Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What this shows is that getting into Harvard used to be immensely easier. People who went to Harvard in the 90s wouldn’t be in at anywhere comparable today.

It’s not harder or easier per se, but the grade inflation is making the signals of quality very noisy. A few decades ago, the high school grades already helped the admissions pick the outstanding (academically) students pretty accurately. In addition, applicants these days are supposed to play victim and write a sob story about what kind of hardship they have gone through and how they have overcome their hardship and what lessons they have learned. It’s like everyone is applying for a script writing major!

Wrong. It is easier. Harvard used to have a much higher admission rate. In 1988, it was 14.6% and less than 15,000 applications.

https://www.thecrimson.com/article/1988/7/8/freshman-class-sets-application-records-pthe/

In 2025, there was a 3.43% acceptance rate out of 57,435 apps.

https://features.thecrimson.com/2021/freshman-survey/makeup-narrative/#:~:text=This%20year%2C%20the%20College's%20acceptance,totals%20a%20historic%201%2C965%20students.

In 1988, you had to type out your application on a typewriter. The lower acceptance rate is as much a function of the improved ease of application as it is anything else. The denominator changed more than the numerator.

Tell me you grew up with enough money to pay for college without telling me you grew up with enough money to pay for college.

What does that mean? Kids who applied to state schools also had to fill out applications on a typewriter.

Yep, I'm younger (by the time I applied to schools, it was paper applications but you could do the application or at least all the essays on the computer and print them out) but I remember my much older sibling and cousins filling them out on typewriters. We did not have a typewriter at home but they had them at the public libraries and at the school libraries and that's where most people filled out their applications.

Another Ivy for hockey.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What this shows is that getting into Harvard used to be immensely easier. People who went to Harvard in the 90s wouldn’t be in at anywhere comparable today.

It’s not harder or easier per se, but the grade inflation is making the signals of quality very noisy. A few decades ago, the high school grades already helped the admissions pick the outstanding (academically) students pretty accurately. In addition, applicants these days are supposed to play victim and write a sob story about what kind of hardship they have gone through and how they have overcome their hardship and what lessons they have learned. It’s like everyone is applying for a script writing major!

Wrong. It is easier. Harvard used to have a much higher admission rate. In 1988, it was 14.6% and less than 15,000 applications.

https://www.thecrimson.com/article/1988/7/8/freshman-class-sets-application-records-pthe/

In 2025, there was a 3.43% acceptance rate out of 57,435 apps.

https://features.thecrimson.com/2021/freshman-survey/makeup-narrative/#:~:text=This%20year%2C%20the%20College's%20acceptance,totals%20a%20historic%201%2C965%20students.

In 1988, you had to type out your application on a typewriter. The lower acceptance rate is as much a function of the improved ease of application as it is anything else. The denominator changed more than the numerator.

Tell me you grew up with enough money to pay for college without telling me you grew up with enough money to pay for college.

What does that mean? Kids who applied to state schools also had to fill out applications on a typewriter.

There are lots of parents now who are realizing they "outkicked the coverage" (football term) - by going to super elite schools they actually made it harder for their kids. My spouse and I both went to TT schools. Our kid is extremely smart and in our generation would have gotten in, but it is harder now. With a legacy preference they would be a shoo-in for the schools just below ours, but they don't have that. So now we scramble.

The process is completely awful and screwed up. And I don't know what the answer is. Other than finding out a way to get rid of all of the yield management the schools are doing which has turned it into an awful game.

Only one person in my friend circle attended Harvard (and also Yale). Her child is doing their undergrad at Yale.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What this shows is that getting into Harvard used to be immensely easier. People who went to Harvard in the 90s wouldn’t be in at anywhere comparable today.

It’s not harder or easier per se, but the grade inflation is making the signals of quality very noisy. A few decades ago, the high school grades already helped the admissions pick the outstanding (academically) students pretty accurately. In addition, applicants these days are supposed to play victim and write a sob story about what kind of hardship they have gone through and how they have overcome their hardship and what lessons they have learned. It’s like everyone is applying for a script writing major!

Wrong. It is easier. Harvard used to have a much higher admission rate. In 1988, it was 14.6% and less than 15,000 applications.

https://www.thecrimson.com/article/1988/7/8/freshman-class-sets-application-records-pthe/

In 2025, there was a 3.43% acceptance rate out of 57,435 apps.

https://features.thecrimson.com/2021/freshman-survey/makeup-narrative/#:~:text=This%20year%2C%20the%20College's%20acceptance,totals%20a%20historic%201%2C965%20students.

In 1988, you had to type out your application on a typewriter. The lower acceptance rate is as much a function of the improved ease of application as it is anything else. The denominator changed more than the numerator.

Also there is just a larger population in general, more people aware of elite schools, and about the same amount of spots.

And academically elite children of immigrants crowding out mediocre legacies.

Go back where you came from with your "mediocre". You are all ruining it. That word is almost as cliche as "woke." Your kids with their 18 APs and violin, chess, fencing, and zero social skills. They will go to these schools and study 24/7 and add nothing to the experience, then not be able to get jobs because they can't interview. Or they will rebel from their obnoxious parents and spend their four years stoned and drunk. Which is the preferable outcome.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What this shows is that getting into Harvard used to be immensely easier. People who went to Harvard in the 90s wouldn’t be in at anywhere comparable today.

