Reply to Selingo WSJ Essay

Forum Index » College and University Discussion

Reply to "Selingo WSJ Essay"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]These articles focus on career “success” and not money “success”.

The insurance policy is that the graduates have rich friends and/or marry someone rich. How many parents on this board earned their 1% vs married their 1%? I am semi-successful professsionally from a meh-private college; my money comes from my husband’s family, not my career.[/quote]

If the [b]1% make up a lot of the graduates[/b], these kids are already in the 1%. They don’t need to go to college to make those friends. They already knew them in HS. [/quote]

They no longer do, and the schools with the most are no longer the Ivy+.
The top 1% were about 17-18% of undergrads at ivy+ in an article using 2013 data! It was published in 2017 and again in 2021 but used data from the graduating class of 2013. The Ivys faced a lot of negative press from it and made changes, especially since 2020.

WashU, Colby, W&L, SMU had higher portions of undergrads in the top1% than ivys at the time: upwards of 24%. WashU is now much lower because they faced backlash in the round after the ivy backlash for the same thing. Pell grand, FGLI, %on need based aid, need-blind admissions are all pushed and broadcast loudly as goals by the top schools: WashU is right on the cusp of the T15ish group and has made, IMO, positive changes to prioritize socioeconomic equity in admissions. 
Since the 2013 data, top colleges especially ivys have redoubled efforts to admit more pell grant kids, expand aid and promote equity. The ivys are MUCH LESS 1% (and less top 5%) heavy than they were 10 years ago yet still proportionally lead to higher likelihood of garnering jobs at MMB, top tech, or acceptance to top law, top med. Schools with the highest proportion of the 1% are not ivys and do not have results at the ivy level.

Hence outcomes these days are less about the proportion of 1% and more a factor of certain companies targeting top schools for efficiency purposes as well as the students of these top schools skew heavily toward the highest intelligence based on proportions: it is no surprise they have the highest LSAT and MCAT distributions. However a very top kid from a T50ish who had the stats and got admission or at least WL to a T15 can likely end up in a similar place, minus maybe a handful or two of companies that target name brands. [/quote]

So the 1% are overrepresented. There are a lot more of them there than you would expect or find. But if the cohort is poorer and less connected, coupled with the less fun environment there's not much reason for the 1% to go to those schools. What's in it for them? [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics