Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.natesilver.net/p/go-to-a-state-school

I don't always agree with Nate Silver but I think he is spot on. I have interviewed several Ivy League grads that came across as entitled and coddled. I have to wonder if other hiring managers are seeing a similar trend.

Agree 100%.

+2
And the entire country is getting a taste of just how entitled and coddled these morons are.

Anonymous wrote:https://www.natesilver.net/p/go-to-a-state-school

I don't always agree with Nate Silver but I think he is spot on. I have interviewed several Ivy League grads that came across as entitled and coddled. I have to wonder if other hiring managers are seeing a similar trend.

Agree 100%.

Anonymous wrote:I am getting from this that the white folks are mad at “DEI”. It cannot be that elite anymore now that the browns and the blacks are getting in. All that riff raff ! Let us hire our own folks from the top public universities!

🤦‍♀️

Someone has sense and sees the truth!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can see people are upset because they have an investment, whether emotional, financial, or ideological, with the current modus operandi at most elite colleges so they are bitterly resistant to the changing realities surrounding elite higher education these days despite that Silver cites data showing significant shift in public perspectives on higher education and elite higher education.

This is what people thought of a freshly minted Harvard graduate in 1994: highly accomplished and brainy nerd.

This is what many people now think when they encounter a freshly minted Harvard graduate in 2024: Either a legacy admit from an extremely connected and / or wealthy family (nepotism) or a mollycoddled diversity admit benefiting from a system that rewards identity over merit. And both will bring the same increasingly annoying social justice warrior outlook largely divorced from reality.

Silver is not a right wing MAGAtard, he is a Democrat and sold his polling business to the NYT. But like a lot of very intelligent nerds, Silver doesn't shy away from frankness.

You are an idiot. The minority students at Harvard etc have near perfect test scores and/or grades. The average student now is miles ahead of the 1994 student in terms of academic indicators. Same with the wealthy kids; at the top schools everyone has the scores that's why they add other factors to select.

what no?

Let me school you a bit. Go to your chart. Check the X axis. The scale of the chart is designed to make it seem as if there are big differences amongst the scores, but the average score for all races is some form of 700. At Harvard, they taught us (even the minorities) how to discern lies backed by stats and charts.

NP--Exactly. The difference between the average score for those of Asian descent (around 770) and those of African descent (around 720) is the difference between the 99th percentile and the 98th percentile. Even Mensa takes the top 2%.

I bet if you show both sections of the SAT, the difference would be wider.

Both would still be 95th percentile and above.

1400 is very different than 1600

How so?

200 point difference. That's a lot. You can't tell me that you find a 1400 as equally impressive as 1600. The median SAT scores for top tier colleges used to be > 1400. Those colleges even see the difference.

We aren’t comparing 1400 and 1600 here. Average black score according to chart is 1440 average white score is 1480. So 1440 and 1480.

and Asian score is 1550, but as the Harvard case shows, the rate of their admissions is far lower than that of Blacks.

Chances are the “Blacks” got that score in one seating, because they did not have the money to repeatedly take that test until they hit 1550.
And then, the “Blacks” manage to graduate!

Yes, scandalous I know.

Many of these Blacks are of Nigerian and Ghanian descent or from UMC households where the families emphasize education and do take the SATs multiple times. Also, why is it always assumed that Asians are not poor. 75% of NYC specialized HS students are Asians and many of these HS (greater than 50%) are from low income households and believe me the kids are not taking SATs multiple times. Not all blacks are poor and all Asians rich. I think College Board should specify how many times kids take the SAT (and who gets accomodations) or have just one day when everyone takes it, to eliminate all this speculation.

however, I'm willing to bet that the vast majority of Asians at Harvard (and similar schools) are UMC+, not poor. Not sure how to find those data points, as I don't believe CDS breaks things down by race and SES. It would be nice if they broke down test scores/gpa by SES, as I think that is more relevant than Race. I think it would show that some of the "lower scores" do come from those kids with disadvantaged backgrounds. Once again, those "lower scores" are only slightly lower and really don't have an impact IMO. 720 vs 780 is not a huge difference

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m confused by folks calling some Ivy League grads as coddled? Coddled by whom?

by the school. Some elite schools treat their kids as "too big to fail", and don't want to impact their student body average GPA, so they let them withdraw up to the lat week before finals, whereas in big state schools, you can't withdraw that close to finals, and you just take the F or D or whatever, and make it up in the summer. And big state schools don't hold your hand and treat you like you're "special".

