Are Ivy League Schools Becoming More or Less Popular?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why attend Penn where you have so many neurotic people from Long Island, tri state or Florida when you can attend CU boulder where there is fresh mountain air, healthy sporty attractive students in an effortless manner, ski, chillaxing etc?

Tell me you’re an anti-Semite without saying you’re an anti-Semite.

I didn’t know trump was Jewish. Everything i wrote described trump (penn alum) and trump types.

You are the antisemite for jumping to conclusions

Who mentioned Trump?

You said neurotic, Long Island, Tri-state and Florida. Gee what can that mean? And you picked the most Jewish Ivy.

Then you contrasted it with a Coors commercial by randomly comparing it to Boulder, evoking images of healthy Aryans at play in the mountains.

We may be neurotic and non-sporty but we ain’t stupid!

Those are all trump descriptors

He literally is Long Island (queens is on Long Island), from the tri state and now from Florida and he went to Penn!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I went to MIT 30 years ago and took a couple classes at Harvard. I didn't think the Harvard kids were especially impressive. I think MIT admission rate was in the 35% range, so not especially impressive although IME more self selecting for a mathy brain, not just a rich-ish brain.

In the 30 years since that time, I've met a million smart people and the idea that the smartest people are from HYP is laughable. Maybe you work in an industry that doesn't attract smart people

I had people like you in our class. And we thought you were dumb.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ivies used to have a monopoly or close to it in the smartest kids, so it was a useful signal, but nowadays the gap between these elite schools and so called second tier schools is very narrow. Just look at standardized test data. Plus there is the recognition that while half the class at Ivies are top notch students, the other half are hooked, beneficiaries of woke policies, etc.

For example, the intellectual gap between the average Ivy League student and the average SLAC student is minor at this point. Thirty years ago it was more significant.

How stupid are you? Do you know how many recruited athletes are at SLACs? You think they don’t have DEI? I mean make an argument but try one that isn’t so dumb.

The argument is that a kid who went to say Bowdoin or Michigan OOS 30 years ago was not usually of the same caliber academically as a kid who went to Yale. Now that difference has become much smaller. It’s a supply demand thing. To illustrate with hypothetical numbers, there used to be 1000 elite students (basically similar aptitude) applying to colleges and the Ivies etc had 1000 seats. Now there are 2000 elite students and 1100 seats. So there is more overflow into the other schools. The difference between a Hamilton kid and a Brown kid was big in 1995. Now there really isn’t one.

No that wasn’t the argument. The argument is that Ivy League students are being dumbed down. That’s the explanation for the lack of a gap.

Your take might be true a limited number of SLACs. But hey if it makes you feel better about your Grinnell or Hamilton kid by all means stay in your fantasyland.

It was a combination. Due to affluence and demographics, we have more supply of “elite” students. Due to DEI, we have more seats (half?) at Ivy League and all top schools allocated to kids for non-meritocratic reasons. So it’s like musical chairs. More kids are playing and there are fewer seats. The result is the Ivies cannot absorb all the elite students and they flow down to schools historically seen as second tier. As a result the difference in the quality of the student body at second tier now is pretty minor if it exists at all. 30 years ago the kid who got 1500 would get into Yale and the kid who got 1240 would get into Colby. Today it is the kid who got 1540 gets into Yale and the kid who got 1500 gets into Colby. Do you understand?

Anyone who has been through this process realizes this when you see which kids land where and why. For the most part the kids from high income backgrounds going to ivies as opposed to the next level down are athletes, legacies or otherwise hooked.

You assume your kid is elite because they’re upper middle class and white. The fact that your kid attends Hamilton doesn’t make it true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not in terms of just number of applications they receive, but in terms of general recognition by the public. For example, it feels like "Ivy League" is used all over movies and TV because it's a very convenient shorthand for "good colleges." Even a school like Cornell probably benefits from just being associated. Does this leave behind other great schools like Stanford and Duke in popular recognition who don't get on the big screen as much because they aren't technically Ivies?

I think internet informed common people about non-ivy elite colleges, specially ones located out of east/west coast bubbles, like Vanderbilt, Rice, Northwestern etc.

