Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why is everyone fighting so hard to get their kids into a "top 30-ish" school?
Less than 5% of college students attend a top 50 college. About 2.4% of college students in the US attend a top 30 college. Roughly 1% attend a "top 20" college. What is the point in fighting to be such a tiny fraction of college students.
For internships and jobs after. For grad school, medical and law school placement. For the contacts one makes at such places.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why is everyone fighting so hard to get their kids into a "top 30-ish" school?
Less than 5% of college students attend a top 50 college. About 2.4% of college students in the US attend a top 30 college. Roughly 1% attend a "top 20" college. What is the point in fighting to be such a tiny fraction of college students.
Where is your citation for this? Top 30 nat’l universities and SLACs?
I'd love to see a citation for this too. Honestly, some posters just come here and spout out stats with zero citations to back them up - and then everyone is expected to just believe them.![]()
Anonymous wrote:Top 2% is not that hard. A 1430 is in the top 2%.
Anonymous wrote:Once you get out of areas where everyone is obsessed with prestige and comparing themselves with everyone else, your life gets vastly better. Go to a good school, live in a moderate-sized city with real people, and quietly be a big fish in a smaller pond with little pressure to constantly compete with others. It’s heavenly.
Anonymous wrote:Once you get out of areas where everyone is obsessed with prestige and comparing themselves with everyone else, your life gets vastly better. Go to a good school, live in a moderate-sized city with real people, and quietly be a big fish in a smaller pond with little pressure to constantly compete with others. It’s heavenly.
Anonymous wrote:bragging rights2
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why is everyone fighting so hard to get their kids into a "top 30-ish" school?
Less than 5% of college students attend a top 50 college. About 2.4% of college students in the US attend a top 30 college. Roughly 1% attend a "top 20" college. What is the point in fighting to be such a tiny fraction of college students.
I often wonder where people get these stats and how do you know how trustworthy it is.
Some other posts have noted that many posts here are basically SP. Lot of them probably come from consulting businesses, and some outsiders lack a genuine understanding of the lifestyles of American elites.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why is everyone fighting so hard to get their kids into a "top 30-ish" school?
Less than 5% of college students attend a top 50 college. About 2.4% of college students in the US attend a top 30 college. Roughly 1% attend a "top 20" college. What is the point in fighting to be such a tiny fraction of college students.
I often wonder where people get these stats and how do you know how trustworthy it is.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why is everyone fighting so hard to get their kids into a "top 30-ish" school?
Less than 5% of college students attend a top 50 college. About 2.4% of college students in the US attend a top 30 college. Roughly 1% attend a "top 20" college. What is the point in fighting to be such a tiny fraction of college students.
Where is your citation for this? Top 30 nat’l universities and SLACs?
Anonymous wrote:A few posters have extolled the virtues of an ultra-competitive environment, yet they’re probably the same parents driving their kids insane about the need to “go Ivy” and get a well-paying treadmill job in tech, finance or consulting. Then, they tell everyone else that any other way is the road to serfdom. I feel sorry for these lost and myopic souls. What they’ve encouraged their children to pursue is not a good life.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:US is designed around the idea of competition and freedom to compete. Everyone gets a chance to wrestle to the top of the heap, instead of being forced to stay lower class or upper class.
That’s not true. Most Ivy League schools and other top colleges are disproportionately filled with wealthy students, which shows how wealth and power tend to remain concentrated among those who already have them. Many high-achieving students are denied admission not because of a lack of merit, but because they lack advantages such as influence, legacy status, or institutional “hooks.” The admissions system is not fair, nor is it a level playing field.
It is true that many high-achieving kids are denied admission. But, they are denied admission because of a lack of space, not a lack of fairness. Your implication that those with hooks don’t merit admission is incorrect. The playing field isn’t always level but those who do are not qualified for admission rarely get in.
There are far more high-achieving applicants than spaces which is why you cannot really stack rank top schools. The student body and resources are more similar than different. This vexes those who gain admission because they need to crow about their “win”.
I agree with this in part. The vast majority of the kids in the Ivy+ (and mine is one of them) are high achieving and earned their spots (including the athletes and legacies). It's really only the donor ones that are potentially exempted from being at the same level of GPA, test score etc. The problem is indeed that there are multiples of equally qualified students for whom there aren't enough spots.
What I disagree with is the idea that the kids/parents who did get lucky and get a spot don't recognize that. Believe me they do. They are fully aware that many of their equally talented and qualified siblings, friends and peers simply didn't win the random chance lottery that is highly rejective admissions
I agree with that. I acknowledge a lot of equally worthy didn’t get the lucky ticket. However, I do think there is a difference and I know that will make some people annoyed. When we attended admit days for two schools that were ranked around 20, they did not have the same feeling of intensity the higher ranked schools did. It could be a pro or a con based on personal opinions.
There is no difference, it does annoy me because it is absolutely incorrect. I say that as someone who attended one of the HYPSM and has a child at a WASP. I have another child at a different school with single digit acceptance rates and the education that they are getting gives no ground to mine or their siblings.