+1 OP here. The Ivy grads we have interviewed definitely came across like they had been told they were god's gift to the world. Yet they are applying for jobs with a steep learning curve. Nobody wants to hire someone that doesn't think they have anything to learn, or who will assume they are smarter than anyone who went to a state school.

A students hire A+ students. B students hire C students.

Lol a person who thinks they have nothing to learn is not an A+ student. They are a nightmare. I will happily hire someone smarter than me. But the people who think they are smarter than me usually aren't. Not even close.

You do realize this is a delusion that nearly every reasonably bright person holds. Also, I have worked with hundreds of high-achieving interns/recent grads from all sorts of schools over time. I haven't found a significant pattern with type of school and their willingness to learn. If forced to take a stance on it, I would say I have found a slight trend for the students from elite schools a little more open to learning. If I wanted to come up with random ad hoc theories to explain it I might say perhaps because they are a little more used to being a small fish in a big pond in college than being constantly regarded as the top of the heap. One trend I *have* noticed is that there are always a few people at work who have a chip on their shoulder about elite schools and project all sorts of nonsense on the new employees But the majority of us don't see it (and we also come from a range of schools) and just sort of feel bad for the people who talk that way and try to steer the recent grads from having to interact with those folks as they are not fair-minded.

I have worked with many people who are smarter/more capable than me, including interns. They may know it, but they don't act superior or disrespectful. The people who think they are smarter than me, and show it, are usually not very smart, or at least not capable of performing well in what my office does. I have absolutely seen a pattern among Ivy grads. It may be because where I work is a place many Ivy grads see as being below them, despite it being interesting work with decent pay. It's not something I am "projecting" - it's something that for example, every single person on an interview panel noticed about a particular candidate. It's people in high level leadership positions that are universally disliked because of how they treat the people they are supposed to be leading. Maybe they would be better leaders if they worked somewhere with more people they considered to be their equals. But since they don't, they do terribly.

So how many examples are you making this more generalized reasoning from??? There's going to be arrogant folks from all sorts of life. No need to link it to notions about "elite schools."

You really don't see how arrogance might be something that occurs at a higher rate among people who went to "elite schools"? Lol

I'm basing it on my direct experience: I have worked with hundreds of interns/grads and don't recognize the trends others are talking about--and my colleagues don't either. We give evaluations to all these people that include things like collaboration skills, learning from feedback, contribution to the team (rated by other team members) etc. and there aren't number trends that align with that bias either.

Okay? You don't see the trends, other people do. Nobody has done a real study on this so we'll never know.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m confused by folks calling some Ivy League grads as coddled? Coddled by whom?

by the school. Some elite schools treat their kids as "too big to fail", and don't want to impact their student body average GPA, so they let them withdraw up to the lat week before finals, whereas in big state schools, you can't withdraw that close to finals, and you just take the F or D or whatever, and make it up in the summer. And big state schools don't hold your hand and treat you like you're "special".

+1 OP here. The Ivy grads we have interviewed definitely came across like they had been told they were god's gift to the world. Yet they are applying for jobs with a steep learning curve. Nobody wants to hire someone that doesn't think they have anything to learn, or who will assume they are smarter than anyone who went to a state school.

A students hire A+ students. B students hire C students.

Lol a person who thinks they have nothing to learn is not an A+ student. They are a nightmare. I will happily hire someone smarter than me. But the people who think they are smarter than me usually aren't. Not even close.

You do realize this is a delusion that nearly every reasonably bright person holds. Also, I have worked with hundreds of high-achieving interns/recent grads from all sorts of schools over time. I haven't found a significant pattern with type of school and their willingness to learn. If forced to take a stance on it, I would say I have found a slight trend for the students from elite schools a little more open to learning. If I wanted to come up with random ad hoc theories to explain it I might say perhaps because they are a little more used to being a small fish in a big pond in college than being constantly regarded as the top of the heap. One trend I *have* noticed is that there are always a few people at work who have a chip on their shoulder about elite schools and project all sorts of nonsense on the new employees But the majority of us don't see it (and we also come from a range of schools) and just sort of feel bad for the people who talk that way and try to steer the recent grads from having to interact with those folks as they are not fair-minded.

I have worked with many people who are smarter/more capable than me, including interns. They may know it, but they don't act superior or disrespectful. The people who think they are smarter than me, and show it, are usually not very smart, or at least not capable of performing well in what my office does. I have absolutely seen a pattern among Ivy grads. It may be because where I work is a place many Ivy grads see as being below them, despite it being interesting work with decent pay. It's not something I am "projecting" - it's something that for example, every single person on an interview panel noticed about a particular candidate. It's people in high level leadership positions that are universally disliked because of how they treat the people they are supposed to be leading. Maybe they would be better leaders if they worked somewhere with more people they considered to be their equals. But since they don't, they do terribly.

So how many examples are you making this more generalized reasoning from??? There's going to be arrogant folks from all sorts of life. No need to link it to notions about "elite schools."

You really don't see how arrogance might be something that occurs at a higher rate among people who went to "elite schools"? Lol

I'm basing it on my direct experience: I have worked with hundreds of interns/grads and don't recognize the trends others are talking about--and my colleagues don't either. We give evaluations to all these people that include things like collaboration skills, learning from feedback, contribution to the team (rated by other team members) etc. and there aren't number trends that align with that bias either.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can see people are upset because they have an investment, whether emotional, financial, or ideological, with the current modus operandi at most elite colleges so they are bitterly resistant to the changing realities surrounding elite higher education these days despite that Silver cites data showing significant shift in public perspectives on higher education and elite higher education.

This is what people thought of a freshly minted Harvard graduate in 1994: highly accomplished and brainy nerd.

This is what many people now think when they encounter a freshly minted Harvard graduate in 2024: Either a legacy admit from an extremely connected and / or wealthy family (nepotism) or a mollycoddled diversity admit benefiting from a system that rewards identity over merit. And both will bring the same increasingly annoying social justice warrior outlook largely divorced from reality.

Silver is not a right wing MAGAtard, he is a Democrat and sold his polling business to the NYT. But like a lot of very intelligent nerds, Silver doesn't shy away from frankness.

You are an idiot. The minority students at Harvard etc have near perfect test scores and/or grades. The average student now is miles ahead of the 1994 student in terms of academic indicators. Same with the wealthy kids; at the top schools everyone has the scores that's why they add other factors to select.

what no?

Let me school you a bit. Go to your chart. Check the X axis. The scale of the chart is designed to make it seem as if there are big differences amongst the scores, but the average score for all races is some form of 700. At Harvard, they taught us (even the minorities) how to discern lies backed by stats and charts.

NP--Exactly. The difference between the average score for those of Asian descent (around 770) and those of African descent (around 720) is the difference between the 99th percentile and the 98th percentile. Even Mensa takes the top 2%.

I bet if you show both sections of the SAT, the difference would be wider.

Both would still be 95th percentile and above.

1400 is very different than 1600

How so?

200 point difference. That's a lot. You can't tell me that you find a 1400 as equally impressive as 1600. The median SAT scores for top tier colleges used to be > 1400. Those colleges even see the difference.

We aren’t comparing 1400 and 1600 here. Average black score according to chart is 1440 average white score is 1480. So 1440 and 1480.

and Asian score is 1550, but as the Harvard case shows, the rate of their admissions is far lower than that of Blacks.

Chances are the “Blacks” got that score in one seating, because they did not have the money to repeatedly take that test until they hit 1550.
And then, the “Blacks” manage to graduate!

Yes, scandalous I know.