[Anonymous]

Now its about T20 not just Ivy8.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why attend Penn where you have so many neurotic people from Long Island, tri state or Florida when you can attend CU boulder where there is fresh mountain air, healthy sporty attractive students in an effortless manner, ski, chillaxing etc?

Tell me you’re an anti-Semite without saying you’re an anti-Semite.

I didn’t know trump was Jewish. Everything i wrote described trump (penn alum) and trump types.

You are the antisemite for jumping to conclusions

Who mentioned Trump?

You said neurotic, Long Island, Tri-state and Florida. Gee what can that mean? And you picked the most Jewish Ivy.

Then you contrasted it with a Coors commercial by randomly comparing it to Boulder, evoking images of healthy Aryans at play in the mountains.

We may be neurotic and non-sporty but we ain’t stupid!

Those are all trump descriptors

He literally is Long Island (queens is on Long Island), from the tri state and now from Florida and he went to Penn!

More like Woody Allen descriptors

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ivies used to have a monopoly or close to it in the smartest kids, so it was a useful signal, but nowadays the gap between these elite schools and so called second tier schools is very narrow. Just look at standardized test data. Plus there is the recognition that while half the class at Ivies are top notch students, the other half are hooked, beneficiaries of woke policies, etc.

For example, the intellectual gap between the average Ivy League student and the average SLAC student is minor at this point. Thirty years ago it was more significant.

How stupid are you? Do you know how many recruited athletes are at SLACs? You think they don’t have DEI? I mean make an argument but try one that isn’t so dumb.

The argument is that a kid who went to say Bowdoin or Michigan OOS 30 years ago was not usually of the same caliber academically as a kid who went to Yale. Now that difference has become much smaller. It’s a supply demand thing. To illustrate with hypothetical numbers, there used to be 1000 elite students (basically similar aptitude) applying to colleges and the Ivies etc had 1000 seats. Now there are 2000 elite students and 1100 seats. So there is more overflow into the other schools. The difference between a Hamilton kid and a Brown kid was big in 1995. Now there really isn’t one.

No that wasn’t the argument. The argument is that Ivy League students are being dumbed down. That’s the explanation for the lack of a gap.

Your take might be true a limited number of SLACs. But hey if it makes you feel better about your Grinnell or Hamilton kid by all means stay in your fantasyland.

It was a combination. Due to affluence and demographics, we have more supply of “elite” students. Due to DEI, we have more seats (half?) at Ivy League and all top schools allocated to kids for non-meritocratic reasons. So it’s like musical chairs. More kids are playing and there are fewer seats. The result is the Ivies cannot absorb all the elite students and they flow down to schools historically seen as second tier. As a result the difference in the quality of the student body at second tier now is pretty minor if it exists at all. 30 years ago the kid who got 1500 would get into Yale and the kid who got 1240 would get into Colby. Today it is the kid who got 1540 gets into Yale and the kid who got 1500 gets into Colby. Do you understand?

Anyone who has been through this process realizes this when you see which kids land where and why. For the most part the kids from high income backgrounds going to ivies as opposed to the next level down are athletes, legacies or otherwise hooked.

You assume your kid is elite because they’re upper middle class and white. The fact that your kid attends Hamilton doesn’t make it true.

I literally know these kids. The ones who got into Ivies this year, the ones who landed at “second tier.” The difference isn’t huge, largely a function of the usual bs (sports, hooks, legacy, etc). They are all excellent students with high scores.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ivies used to have a monopoly or close to it in the smartest kids, so it was a useful signal, but nowadays the gap between these elite schools and so called second tier schools is very narrow. Just look at standardized test data. Plus there is the recognition that while half the class at Ivies are top notch students, the other half are hooked, beneficiaries of woke policies, etc.

For example, the intellectual gap between the average Ivy League student and the average SLAC student is minor at this point. Thirty years ago it was more significant.

How stupid are you? Do you know how many recruited athletes are at SLACs? You think they don’t have DEI? I mean make an argument but try one that isn’t so dumb.

The argument is that a kid who went to say Bowdoin or Michigan OOS 30 years ago was not usually of the same caliber academically as a kid who went to Yale. Now that difference has become much smaller. It’s a supply demand thing. To illustrate with hypothetical numbers, there used to be 1000 elite students (basically similar aptitude) applying to colleges and the Ivies etc had 1000 seats. Now there are 2000 elite students and 1100 seats. So there is more overflow into the other schools. The difference between a Hamilton kid and a Brown kid was big in 1995. Now there really isn’t one.