It’s not harder or easier per se, but the grade inflation is making the signals of quality very noisy. A few decades ago, the high school grades already helped the admissions pick the outstanding (academically) students pretty accurately. In addition, applicants these days are supposed to play victim and write a sob story about what kind of hardship they have gone through and how they have overcome their hardship and what lessons they have learned. It’s like everyone is applying for a script writing major!

Wrong. It is easier. Harvard used to have a much higher admission rate. In 1988, it was 14.6% and less than 15,000 applications.

https://www.thecrimson.com/article/1988/7/8/freshman-class-sets-application-records-pthe/

In 2025, there was a 3.43% acceptance rate out of 57,435 apps.

https://features.thecrimson.com/2021/freshman-survey/makeup-narrative/#:~:text=This%20year%2C%20the%20College's%20acceptance,totals%20a%20historic%201%2C965%20students.

But you also wouldn’t apply unless you have an almost 4.0 GPA unhooked. Also, kids are dramatizing their sob story to have a chance of being admitted as a hardship case.

I had a 4.0 in high school without ever studying for more than an hour a night, ever. Was elected class president, worked a summer job, no national awards. Got into Yale. Took an SAT prep class and mom and dad could pay tuition.

The kids now work much harder than I did and are so much more accomplished. They are taking harder classes, taking more of them a year, doing actual work/research, getting national awards. The IDEA that you think kids are crying their way into Harvard now shows real intellectual disinterest. The kids who are talking about their "sob story" are also winning the TOC. These colleges take 1 kids out of every 25 apps. Get real.

The real advantages now are with athletes, donors, and legacies - and those still favor the white kids.

U Chicago
USC
Berkeley

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What this shows is that getting into Harvard used to be immensely easier. People who went to Harvard in the 90s wouldn’t be in at anywhere comparable today.

It’s not harder or easier per se, but the grade inflation is making the signals of quality very noisy. A few decades ago, the high school grades already helped the admissions pick the outstanding (academically) students pretty accurately. In addition, applicants these days are supposed to play victim and write a sob story about what kind of hardship they have gone through and how they have overcome their hardship and what lessons they have learned. It’s like everyone is applying for a script writing major!

Wrong. It is easier. Harvard used to have a much higher admission rate. In 1988, it was 14.6% and less than 15,000 applications.

https://www.thecrimson.com/article/1988/7/8/freshman-class-sets-application-records-pthe/

In 2025, there was a 3.43% acceptance rate out of 57,435 apps.

https://features.thecrimson.com/2021/freshman-survey/makeup-narrative/#:~:text=This%20year%2C%20the%20College's%20acceptance,totals%20a%20historic%201%2C965%20students.

But you also wouldn’t apply unless you have an almost 4.0 GPA unhooked. Also, kids are dramatizing their sob story to have a chance of being admitted as a hardship case.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What this shows is that getting into Harvard used to be immensely easier. People who went to Harvard in the 90s wouldn’t be in at anywhere comparable today.

of course it was. there was a paper out studying this some time back - if you had enough money/social capital to know about and pay for SAT prep course, you're chance of admissions to Harvard was triple than pool. This was true in the. 80s and first half of the 90s. Never mind private tutoring in high school. I literally never heard of that when I was in HS. Sal Kahn really ruined everything!

my husband is always amazed that I had friends at my fancy boarding school who knew to get extra time on their SATS. and then got into HYPSM. I know this is more widespread now, but this was very common in the 90s where I went. the idea that some of you think, it's harder now because of grade inflation is laughable. need blind happened and, more importantly, the internet happened. how the game was played was clearer to more people starting in the 2000s

Anonymous wrote:My husband and I are both Harvard grads from the 90s. None of our close friends' kids go to Harvard -- not one. Off the op of my head:

Brown
UVA
William and Mary
Toronto
USC
Barnard
Haverford

etc

Did your friends and their parents go to Harvard?


Were you and your friends in Final clubs?

Columbia

Also more diversity of admission in general. It’s much harder for some demos to get in now, but much easier for others. And not just on the old affirmative action categories.

My husband and I are both Harvard grads from the 90s. None of our close friends' kids go to Harvard -- not one. Off the op of my head:

Brown
UVA
William and Mary
Toronto
USC
Barnard
Haverford

etc

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What this shows is that getting into Harvard used to be immensely easier. People who went to Harvard in the 90s wouldn’t be in at anywhere comparable today.

It’s not harder or easier per se, but the grade inflation is making the signals of quality very noisy. A few decades ago, the high school grades already helped the admissions pick the outstanding (academically) students pretty accurately. In addition, applicants these days are supposed to play victim and write a sob story about what kind of hardship they have gone through and how they have overcome their hardship and what lessons they have learned. It’s like everyone is applying for a script writing major!

Wrong. It is easier. Harvard used to have a much higher admission rate. In 1988, it was 14.6% and less than 15,000 applications.

https://www.thecrimson.com/article/1988/7/8/freshman-class-sets-application-records-pthe/

In 2025, there was a 3.43% acceptance rate out of 57,435 apps.

https://features.thecrimson.com/2021/freshman-survey/makeup-narrative/#:~:text=This%20year%2C%20the%20College's%20acceptance,totals%20a%20historic%201%2C965%20students.

In 1988, you had to type out your application on a typewriter. The lower acceptance rate is as much a function of the improved ease of application as it is anything else. The denominator changed more than the numerator.

Also there is just a larger population in general, more people aware of elite schools, and about the same amount of spots.

And academically elite children of immigrants crowding out mediocre legacies.