Many of these Blacks are of Nigerian and Ghanian descent or from UMC households where the families emphasize education and do take the SATs multiple times. Also, why is it always assumed that Asians are not poor. 75% of NYC specialized HS students are Asians and many of these HS (greater than 50%) are from low income households and believe me the kids are not taking SATs multiple times. Not all blacks are poor and all Asians rich. I think College Board should specify how many times kids take the SAT (and who gets accomodations) or have just one day when everyone takes it, to eliminate all this speculation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can see people are upset because they have an investment, whether emotional, financial, or ideological, with the current modus operandi at most elite colleges so they are bitterly resistant to the changing realities surrounding elite higher education these days despite that Silver cites data showing significant shift in public perspectives on higher education and elite higher education.

This is what people thought of a freshly minted Harvard graduate in 1994: highly accomplished and brainy nerd.

This is what many people now think when they encounter a freshly minted Harvard graduate in 2024: Either a legacy admit from an extremely connected and / or wealthy family (nepotism) or a mollycoddled diversity admit benefiting from a system that rewards identity over merit. And both will bring the same increasingly annoying social justice warrior outlook largely divorced from reality.

Silver is not a right wing MAGAtard, he is a Democrat and sold his polling business to the NYT. But like a lot of very intelligent nerds, Silver doesn't shy away from frankness.

You are an idiot. The minority students at Harvard etc have near perfect test scores and/or grades. The average student now is miles ahead of the 1994 student in terms of academic indicators. Same with the wealthy kids; at the top schools everyone has the scores that's why they add other factors to select.

what no?

Let me school you a bit. Go to your chart. Check the X axis. The scale of the chart is designed to make it seem as if there are big differences amongst the scores, but the average score for all races is some form of 700. At Harvard, they taught us (even the minorities) how to discern lies backed by stats and charts.

NP--Exactly. The difference between the average score for those of Asian descent (around 770) and those of African descent (around 720) is the difference between the 99th percentile and the 98th percentile. Even Mensa takes the top 2%.

I bet if you show both sections of the SAT, the difference would be wider.

Both would still be 95th percentile and above.

1400 is very different than 1600

How so?

200 point difference. That's a lot. You can't tell me that you find a 1400 as equally impressive as 1600. The median SAT scores for top tier colleges used to be > 1400. Those colleges even see the difference.

We aren’t comparing 1400 and 1600 here. Average black score according to chart is 1440 average white score is 1480. So 1440 and 1480.

and Asian score is 1550, but as the Harvard case shows, the rate of their admissions is far lower than that of Blacks.

And yet, when I walk around the elite campuses, somehow I still don’t see that many “Blacks”!

Because they don't apply in great numbers.



If you want to talk about quota, it seems to me that Harvard has been admitting a higher % of Blacks from that group's applicant pool than Asians, by quite a lot.

A chart through 2013?

A lot has changed since then. See SCOTUS ruling around June 2023.

This aside, there are many academically qualified black students who should be admitted to Harvard and other highly selective schools. I'll defer to others to make the zero-sum arguments primarily based on standardized test scores.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m confused by folks calling some Ivy League grads as coddled? Coddled by whom?

by the school. Some elite schools treat their kids as "too big to fail", and don't want to impact their student body average GPA, so they let them withdraw up to the lat week before finals, whereas in big state schools, you can't withdraw that close to finals, and you just take the F or D or whatever, and make it up in the summer. And big state schools don't hold your hand and treat you like you're "special".

+1 OP here. The Ivy grads we have interviewed definitely came across like they had been told they were god's gift to the world. Yet they are applying for jobs with a steep learning curve. Nobody wants to hire someone that doesn't think they have anything to learn, or who will assume they are smarter than anyone who went to a state school.

A students hire A+ students. B students hire C students.

Lol a person who thinks they have nothing to learn is not an A+ student. They are a nightmare. I will happily hire someone smarter than me. But the people who think they are smarter than me usually aren't. Not even close.

You do realize this is a delusion that nearly every reasonably bright person holds. Also, I have worked with hundreds of high-achieving interns/recent grads from all sorts of schools over time. I haven't found a significant pattern with type of school and their willingness to learn. If forced to take a stance on it, I would say I have found a slight trend for the students from elite schools a little more open to learning. If I wanted to come up with random ad hoc theories to explain it I might say perhaps because they are a little more used to being a small fish in a big pond in college than being constantly regarded as the top of the heap. One trend I *have* noticed is that there are always a few people at work who have a chip on their shoulder about elite schools and project all sorts of nonsense on the new employees But the majority of us don't see it (and we also come from a range of schools) and just sort of feel bad for the people who talk that way and try to steer the recent grads from having to interact with those folks as they are not fair-minded.