No that wasn’t the argument. The argument is that Ivy League students are being dumbed down. That’s the explanation for the lack of a gap.

Your take might be true a limited number of SLACs. But hey if it makes you feel better about your Grinnell or Hamilton kid by all means stay in your fantasyland.

It was a combination. Due to affluence and demographics, we have more supply of “elite” students. Due to DEI, we have more seats (half?) at Ivy League and all top schools allocated to kids for non-meritocratic reasons. So it’s like musical chairs. More kids are playing and there are fewer seats. The result is the Ivies cannot absorb all the elite students and they flow down to schools historically seen as second tier. As a result the difference in the quality of the student body at second tier now is pretty minor if it exists at all. 30 years ago the kid who got 1500 would get into Yale and the kid who got 1240 would get into Colby. Today it is the kid who got 1540 gets into Yale and the kid who got 1500 gets into Colby. Do you understand?

Anyone who has been through this process realizes this when you see which kids land where and why. For the most part the kids from high income backgrounds going to ivies as opposed to the next level down are athletes, legacies or otherwise hooked.

You assume your kid is elite because they’re upper middle class and white. The fact that your kid attends Hamilton doesn’t make it true.

I literally know these kids. The ones who got into Ivies this year, the ones who landed at “second tier.” The difference isn’t huge, largely a function of the usual bs (sports, hooks, legacy, etc). They are all excellent students with high scores.

Oh that changes everything. You “know” these kids.

Your kids attend some other kids safety school. Live with it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I went to MIT 30 years ago and took a couple classes at Harvard. I didn't think the Harvard kids were especially impressive. I think MIT admission rate was in the 35% range, so not especially impressive although IME more self selecting for a mathy brain, not just a rich-ish brain.

In the 30 years since that time, I've met a million smart people and the idea that the smartest people are from HYP is laughable. Maybe you work in an industry that doesn't attract smart people

I had people like you in our class. And we thought you were dumb.

Tell me you didn't go to Harvard without telling me you didn't go to Harvard

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ivies used to have a monopoly or close to it in the smartest kids, so it was a useful signal, but nowadays the gap between these elite schools and so called second tier schools is very narrow. Just look at standardized test data. Plus there is the recognition that while half the class at Ivies are top notch students, the other half are hooked, beneficiaries of woke policies, etc.

For example, the intellectual gap between the average Ivy League student and the average SLAC student is minor at this point. Thirty years ago it was more significant.

How stupid are you? Do you know how many recruited athletes are at SLACs? You think they don’t have DEI? I mean make an argument but try one that isn’t so dumb.

The argument is that a kid who went to say Bowdoin or Michigan OOS 30 years ago was not usually of the same caliber academically as a kid who went to Yale. Now that difference has become much smaller. It’s a supply demand thing. To illustrate with hypothetical numbers, there used to be 1000 elite students (basically similar aptitude) applying to colleges and the Ivies etc had 1000 seats. Now there are 2000 elite students and 1100 seats. So there is more overflow into the other schools. The difference between a Hamilton kid and a Brown kid was big in 1995. Now there really isn’t one.

No that wasn’t the argument. The argument is that Ivy League students are being dumbed down. That’s the explanation for the lack of a gap.

Your take might be true a limited number of SLACs. But hey if it makes you feel better about your Grinnell or Hamilton kid by all means stay in your fantasyland.

It was a combination. Due to affluence and demographics, we have more supply of “elite” students. Due to DEI, we have more seats (half?) at Ivy League and all top schools allocated to kids for non-meritocratic reasons. So it’s like musical chairs. More kids are playing and there are fewer seats. The result is the Ivies cannot absorb all the elite students and they flow down to schools historically seen as second tier. As a result the difference in the quality of the student body at second tier now is pretty minor if it exists at all. 30 years ago the kid who got 1500 would get into Yale and the kid who got 1240 would get into Colby. Today it is the kid who got 1540 gets into Yale and the kid who got 1500 gets into Colby. Do you understand?

Anyone who has been through this process realizes this when you see which kids land where and why. For the most part the kids from high income backgrounds going to ivies as opposed to the next level down are athletes, legacies or otherwise hooked.

You assume your kid is elite because they’re upper middle class and white. The fact that your kid attends Hamilton doesn’t make it true.

I literally know these kids. The ones who got into Ivies this year, the ones who landed at “second tier.” The difference isn’t huge, largely a function of the usual bs (sports, hooks, legacy, etc). They are all excellent students with high scores.

Oh that changes everything. You “know” these kids.

Your kids attend some other kids safety school. Live with it.

Pretty nasty…. Yeah I have known these kids since they were in diapers. Some made it into Ivies, some excellent schools a notch below in selectivity. Do I think that the kid who was considered the best student and got 1600 but didn’t make Ivy (no hooks) and is going to T30 school is no longer an “elite” student who now has reduced prospects on a bright future? No I don’t.

What is messed up is that their are actually people out there, like you, who view success in college admissions as the definitive judgment on a person’s worth.

For the most part I believe the kids who did make it into Ivy schools worked extremely hard to make that possible (music, sports, plus grades) and deserved it. Their work ethic will continue to propel them so long as they don’t burn out, which is a thing

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ivies used to have a monopoly or close to it in the smartest kids, so it was a useful signal, but nowadays the gap between these elite schools and so called second tier schools is very narrow. Just look at standardized test data. Plus there is the recognition that while half the class at Ivies are top notch students, the other half are hooked, beneficiaries of woke policies, etc.

For example, the intellectual gap between the average Ivy League student and the average SLAC student is minor at this point. Thirty years ago it was more significant.

How stupid are you? Do you know how many recruited athletes are at SLACs? You think they don’t have DEI? I mean make an argument but try one that isn’t so dumb.

The argument is that a kid who went to say Bowdoin or Michigan OOS 30 years ago was not usually of the same caliber academically as a kid who went to Yale. Now that difference has become much smaller. It’s a supply demand thing. To illustrate with hypothetical numbers, there used to be 1000 elite students (basically similar aptitude) applying to colleges and the Ivies etc had 1000 seats. Now there are 2000 elite students and 1100 seats. So there is more overflow into the other schools. The difference between a Hamilton kid and a Brown kid was big in 1995. Now there really isn’t one.

No that wasn’t the argument. The argument is that Ivy League students are being dumbed down. That’s the explanation for the lack of a gap.

Your take might be true a limited number of SLACs. But hey if it makes you feel better about your Grinnell or Hamilton kid by all means stay in your fantasyland.

It was a combination. Due to affluence and demographics, we have more supply of “elite” students. Due to DEI, we have more seats (half?) at Ivy League and all top schools allocated to kids for non-meritocratic reasons. So it’s like musical chairs. More kids are playing and there are fewer seats. The result is the Ivies cannot absorb all the elite students and they flow down to schools historically seen as second tier. As a result the difference in the quality of the student body at second tier now is pretty minor if it exists at all. 30 years ago the kid who got 1500 would get into Yale and the kid who got 1240 would get into Colby. Today it is the kid who got 1540 gets into Yale and the kid who got 1500 gets into Colby. Do you understand?

Anyone who has been through this process realizes this when you see which kids land where and why. For the most part the kids from high income backgrounds going to ivies as opposed to the next level down are athletes, legacies or otherwise hooked.

You assume your kid is elite because they’re upper middle class and white. The fact that your kid attends Hamilton doesn’t make it true.

I literally know these kids. The ones who got into Ivies this year, the ones who landed at “second tier.” The difference isn’t huge, largely a function of the usual bs (sports, hooks, legacy, etc). They are all excellent students with high scores.

Oh that changes everything. You “know” these kids.

Your kids attend some other kids safety school. Live with it.

Pretty nasty…. Yeah I have known these kids since they were in diapers. Some made it into Ivies, some excellent schools a notch below in selectivity. Do I think that the kid who was considered the best student and got 1600 but didn’t make Ivy (no hooks) and is going to T30 school is no longer an “elite” student who now has reduced prospects on a bright future? No I don’t.

What is messed up is that their are actually people out there, like you, who view success in college admissions as the definitive judgment on a person’s worth.

