be transformational. Upper middle class kids are mostly going to become upper middle class adults. Rich, well-connected kids are mostly going to become rich, well-connected adults. A few from each group will float up or down.

I don’t get the obsession with who gets into the Ivy League schools. That is not where class change happens. A Yale full of nice upper middle class kids will mostly produce professionals and academics but not an outsized number of the rich or powerful in society. That is fine but I’m not sure it’s worth fighting each other over.

I went to Dartmouth and this is spot on. A few people crossed boundaries due to sports teams but most of us stayed with the social classes we were born into and are now UMC professionals.

Someone who went to HYPS here and agree. Athletics and engineering were the only real driver of class change that I saw. Hardworking good athletes did extremely well after college. Engineering students also changed course.

But otherwise, no.

Dh went to Yale. I went to Harvard. I do agree that the uber rich kids hung out together and married one another. Dh and I are children of poor immigrants and we ended up marrying one another.

DH is very successful and earns a seven figure income. He is well connected and I don’t think he would have had the same opportunities had he gone to Penn State. We live a very UMC lifestyle. Some people may think we are rich. All would not have been possible had we not done so well academically. This may be an Asian way of thinking. We are taught that education is our ticket.

It’s not just Asians. My mom’s choices were to be a teacher or a nurse and then a stay at home mom. My dad had no college. I went to MIT and Stanford Law. DH went to a great state school, crushed it at a top 10 MBA program (his parents were just like mine) and we both now make mid-seven figures. My daughters are what the target should be - hard workers who are really smart from stable, highly successful families. They have great grades, great sports, great service engagement, etc etc. The best schools should be fighting for them. If doing what we did (coming from nowhere with no hooks) hurts my kids, then feminism has been poorly served.

Only on DCUM would a couple making mid seven figures each think they are middle class victims.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m a Yale graduate. I was a regular middle class kid from a public high school (both my parents were teachers, so maybe on the lower edge of upper middle class). I had a very good experience at Yale, got good grades, married a classmate, went to an R1 state university for my PhD, and I have a nice professional life.

Most of my friends from Yale are like me. MC or UMC kids who became professionals. We mostly married each other and we have nice lives.

But, there was another Yale that we had nothing to do with. The Yale that was filled with rich, well-connected kids who all knew each other from prep schools, summer camps, country clubs. They pretty much hung out with each other at Yale and with their high school friends from other colleges. After graduation, they got jobs through connections, worked for family companies, married each other. Where they went to college didn’t really matter. The ones from Yale and the ones who went to Michigan or Emory are all still rich and all still friends.

If your kid wants to go to an Ivy, that is a nice dream and they should pursue it. But, it’s not likely to be transformational. Upper middle class kids are mostly going to become upper middle class adults. Rich, well-connected kids are mostly going to become rich, well-connected adults. A few from each group will float up or down.

I don’t get the obsession with who gets into the Ivy League schools. That is not where class change happens. A Yale full of nice upper middle class kids will mostly produce professionals and academics but not an outsized number of the rich or powerful in society. That is fine but I’m not sure it’s worth fighting each other over.

Yes, this is very true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If their academic reputation is "withering," why wouldn't that be reflected in fewer applicants?

Not the ones who mostly care about the name.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m a Yale graduate. I was a regular middle class kid from a public high school (both my parents were teachers, so maybe on the lower edge of upper middle class). I had a very good experience at Yale, got good grades, married a classmate, went to an R1 state university for my PhD, and I have a nice professional life.

Most of my friends from Yale are like me. MC or UMC kids who became professionals. We mostly married each other and we have nice lives.

But, there was another Yale that we had nothing to do with. The Yale that was filled with rich, well-connected kids who all knew each other from prep schools, summer camps, country clubs. They pretty much hung out with each other at Yale and with their high school friends from other colleges. After graduation, they got jobs through connections, worked for family companies, married each other. Where they went to college didn’t really matter. The ones from Yale and the ones who went to Michigan or Emory are all still rich and all still friends.

If your kid wants to go to an Ivy, that is a nice dream and they should pursue it. But, it’s not likely to be transformational. Upper middle class kids are mostly going to become upper middle class adults. Rich, well-connected kids are mostly going to become rich, well-connected adults. A few from each group will float up or down.

I don’t get the obsession with who gets into the Ivy League schools. That is not where class change happens. A Yale full of nice upper middle class kids will mostly produce professionals and academics but not an outsized number of the rich or powerful in society. That is fine but I’m not sure it’s worth fighting each other over.

I went to Dartmouth and this is spot on. A few people crossed boundaries due to sports teams but most of us stayed with the social classes we were born into and are now UMC professionals.

Someone who went to HYPS here and agree. Athletics and engineering were the only real driver of class change that I saw. Hardworking good athletes did extremely well after college. Engineering students also changed course.

But otherwise, no.

Dh went to Yale. I went to Harvard. I do agree that the uber rich kids hung out together and married one another. Dh and I are children of poor immigrants and we ended up marrying one another.

DH is very successful and earns a seven figure income. He is well connected and I don’t think he would have had the same opportunities had he gone to Penn State. We live a very UMC lifestyle. Some people may think we are rich. All would not have been possible had we not done so well academically. This may be an Asian way of thinking. We are taught that education is our ticket.

It’s not just Asians. My mom’s choices were to be a teacher or a nurse and then a stay at home mom. My dad had no college. I went to MIT and Stanford Law. DH went to a great state school, crushed it at a top 10 MBA program (his parents were just like mine) and we both now make mid-seven figures. My daughters are what the target should be - hard workers who are really smart from stable, highly successful families. They have great grades, great sports, great service engagement, etc etc. The best schools should be fighting for them. If doing what we did (coming from nowhere with no hooks) hurts my kids, then feminism has been poorly served.

Only on DCUM would a couple making mid seven figures each think they are middle class victims.

Not PP, but this is because when previous Yale grad posted about the rich kids marrying within that social class, I’m assuming he/she meant really, really rich. Like billionaires or close-to. No one is claiming to be a victim here, but it’s a different kind of life and mindset. I’ve seen more cross-class marriages in my Yale class that are not sports related. But still fairly few.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If their academic reputation is "withering," why wouldn't that be reflected in fewer applicants?

Not the ones who mostly care about the name.

How can the "name" carry any value when its academic reputation is purportedly withering?