I have worked with many people who are smarter/more capable than me, including interns. They may know it, but they don't act superior or disrespectful. The people who think they are smarter than me, and show it, are usually not very smart, or at least not capable of performing well in what my office does. I have absolutely seen a pattern among Ivy grads. It may be because where I work is a place many Ivy grads see as being below them, despite it being interesting work with decent pay. It's not something I am "projecting" - it's something that for example, every single person on an interview panel noticed about a particular candidate. It's people in high level leadership positions that are universally disliked because of how they treat the people they are supposed to be leading. Maybe they would be better leaders if they worked somewhere with more people they considered to be their equals. But since they don't, they do terribly.

So how many examples are you making this more generalized reasoning from??? There's going to be arrogant folks from all sorts of life. No need to link it to notions about "elite schools."

You really don't see how arrogance might be something that occurs at a higher rate among people who went to "elite schools"? Lol

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m confused by folks calling some Ivy League grads as coddled? Coddled by whom?

by the school. Some elite schools treat their kids as "too big to fail", and don't want to impact their student body average GPA, so they let them withdraw up to the lat week before finals, whereas in big state schools, you can't withdraw that close to finals, and you just take the F or D or whatever, and make it up in the summer. And big state schools don't hold your hand and treat you like you're "special".

+1 OP here. The Ivy grads we have interviewed definitely came across like they had been told they were god's gift to the world. Yet they are applying for jobs with a steep learning curve. Nobody wants to hire someone that doesn't think they have anything to learn, or who will assume they are smarter than anyone who went to a state school.

A students hire A+ students. B students hire C students.

Lol a person who thinks they have nothing to learn is not an A+ student. They are a nightmare. I will happily hire someone smarter than me. But the people who think they are smarter than me usually aren't. Not even close.

You do realize this is a delusion that nearly every reasonably bright person holds. Also, I have worked with hundreds of high-achieving interns/recent grads from all sorts of schools over time. I haven't found a significant pattern with type of school and their willingness to learn. If forced to take a stance on it, I would say I have found a slight trend for the students from elite schools a little more open to learning. If I wanted to come up with random ad hoc theories to explain it I might say perhaps because they are a little more used to being a small fish in a big pond in college than being constantly regarded as the top of the heap. One trend I *have* noticed is that there are always a few people at work who have a chip on their shoulder about elite schools and project all sorts of nonsense on the new employees But the majority of us don't see it (and we also come from a range of schools) and just sort of feel bad for the people who talk that way and try to steer the recent grads from having to interact with those folks as they are not fair-minded.

I have worked with many people who are smarter/more capable than me, including interns. They may know it, but they don't act superior or disrespectful. The people who think they are smarter than me, and show it, are usually not very smart, or at least not capable of performing well in what my office does. I have absolutely seen a pattern among Ivy grads. It may be because where I work is a place many Ivy grads see as being below them, despite it being interesting work with decent pay. It's not something I am "projecting" - it's something that for example, every single person on an interview panel noticed about a particular candidate. It's people in high level leadership positions that are universally disliked because of how they treat the people they are supposed to be leading. Maybe they would be better leaders if they worked somewhere with more people they considered to be their equals. But since they don't, they do terribly.

So how many examples are you making this more generalized reasoning from??? There's going to be arrogant folks from all sorts of life. No need to link it to notions about "elite schools."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can see people are upset because they have an investment, whether emotional, financial, or ideological, with the current modus operandi at most elite colleges so they are bitterly resistant to the changing realities surrounding elite higher education these days despite that Silver cites data showing significant shift in public perspectives on higher education and elite higher education.

This is what people thought of a freshly minted Harvard graduate in 1994: highly accomplished and brainy nerd.

