Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve lived my life between the US and the Middle East and have worked at various global organizations. Two of the smartest people I ever met were Harvard grads. They are on a whole other level of intellect.

I’m in finance. Smartest person I’ve worked with: SUNY Buffalo. Most clueless: Yale

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The people I know who went to Harvard will say some version of, “I attended school in Boston.” They won’t even say the name.

I say I went to school in New Jersey. People think it's braggy otherwise. But it's all over my c.v.

Folks, when you say things like "I went to school in Boston"...of "I went to school in New Jersey"...you actually sound so much more like a douchebag. Just own where you went to school and move on. We know you didn't go to BU or Rutgers or even MIT...because an MIT kid wouldn't answer like that.

basically, damned if you do and damned if you don't

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The people I know who went to Harvard will say some version of, “I attended school in Boston.” They won’t even say the name.

I say I went to school in New Jersey. People think it's braggy otherwise. But it's all over my c.v.

Folks, when you say things like "I went to school in Boston"...of "I went to school in New Jersey"...you actually sound so much more like a douchebag. Just own where you went to school and move on. We know you didn't go to BU or Rutgers or even MIT...because an MIT kid wouldn't answer like that.

Anonymous wrote:I’ve lived my life between the US and the Middle East and have worked at various global organizations. Two of the smartest people I ever met were Harvard grads. They are on a whole other level of intellect.

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.

I am aghast that any of us who went to HYP in the 90s think we were the "smartest kids" - I mean .. I thought this at 19, but at some point didn't you guys have careers, meet people from all over the United States and the world and reconsider this?

The opposite. Went to HYP. Then went to top grad school. Then had career which took me around the world. Most intellectually impressive people I ever met were from undergrad. Certainly not everyone (athletes, rich kids, etc), and this didn’t necessarily translate into success. But in terms of brains.

Am I you? I could have written the same thing.

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.

I am aghast that any of us who went to HYP in the 90s think we were the "smartest kids" - I mean .. I thought this at 19, but at some point didn't you guys have careers, meet people from all over the United States and the world and reconsider this?

The opposite. Went to HYP. Then went to top grad school. Then had career which took me around the world. Most intellectually impressive people I ever met were from undergrad. Certainly not everyone (athletes, rich kids, etc), and this didn’t necessarily translate into success. But in terms of brains.

Am I you? I could have written the same thing.

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.

I am aghast that any of us who went to HYP in the 90s think we were the "smartest kids" - I mean .. I thought this at 19, but at some point didn't you guys have careers, meet people from all over the United States and the world and reconsider this?

The opposite. Went to HYP. Then went to top grad school. Then had career which took me around the world. Most intellectually impressive people I ever met were from undergrad. Certainly not everyone (athletes, rich kids, etc), and this didn’t necessarily translate into success. But in terms of brains.

Anonymous wrote:Not to name drop, but I attended a school in Baton Rouge.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The people I know who went to Harvard will say some version of, “I attended school in Boston.” They won’t even say the name.

I say I went to school in New Jersey. People think it's braggy otherwise. But it's all over my c.v.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:less popular -

the word is out that select flagship publics offer the best blend of academics and lifestyle with a large enough student body for fun.

The ivies are seen as woke and/or grindy

People who are looking for that never seriously considered Ivy League schools. Not now. Not 30 years ago.

Anonymous wrote:The people I know who went to Harvard will say some version of, “I attended school in Boston.” They won’t even say the name.

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.

This is a very good interpretation of the current elite college landscape.

Do you think there are any changes trickling down to the t75-t50 level colleges? What is the impact amongst the rest of the field?

Thanks. It’s really just economics 101. There is a compression of talent at the top now. Yes I think 50-75 definitely affected.

“ 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.”

Anybody who has been through the college process knows that LACs have a huge percentage of athletes, legacies and hooked kids. What they don’t really have is non-white kids, so that’s really your point - that’s why you think all these kids are smart and talented.