Why is it so hard to accept that the students at better colleges are simply better students?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you believe that all institutions are interchangeable and one has nothing to offer over the other, I am not sure that you have access to really high quality opportunities. All schools are actually not created equal. A student can try make the most out of any college but they are not all the same by any means

No, a branch campus of a state school can't equal HYPS. But the difference in quality of education between elites and their safeties is minimal to nonexistent. This was shown to be true financially by Dale and Kruger, and in other respects by Where You Go is not Who You'll Be (Frank Bruni), Less High School Stress (cited here frequently), plain common sense from observing life, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here are the 50 smartest colleges in America
based on test scores before the pandemic when test score was mandatory.

https://www.businessinsider.com/the-50-smartest-colleges-in-america-2016-10

Franklin W. Olin College of Engineering?

One of the smartest people I've ever known, and I went to another school on that list, went to Olin. He ended up with a PhD from MIT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here are the 50 smartest colleges in America
based on test scores before the pandemic when test score was mandatory.

https://www.businessinsider.com/the-50-smartest-colleges-in-america-2016-10

Franklin W. Olin College of Engineering?

You’ve never heard of Olin!We toured but DS picked something else. Liked it a lot.


Anyhow, the Business Insider piece is garbage. All they did was rank in order of average SAT. That’s all they did. Because idiots think the rankings mean something which jn turn sells advertising

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Before you accuse me of being a snob or an elitist, I will start by saying that I went to a pretty bad college; one that accepts students with C minus averages and whose 4-year-graduation rate is less than 20 percent. The first piece of evidence that students at worse colleges are generally worse students is the obvious fact that we got into colleges like this in the first place. In my case, you don't even need to look at where I went to college in order to know that I was a bad student in high school; just the fact that I graduated with a B average and 6 AP credits is proof enough.

The next piece of evidence that students at worse colleges are generally worse students is the fact that the 4-year-graduate rates at these colleges are much lower. This seems like it should also be pretty self-explanatory, in that they failed to graduate in 4 years for the same reason they couldn't get into a better college. Notice that I've switched the tense to "third-person" because this doesn't apply to me; I was in the <20 percent of students who graduated in 4 years. And yet, I constantly hear excuses made for these students, namely that they have to work. Well, I had a job in college even though I didn't have to, and I still graduated on time. Also, I visited the campus of a top-ranked college with a >99% graduation rate, and saw that there was a tutoring center there where students could work and tutor other students, which means that there are plenty of students at the college who also work and graduate on time.

Also, it's much easier to graduate from these worse colleges in 4 years or less because they take all your AP credits. So the fact that students who go to worse colleges generally have a harder time graduating in 4 years even though the road to graduating on time is easier at said colleges really proves that they are worse students.

I was "first gen" from a poor family. My parents said they could pay for me if I went to [School X] that basically took most applicants. I had nearly all A's, extracurriculars, leadership positions, and worked every available minute from the time I turned 14 (because we were poor). So that's where I went (and then they ended up not paying but I didn't want to lose credits transferring).

The premise that kids go to lesser colleges only b/c they are lesser students to begin with is flawed from the start.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well better colleges used to have better students. Now I don’t believe it any more. Too many athletes, legacy, and social projects at top colleges. I have confidence only in a few colleges like MIT like Carnegie Mellon.

LOL. You think there are MORE athletes and legacy students today?

[Anonymous]

Often the variances are larger than the differences between the averages, which doesn't render the difference in averages moot, but makes it less important than it initially might seem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Okay but why should I, as an employer, GAF who is the best student? I don’t have any jobs for studying and taking tests. I need to know who is the best project manager and best salesperson and best communicator. Mind you, I do think student quality has some overlap with the skills I’m looking for, but you’re the one talking about the “best students.”

I find the obsession over where a person spends 4 years of their life really odd. Especially in the DMV, people seem to take more about predictors of success than actual… success.

And before you accuse me of being a naive populist, I went to Northwestern.

You really shouldn't be posting that kind of information online. This is supposed to be anonymous, and since so few people went to Northwestern, revealing that you went there greatly narrows down the possibilities of who you might be. If you just said you went to a top-ranked college, that would make it much harder for people to track you down, but since each individual top-ranked college has precious few students, revealing which top-ranked college you went to can make you easily identifiable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here are the 50 smartest colleges in America
based on test scores before the pandemic when test score was mandatory.

https://www.businessinsider.com/the-50-smartest-colleges-in-america-2016-10

Franklin W. Olin College of Engineering?

Most people on DCUM never heard of MIT, either- before having access to the internet.

OP I find you posts consistently divisive, intentionally misleading, and quite rude.

You obviously have quite a large chip on your shoulder.

If you have so many issues with “better schools”, consider (more/different) therapy.

To be fair, Olin is a very niche school with a total number of undergrad students less than 400.
So it's naturally more unknown compared to other usual schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well better colleges used to have better students. Now I don’t believe it any more. Too many athletes, legacy, and social projects at top colleges. I have confidence only in a few colleges like MIT like Carnegie Mellon.

Don't forget Caltech. I think MIT eliminated legacy but they still have affirmative action.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Many drop out because they run out if money. Are people with more money better than poor people?

I think it is a little more complicated than your offensive take on things.

I was a dorm RA at a state school. Students on full means based scholarships failed out every semester. Kids literally paid to go to college. They were just flat out dumb and lazy. They likely tested at an elementary or middle school capacity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many drop out because they run out if money. Are people with more money better than poor people?

I think it is a little more complicated than your offensive take on things.

I was a dorm RA at a state school. Students on full means based scholarships failed out every semester. Kids literally paid to go to college. They were just flat out dumb and lazy. They likely tested at an elementary or middle school capacity.

Some poor people lack important skills/knowledge or struggle with comfortably assimilating into college life. They may have more bad things going on at home that are distracting them. There’s more to succeeding at college than just being smart, and colleges who don’t give strong support to need-based students, URMs, first-gens, etc. are missing a VITAL part of the process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well better colleges used to have better students. Now I don’t believe it any more. Too many athletes, legacy, and social projects at top colleges. I have confidence only in a few colleges like MIT like Carnegie Mellon.

The ability to pay used to be the biggest factor in who went where. Schools guaranteeing to meet 100% of demonstrated aid have eliminated that factor. The smartest kid that I knew from high school only applied to our state flagship because that was all the family could afford.

[Anonymous]

It’s not. Everyone knows this. In fact, it’s obvious.

[Anonymous]

A friend’s DD was accepted to Yale last year. They are middle class. She is not going to Yale due to $$. You will say “anecdata!” but there it is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We know this isn’t true. Look at the Harvard and UNC lawsuits. Look at TJ’s new admissions standards. Look at the criminal spotlight on rich people buying their kids spots at schools. If it was purely based on a kid being a better student, first generation, minorities, legacies, sports, etc. wouldn’t matter. They do and it means often the smartest kids are excluded somewhere because another student with non academic pros beats him out.

And…that is life. Life is not fair.