<p>As the product of a middle class family myself I was well aware of the possible reaction to that phrase. I think it's fine to want to advance oneself; I think it's great to pursue the Great Amercian Dream. But, I also think it's useful to remind ourselves that security and material reward weren't always what the Ivy League were about. It used to be about producing leaders. And I really can't see how you can reconcile leadership with the kind of timidity and conformity that we -- as middle-class adults -- seem to be rewarding as we launch our kids into the college admissions process.</p>
<p>To me, leadership is about being able to think beyond what is good for your particular tribe or religion or even nationality, but, about what is good for the world as a whole. That means taking risks, walking unfamiliar territory -- holding your nose while saying, "I might not appreciate what I'm hearing (or, seeing, or reading about) now, but, maybe in ten years, my opinion might change." </p>
<p>I don't see those traits in today's middle class kids. Instead, I see people who've formed entire world views about art, politics, music and architecture by the time they're sixteen and who aren't particularly interested in changing them -- unless of course, it means getting a better grade for doing so. And what's worse, they now envelope it with the trappings of privilege: a style or a a look is respectable because it is -- "preppy". </p>
<p>And just who are all those Abercrombie & Fitch and Polo ads pitched to? Not the kids who were born with money, but, to middle-class kids who are taught from kindergarten that there's one correct answer -- and to not stand out in the crowd.</p>
<p>One wonders whether many of them would bother even going to college but for the fact that the only thing standing between them and meidcal school, an MBA or an entry level job at an I-bank is a piece of paper with their college's name on it.</p>
<p>With all due respect, your casting of this as a class issue misses the point for me. I agree that admission to an Ivy requires a "package" that might, to some, appear strategic. Fall off the strategy by spending a year say, just reading books instead of doing the EC; decide you don't care and eschew the boring APs; spend a summer listening to rock music, writing songs, and playing your guitar --do any of this and you may no longer pass the bar for the Ivy. There is more room at Wesleyan and Vassar for the different drummer of this ilk. On the other hand, this could be another way of saying admission is less competitive at Vassar and Wesleyan than Brown, which it is. Whatever, I agree in this sense: Those with less patience for the script but very high intellectual talent nonetheless may land at one of these two schools.</p>
<p>It's quite possible we're saying the same thing. The reason I'm casting it in class terms is because I find it fascinating that the years during which Wesleyan acquired it's radical cache seem to correlate with a rise in the percentage of prep school grads among its enrollees -- about 5%. Maybe not much in absolute terms, but, a tipping point of sorts. And, who's to say, all things being equal, which is the more competitive, a gpa from the middle of the pack at Andover or, one in the top 10% at Mid-Atlantic State High? I'm pretty sure which one Brown would choose.</p>
<p>You can't get into Brown by being top 10% at the public high --more like top 1% with something spectacular like the math prof at the State U says you are brilliant etc. Having met many prep school kids myself, I'm not sure I agree that they are overall more liberal, freer, etc than public school kids. It's wrongheaded to brand individuals by type in the context of colleges that purport to be the "anti-brand," ie Wesleyan, Vassar, Brown. These schools seek kids who live on the bias no matter what the milieu.</p>
<p>It IS more difficult to get into Brown whether from public or private school and in objective and absolute terms, no matter what the source of the student, Brown is more selective.</p>
<p>However, the things you need to do to rise above the bar at Brown, Yale, Princeton, etc., often require the kind of focus, steadfastness, and strategy that more creative types may lack --you can't tow the line and drift in your imagination at the same time. If you are writing a rock opera in your room over the summer you are marching to an inner voice that has NOTHING to do with the kind of strategy you need to get into Yale.</p>
<p>Kids who do this kind of thing come from every socioeconomic level from poor to rich because we are talking, here, about innate talent and perhaps, a more solitary notion of personal growth, without all the outer markers that signify accomplishment to the world. It's purely erroneous to assert that the rich have a lock on artistic vision or alternate ways of thinking: It is simply a false concept. Creative artists and other thought leaders come from all walks of life and may have no college education at all.</p>
<p>The bottom line is that over the space of the past twenty years, it is not at all clear that Brown has graduated leaders -- however you define it -- to any greater extent than either Vassar or Wesleyan, in proportion to their sizes.</p>
<p>johnwesley, life has taught me that I can find brilliance in unexpected places. I am one who believes we see great talent at State U's, especially the flagships, as well. Not everyone has it together enough, or has the kind of money it might require, to make it to the most prestigious colleges at age 18. Life is tough, and for some it is tougher. Talent will out in the end and grit can be an acquired trait. When it comes to great talent, it doesn't matter what college you go to as far as I am concerned. You will get there anyway.</p>
<p>I think that's a great point and one that I'm sure every adcom at a competitive college keeps in the back of their mind when weighing the quirky applicant who hasn't "quite gotten it together" by the age of 17. For example (and, to get back to my original point), places like Vassar and Wesleyan are under much less pressure to fill every class to the brim with people who've scored perfectly on the SATs; not that they couldn't if they wanted to -- the mechanism is there and they certainly have the resources. But, the ability to maintain their sense of individuality and historical mission has become one of the perks of not being in the Ivy League or, at least, not being too swept up in its limelight.</p>