Where are my 90s era Harvard classmates sending their kids?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Another Ivy for hockey.

Me again. Specifically, 3 went to other Ivies for sports (hockey and swimming) and 2 went to D3 schools for sports.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What this shows is that getting into Harvard used to be immensely easier. People who went to Harvard in the 90s wouldn’t be in at anywhere comparable today.

It’s not harder or easier per se, but the grade inflation is making the signals of quality very noisy. A few decades ago, the high school grades already helped the admissions pick the outstanding (academically) students pretty accurately. In addition, applicants these days are supposed to play victim and write a sob story about what kind of hardship they have gone through and how they have overcome their hardship and what lessons they have learned. It’s like everyone is applying for a script writing major!

Wrong. It is easier. Harvard used to have a much higher admission rate. In 1988, it was 14.6% and less than 15,000 applications.

https://www.thecrimson.com/article/1988/7/8/freshman-class-sets-application-records-pthe/

In 2025, there was a 3.43% acceptance rate out of 57,435 apps.

https://features.thecrimson.com/2021/freshman-survey/makeup-narrative/#:~:text=This%20year%2C%20the%20College's%20acceptance,totals%20a%20historic%201%2C965%20students.

In 1988, you had to type out your application on a typewriter. The lower acceptance rate is as much a function of the improved ease of application as it is anything else. The denominator changed more than the numerator.

Tell me you grew up with enough money to pay for college without telling me you grew up with enough money to pay for college.

What does that mean? Kids who applied to state schools also had to fill out applications on a typewriter.

you're missing her point, Harvard grad. everyone had to type applications. but there were fewer apps to HYP because there wasn't robust FA unless you were dirt poor - and usually a minority. The ol' barbell. That cut out 80% of the competition. Those kids went to University of Illinois or whatever (with a typed application). The typing wasn't the limiting factor, it was tuition. Now with that barrier gone, it's a tougher admit even for families who can pay it.

[Anonymous]

We are another Harvard-Harvard couple. Our kids are at Harvard and Vandy with the third likely going to a lower ranked school.
Of our friends, off the top of my head:
Harvard
UVA
Cornell
Colby
NYU
Williams
Bowdoin
Pitzer
Colorado College
MIT
Michigan
Vandy
UVA

[Anonymous]

I think parents and their kids are a lot more practical in their college selections these days. Not all, but I would say the majority. They look for what schools are best for what their kid wants to study. The program itself at that particular school and the ability to best place in in that field upon graduation.

[Anonymous]

Harvard-Harvard couple: DC was deferred ED to Tufts, accepted at McGill. Waiting on RD.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Past few years have seen the children of all my Harvard 1990-something classmates head off to college. Where have they chosen to go? here’s the list so far:

University of Virginia
Wake Forest
Auburn
Sewanee
Duke
Tulane
SMU

I am sensing a pattern here…

Someone is running out of people to tell he went to Harvard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What this shows is that getting into Harvard used to be immensely easier. People who went to Harvard in the 90s wouldn’t be in at anywhere comparable today.

It’s not harder or easier per se, but the grade inflation is making the signals of quality very noisy. A few decades ago, the high school grades already helped the admissions pick the outstanding (academically) students pretty accurately. In addition, applicants these days are supposed to play victim and write a sob story about what kind of hardship they have gone through and how they have overcome their hardship and what lessons they have learned. It’s like everyone is applying for a script writing major!

Wrong. It is easier. Harvard used to have a much higher admission rate. In 1988, it was 14.6% and less than 15,000 applications.

https://www.thecrimson.com/article/1988/7/8/freshman-class-sets-application-records-pthe/

In 2025, there was a 3.43% acceptance rate out of 57,435 apps.

https://features.thecrimson.com/2021/freshman-survey/makeup-narrative/#:~:text=This%20year%2C%20the%20College's%20acceptance,totals%20a%20historic%201%2C965%20students.

In 1988, you had to type out your application on a typewriter. The lower acceptance rate is as much a function of the improved ease of application as it is anything else. The denominator changed more than the numerator.