This is what many people now think when they encounter a freshly minted Harvard graduate in 2024: Either a legacy admit from an extremely connected and / or wealthy family (nepotism) or a mollycoddled diversity admit benefiting from a system that rewards identity over merit. And both will bring the same increasingly annoying social justice warrior outlook largely divorced from reality.

Silver is not a right wing MAGAtard, he is a Democrat and sold his polling business to the NYT. But like a lot of very intelligent nerds, Silver doesn't shy away from frankness.

You are an idiot. The minority students at Harvard etc have near perfect test scores and/or grades. The average student now is miles ahead of the 1994 student in terms of academic indicators. Same with the wealthy kids; at the top schools everyone has the scores that's why they add other factors to select.

what no?

Let me school you a bit. Go to your chart. Check the X axis. The scale of the chart is designed to make it seem as if there are big differences amongst the scores, but the average score for all races is some form of 700. At Harvard, they taught us (even the minorities) how to discern lies backed by stats and charts.

NP--Exactly. The difference between the average score for those of Asian descent (around 770) and those of African descent (around 720) is the difference between the 99th percentile and the 98th percentile. Even Mensa takes the top 2%.

I bet if you show both sections of the SAT, the difference would be wider.

Both would still be 95th percentile and above.

1400 is very different than 1600

How so?

200 point difference. That's a lot. You can't tell me that you find a 1400 as equally impressive as 1600. The median SAT scores for top tier colleges used to be > 1400. Those colleges even see the difference.

We aren’t comparing 1400 and 1600 here. Average black score according to chart is 1440 average white score is 1480. So 1440 and 1480.

and Asian score is 1550, but as the Harvard case shows, the rate of their admissions is far lower than that of Blacks.

And yet, when I walk around the elite campuses, somehow I still don’t see that many “Blacks”!

Because they don't apply in great numbers.



If you want to talk about quota, it seems to me that Harvard has been admitting a higher % of Blacks from that group's applicant pool than Asians, by quite a lot.

Athletes

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can see people are upset because they have an investment, whether emotional, financial, or ideological, with the current modus operandi at most elite colleges so they are bitterly resistant to the changing realities surrounding elite higher education these days despite that Silver cites data showing significant shift in public perspectives on higher education and elite higher education.

This is what people thought of a freshly minted Harvard graduate in 1994: highly accomplished and brainy nerd.

This is what many people now think when they encounter a freshly minted Harvard graduate in 2024: Either a legacy admit from an extremely connected and / or wealthy family (nepotism) or a mollycoddled diversity admit benefiting from a system that rewards identity over merit. And both will bring the same increasingly annoying social justice warrior outlook largely divorced from reality.

Silver is not a right wing MAGAtard, he is a Democrat and sold his polling business to the NYT. But like a lot of very intelligent nerds, Silver doesn't shy away from frankness.

You are an idiot. The minority students at Harvard etc have near perfect test scores and/or grades. The average student now is miles ahead of the 1994 student in terms of academic indicators. Same with the wealthy kids; at the top schools everyone has the scores that's why they add other factors to select.

what no?

Let me school you a bit. Go to your chart. Check the X axis. The scale of the chart is designed to make it seem as if there are big differences amongst the scores, but the average score for all races is some form of 700. At Harvard, they taught us (even the minorities) how to discern lies backed by stats and charts.

NP--Exactly. The difference between the average score for those of Asian descent (around 770) and those of African descent (around 720) is the difference between the 99th percentile and the 98th percentile. Even Mensa takes the top 2%.

I bet if you show both sections of the SAT, the difference would be wider.

Both would still be 95th percentile and above.

1400 is very different than 1600

How so?

200 point difference. That's a lot. You can't tell me that you find a 1400 as equally impressive as 1600. The median SAT scores for top tier colleges used to be > 1400. Those colleges even see the difference.

We aren’t comparing 1400 and 1600 here. Average black score according to chart is 1440 average white score is 1480. So 1440 and 1480.

and Asian score is 1550, but as the Harvard case shows, the rate of their admissions is far lower than that of Blacks.

And yet, when I walk around the elite campuses, somehow I still don’t see that many “Blacks”!

Because they don't apply in great numbers.