For the most part I believe the kids who did make it into Ivy schools worked extremely hard to make that possible (music, sports, plus grades) and deserved it. Their work ethic will continue to propel them so long as they don’t burn out, which is a thing

it would be interesting to see what the delta is between

white Ivy acceptances vs the t30 acceptances

Asian Ivy acceptences vs t30 cohort

Black and Latino Ivy vs black and Latino t30

Jewish Ivy acceptances vs wustl/Emory/Tulane

Which group has the largest observable gaps between cohorts and which has the smallest

[Anonymous]

Given how many threads pop up on this listserve about ivies including this one, it is clear people are still obsessed with the ivys.

[Anonymous]

Those grapes were sour anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ivies used to have a monopoly or close to it in the smartest kids, so it was a useful signal, but nowadays the gap between these elite schools and so called second tier schools is very narrow. Just look at standardized test data. Plus there is the recognition that while half the class at Ivies are top notch students, the other half are hooked, beneficiaries of woke policies, etc.

For example, the intellectual gap between the average Ivy League student and the average SLAC student is minor at this point. Thirty years ago it was more significant.

How stupid are you? Do you know how many recruited athletes are at SLACs? You think they don’t have DEI? I mean make an argument but try one that isn’t so dumb.

The argument is that a kid who went to say Bowdoin or Michigan OOS 30 years ago was not usually of the same caliber academically as a kid who went to Yale. Now that difference has become much smaller. It’s a supply demand thing. To illustrate with hypothetical numbers, there used to be 1000 elite students (basically similar aptitude) applying to colleges and the Ivies etc had 1000 seats. Now there are 2000 elite students and 1100 seats. So there is more overflow into the other schools. The difference between a Hamilton kid and a Brown kid was big in 1995. Now there really isn’t one.

No that wasn’t the argument. The argument is that Ivy League students are being dumbed down. That’s the explanation for the lack of a gap.

Your take might be true a limited number of SLACs. But hey if it makes you feel better about your Grinnell or Hamilton kid by all means stay in your fantasyland.

It was a combination. Due to affluence and demographics, we have more supply of “elite” students. Due to DEI, we have more seats (half?) at Ivy League and all top schools allocated to kids for non-meritocratic reasons. So it’s like musical chairs. More kids are playing and there are fewer seats. The result is the Ivies cannot absorb all the elite students and they flow down to schools historically seen as second tier. As a result the difference in the quality of the student body at second tier now is pretty minor if it exists at all. 30 years ago the kid who got 1500 would get into Yale and the kid who got 1240 would get into Colby. Today it is the kid who got 1540 gets into Yale and the kid who got 1500 gets into Colby. Do you understand?

Anyone who has been through this process realizes this when you see which kids land where and why. For the most part the kids from high income backgrounds going to ivies as opposed to the next level down are athletes, legacies or otherwise hooked.

You assume your kid is elite because they’re upper middle class and white. The fact that your kid attends Hamilton doesn’t make it true.

I literally know these kids. The ones who got into Ivies this year, the ones who landed at “second tier.” The difference isn’t huge, largely a function of the usual bs (sports, hooks, legacy, etc). They are all excellent students with high scores.

Oh that changes everything. You “know” these kids.

Your kids attend some other kids safety school. Live with it.

Pretty nasty…. Yeah I have known these kids since they were in diapers. Some made it into Ivies, some excellent schools a notch below in selectivity. Do I think that the kid who was considered the best student and got 1600 but didn’t make Ivy (no hooks) and is going to T30 school is no longer an “elite” student who now has reduced prospects on a bright future? No I don’t.

What is messed up is that their are actually people out there, like you, who view success in college admissions as the definitive judgment on a person’s worth.

For the most part I believe the kids who did make it into Ivy schools worked extremely hard to make that possible (music, sports, plus grades) and deserved it. Their work ethic will continue to propel them so long as they don’t burn out, which is a thing

it would be interesting to see what the delta is between

white Ivy acceptances vs the t30 acceptances

Asian Ivy acceptences vs t30 cohort

Black and Latino Ivy vs black and Latino t30

Jewish Ivy acceptances vs wustl/Emory/Tulane

Which group has the largest observable gaps between cohorts and which has the smallest

What are the Jewish ivies? They are all quite Jewish. Maybe Dartmouth and Princeton are relatively light

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Given how many threads pop up on this listserve about ivies including this one, it is clear people are still obsessed with the ivys.

+1