Also there is just a larger population in general, more people aware of elite schools, and about the same amount of spots.

And academically elite children of immigrants crowding out mediocre legacies.

Go back where you came from with your "mediocre". You are all ruining it. That word is almost as cliche as "woke." Your kids with their 18 APs and violin, chess, fencing, and zero social skills. They will go to these schools and study 24/7 and add nothing to the experience, then not be able to get jobs because they can't interview. Or they will rebel from their obnoxious parents and spend their four years stoned and drunk. Which is the preferable outcome.

Stop stereotyping. We can read the sub-text. There are plenty of Harvard grads who fit the above profile are doing things differently with their kids after a generation of exposure/assimilation (and hanging out with legacies and seeing how their families do it).

[Anonymous]

My Harvard alum friends sent their kids to

Wash U
UCLA
Rice
Tufts



Only one of those kids actually applied to Harvard though (rejected) The other kids did apply to t5-8 schools, also rejected

Princeton parent -> Tufts, Yale

Yale parent -> Michigan, Emory

Fwiw, all of the offspring i described are white, non athletes
,

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are lots of parents now who are realizing they "outkicked the coverage" (football term) - by going to super elite schools they actually made it harder for their kids. My spouse and I both went to TT schools. Our kid is extremely smart and in our generation would have gotten in, but it is harder now. With a legacy preference they would be a shoo-in for the schools just below ours, but they don't have that. So now we scramble.

The process is completely awful and screwed up. And I don't know what the answer is. Other than finding out a way to get rid of all of the yield management the schools are doing which has turned it into an awful game.

I agree with this. I went to Harvard but my kid was deferred Duke ED even with very top stats and great ECs. I have a feeling that if I was a Duke alum, my kid would have gotten in. If I had to do it again, I probably should have gone to Duke also and had more fun (and given my future kids an advantage too).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The pattern being regression to the mean.

I thought the pattern identified would be warm weather.

I thought the pattern would be bro culture/where one can be a MOTU/letterman/all-rounder type man

Also, Harvard grads living south of New York city are going to have a different geographic distribution to where their kids want to head.

Supposedly there still are some acceptance rate advantages to being a Massachusetts local/from Boston feeder schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What this shows is that getting into Harvard used to be immensely easier. People who went to Harvard in the 90s wouldn’t be in at anywhere comparable today.

It’s not harder or easier per se, but the grade inflation is making the signals of quality very noisy. A few decades ago, the high school grades already helped the admissions pick the outstanding (academically) students pretty accurately. In addition, applicants these days are supposed to play victim and write a sob story about what kind of hardship they have gone through and how they have overcome their hardship and what lessons they have learned. It’s like everyone is applying for a script writing major!

Wrong. It is easier. Harvard used to have a much higher admission rate. In 1988, it was 14.6% and less than 15,000 applications.

https://www.thecrimson.com/article/1988/7/8/freshman-class-sets-application-records-pthe/

In 2025, there was a 3.43% acceptance rate out of 57,435 apps.

https://features.thecrimson.com/2021/freshman-survey/makeup-narrative/#:~:text=This%20year%2C%20the%20College's%20acceptance,totals%20a%20historic%201%2C965%20students.

In 1988, you had to type out your application on a typewriter. The lower acceptance rate is as much a function of the improved ease of application as it is anything else. The denominator changed more than the numerator.

Tell me you grew up with enough money to pay for college without telling me you grew up with enough money to pay for college.

What does that mean? Kids who applied to state schools also had to fill out applications on a typewriter.

you're missing her point, Harvard grad. everyone had to type applications. but there were fewer apps to HYP because there wasn't robust FA unless you were dirt poor - and usually a minority. The ol' barbell. That cut out 80% of the competition. Those kids went to University of Illinois or whatever (with a typed application). The typing wasn't the limiting factor, it was tuition. Now with that barrier gone, it's a tougher admit even for families who can pay it.

I went to a T10 that wasn't Harvard in the late 80s/early 90s. My school met full need, and plenty of my friends were there, in part, because with aid the school was cheaper than their in state option.