If you want to talk about quota, it seems to me that Harvard has been admitting a higher % of Blacks from that group's applicant pool than Asians, by quite a lot.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m confused by folks calling some Ivy League grads as coddled? Coddled by whom?

by the school. Some elite schools treat their kids as "too big to fail", and don't want to impact their student body average GPA, so they let them withdraw up to the lat week before finals, whereas in big state schools, you can't withdraw that close to finals, and you just take the F or D or whatever, and make it up in the summer. And big state schools don't hold your hand and treat you like you're "special".

+1 OP here. The Ivy grads we have interviewed definitely came across like they had been told they were god's gift to the world. Yet they are applying for jobs with a steep learning curve. Nobody wants to hire someone that doesn't think they have anything to learn, or who will assume they are smarter than anyone who went to a state school.

A students hire A+ students. B students hire C students.

Lol a person who thinks they have nothing to learn is not an A+ student. They are a nightmare. I will happily hire someone smarter than me. But the people who think they are smarter than me usually aren't. Not even close.

You do realize this is a delusion that nearly every reasonably bright person holds. Also, I have worked with hundreds of high-achieving interns/recent grads from all sorts of schools over time. I haven't found a significant pattern with type of school and their willingness to learn. If forced to take a stance on it, I would say I have found a slight trend for the students from elite schools a little more open to learning. If I wanted to come up with random ad hoc theories to explain it I might say perhaps because they are a little more used to being a small fish in a big pond in college than being constantly regarded as the top of the heap. One trend I *have* noticed is that there are always a few people at work who have a chip on their shoulder about elite schools and project all sorts of nonsense on the new employees But the majority of us don't see it (and we also come from a range of schools) and just sort of feel bad for the people who talk that way and try to steer the recent grads from having to interact with those folks as they are not fair-minded.

I have worked with many people who are smarter/more capable than me, including interns. They may know it, but they don't act superior or disrespectful. The people who think they are smarter than me, and show it, are usually not very smart, or at least not capable of performing well in what my office does. I have absolutely seen a pattern among Ivy grads. It may be because where I work is a place many Ivy grads see as being below them, despite it being interesting work with decent pay. It's not something I am "projecting" - it's something that for example, every single person on an interview panel noticed about a particular candidate. It's people in high level leadership positions that are universally disliked because of how they treat the people they are supposed to be leading. Maybe they would be better leaders if they worked somewhere with more people they considered to be their equals. But since they don't, they do terribly.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can see people are upset because they have an investment, whether emotional, financial, or ideological, with the current modus operandi at most elite colleges so they are bitterly resistant to the changing realities surrounding elite higher education these days despite that Silver cites data showing significant shift in public perspectives on higher education and elite higher education.

This is what people thought of a freshly minted Harvard graduate in 1994: highly accomplished and brainy nerd.

This is what many people now think when they encounter a freshly minted Harvard graduate in 2024: Either a legacy admit from an extremely connected and / or wealthy family (nepotism) or a mollycoddled diversity admit benefiting from a system that rewards identity over merit. And both will bring the same increasingly annoying social justice warrior outlook largely divorced from reality.

Silver is not a right wing MAGAtard, he is a Democrat and sold his polling business to the NYT. But like a lot of very intelligent nerds, Silver doesn't shy away from frankness.

You are an idiot. The minority students at Harvard etc have near perfect test scores and/or grades. The average student now is miles ahead of the 1994 student in terms of academic indicators. Same with the wealthy kids; at the top schools everyone has the scores that's why they add other factors to select.

what no?

Let me school you a bit. Go to your chart. Check the X axis. The scale of the chart is designed to make it seem as if there are big differences amongst the scores, but the average score for all races is some form of 700. At Harvard, they taught us (even the minorities) how to discern lies backed by stats and charts.

NP--Exactly. The difference between the average score for those of Asian descent (around 770) and those of African descent (around 720) is the difference between the 99th percentile and the 98th percentile. Even Mensa takes the top 2%.

I bet if you show both sections of the SAT, the difference would be wider.

Both would still be 95th percentile and above.

1400 is very different than 1600

How so?