Did Harvard really not have robust aid then?

[Anonymous]

This convo reminds me of my friend I graduated HS with 25 years ago. Her parents and step-parents all went to Harvard for undergrad and multiple law degrees. It was her dream. She was waitlisted, then offered admission the following year, so she would take a gap year.

In the meantime, she was also accepted to Northwestern. But she turned it down to go to Spain for a year and then attend Harvard. Her father was PISSED. He was like, Northwestern is a perfectly wonderful school, no reason to delay college to go to Harvard.

But she did go to Harvard, has had a wonderful career and met such a nice guy. All's well that ends well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What this shows is that getting into Harvard used to be immensely easier. People who went to Harvard in the 90s wouldn’t be in at anywhere comparable today.

of course it was. there was a paper out studying this some time back - if you had enough money/social capital to know about and pay for SAT prep course, you're chance of admissions to Harvard was triple than pool. This was true in the. 80s and first half of the 90s. Never mind private tutoring in high school. I literally never heard of that when I was in HS. Sal Kahn really ruined everything!

There were SAT prep books in 1985. I think they were Stanley Kaplan. Princeton Review books appeared in time for my grad exam prepping. My husband lived in a low income area and they had a cursory prep class available taught by a teacher in 1987.

I didn't know anybody who took an expensive class at a center or who had a private tutor. We also were led to believe that you could not game the test and it was somewhat dependent on your inherent intellect and years of learning. Princeton Review broke me of that mindset and helped me from 85th percentile math to 98th percentile math on GMAT.

I am still marveling about superscoring as practiced now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What this shows is that getting into Harvard used to be immensely easier. People who went to Harvard in the 90s wouldn’t be in at anywhere comparable today.

It’s not harder or easier per se, but the grade inflation is making the signals of quality very noisy. A few decades ago, the high school grades already helped the admissions pick the outstanding (academically) students pretty accurately. In addition, applicants these days are supposed to play victim and write a sob story about what kind of hardship they have gone through and how they have overcome their hardship and what lessons they have learned. It’s like everyone is applying for a script writing major!

Wrong. It is easier. Harvard used to have a much higher admission rate. In 1988, it was 14.6% and less than 15,000 applications.

https://www.thecrimson.com/article/1988/7/8/freshman-class-sets-application-records-pthe/

In 2025, there was a 3.43% acceptance rate out of 57,435 apps.

https://features.thecrimson.com/2021/freshman-survey/makeup-narrative/#:~:text=This%20year%2C%20the%20College's%20acceptance,totals%20a%20historic%201%2C965%20students.

In 1988, you had to type out your application on a typewriter. The lower acceptance rate is as much a function of the improved ease of application as it is anything else. The denominator changed more than the numerator.

Right. I applied to four colleges/universities. My kids applied to nine to 15.

I applied to 9 in 1989.

Affluent areas in the NE took college apps seriously, even back then.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What this shows is that getting into Harvard used to be immensely easier. People who went to Harvard in the 90s wouldn’t be in at anywhere comparable today.

of course it was. there was a paper out studying this some time back - if you had enough money/social capital to know about and pay for SAT prep course, you're chance of admissions to Harvard was triple than pool. This was true in the. 80s and first half of the 90s. Never mind private tutoring in high school. I literally never heard of that when I was in HS. Sal Kahn really ruined everything!

There were SAT prep books in 1985. I think they were Stanley Kaplan. Princeton Review books appeared in time for my grad exam prepping. My husband lived in a low income area and they had a cursory prep class available taught by a teacher in 1987.

I didn't know anybody who took an expensive class at a center or who had a private tutor. We also were led to believe that you could not game the test and it was somewhat dependent on your inherent intellect and years of learning. Princeton Review broke me of that mindset and helped me from 85th percentile math to 98th percentile math on GMAT.

I am still marveling about superscoring as practiced now.

We had an SAT prep class at my public HS back in HS in the 80s. And people took it multiple times and referred to their superscore (though it wasn’t called that then).