200 point difference. That's a lot. You can't tell me that you find a 1400 as equally impressive as 1600. The median SAT scores for top tier colleges used to be > 1400. Those colleges even see the difference.

But it IS a bell curve. Meaning at 1400 is much closer in performance to a 1600 than it is to a 1200. The difference between 1600 and 1400 is the same as it is between 1350 and 1400. And it’s completely reasonable to conclude that the lower one is a more desired applicant based on other factors.

yea, like race

Well you can play the race card if you want, but it could also be any number of things. Overcoming a disadvantaged background (irrespective of race), showing some leadership, artistic or musical talent, athletic ability, essay writing. Maybe that person was a pied piper at their school and blazed trails and got great ECs. Maybe they pushed themselves and challenged themselves and took a longer commute to go to a better HS. Maybe they cared for younger siblings or came from a broken home or had an unstable family and had to move around. Maybe they didn’t have a multigenerational expectation of academic achievement and had to figure out on their own how to succeed without the scaffolding so many kids have. Maybe you’re looking at things through a certain lens to grind your axe.

A PP stated that Black admits have just as high scores as Asians -- quote from above: "The minority students at Harvard etc have near perfect test scores and/or grades".

Presented with evidence which shows the contrary, now you are saying.. "well, they have some other qualification like their disadvantaged background".

That may well be true, or not, you have no idea what the background is of any admit, including the high scoring Asian students. But, the goal post keeps moving.

Assertion: "The minority students at Harvard etc have near perfect test scores and/or grades".
Evidence presented: it's not
Goal post #1: 700 is not that different to 770
Evidence: that's just one section. Doubling it, 1400 is very different to 1540
Goal Post #2: "well they have other factors like disadvantaged backgrounds"...

There is nothing that shows how many of those Black (or Asian or White) students are from disadvantaged backgrounds in that chart, but that's the leap you made.

Also, a lot of those high scoring Asian students have leadership and great extra curriculars, too. Asian students with only great grades know their chances of getting in is slim to none since they already have a higher bar than any other group.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can see people are upset because they have an investment, whether emotional, financial, or ideological, with the current modus operandi at most elite colleges so they are bitterly resistant to the changing realities surrounding elite higher education these days despite that Silver cites data showing significant shift in public perspectives on higher education and elite higher education.

This is what people thought of a freshly minted Harvard graduate in 1994: highly accomplished and brainy nerd.

This is what many people now think when they encounter a freshly minted Harvard graduate in 2024: Either a legacy admit from an extremely connected and / or wealthy family (nepotism) or a mollycoddled diversity admit benefiting from a system that rewards identity over merit. And both will bring the same increasingly annoying social justice warrior outlook largely divorced from reality.

Silver is not a right wing MAGAtard, he is a Democrat and sold his polling business to the NYT. But like a lot of very intelligent nerds, Silver doesn't shy away from frankness.

You are an idiot. The minority students at Harvard etc have near perfect test scores and/or grades. The average student now is miles ahead of the 1994 student in terms of academic indicators. Same with the wealthy kids; at the top schools everyone has the scores that's why they add other factors to select.

what no?

Let me school you a bit. Go to your chart. Check the X axis. The scale of the chart is designed to make it seem as if there are big differences amongst the scores, but the average score for all races is some form of 700. At Harvard, they taught us (even the minorities) how to discern lies backed by stats and charts.

NP--Exactly. The difference between the average score for those of Asian descent (around 770) and those of African descent (around 720) is the difference between the 99th percentile and the 98th percentile. Even Mensa takes the top 2%.

I bet if you show both sections of the SAT, the difference would be wider.

Both would still be 95th percentile and above.

1400 is very different than 1600

How so?

200 point difference. That's a lot. You can't tell me that you find a 1400 as equally impressive as 1600. The median SAT scores for top tier colleges used to be > 1400. Those colleges even see the difference.

We aren’t comparing 1400 and 1600 here. Average black score according to chart is 1440 average white score is 1480. So 1440 and 1480.

and Asian score is 1550, but as the Harvard case shows, the rate of their admissions is far lower than that of Blacks.

And yet, when I walk around the elite campuses, somehow I still don’t see that many “Blacks”!