<p>May I pls point out that PG’s quote in 846 combines thoughts from two of us? I have no issue with PG or her family choices.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If you’re restricting it to wealth and income level, yes. However, there’s also the dimension of being part of an upper/upper-middle class in terms of being associated even as a hanger-on of a select exclusive “intellectual social club”…especially one associated with preppy culture…however illusory such notions may be in practice. </p>
<p>Closest thing I can liken it to would be an impoverished/heavily indebted European aristocrat, Chinese scholar-official, Tokugawa era Daimyo/Samurai, or your erstwhile British aristocrat* who may be impoverished economically…but has the consolation of being part of their respective society’s social elite…including being socially superior to those much wealthier than they are in economic terms. </p>
<ul>
<li>I.e. Lord Grantham’s family versus both the “middle class” relations and his “commoner” in-laws.</li>
</ul>
<p>Alh , didn’t you first bring up the resources question in the context of cuts at UNC? Who should be admitted?
And resources are only one part of the Brewster letter. IMO, resources include classes, library, facilities, visiting lectures, clubs/activities, study groups, etc. Not a matter of popular vs smaller departments. Somehow, didn’t my daughter and her less common major come up? Help me here</p>
<p>I feel compelled to make a brief statement here and then move on. Many in the paleoleft (the old pro-labor left) are quite convinced that the popularity and ubiquitousness of gender studies, queer studies, African-American studies, etc…, which are of the New Left and go hand-in-hand with Identity politics, have been a significant factor in the ascendance of the Right in the last few decades and its continued dominance (in spite of Obama, who is actually to the right of Nixon on the great majority of issues). They also would hold that the sophisticated Right is extremely supportive of this trend and has done and will continue to do what it can to help this trend continue (the old “divide and conquer”).</p>
<p>Cob, you’re speaking of a smaller slice of the pie. We won’t pass with Queen Elizabeth, but can attain a higher US class than born to. IF we learn the cues. Not all do.</p>
<p>Whoa, count me out of the group that learns the cues!</p>
<p>I agree with alh: Education is valuable in itself. (Perhaps it is our common non-Ivy background that makes us think similarly.) I don’t see education primarily as a means to join the upper middle class, or upper class, or uber-rich.</p>
<p>Although I think that a strong student can get an education that is really quite good without going to one of the “top” schools, it is nevertheless the case that it is much more difficult for a student at many good state flagships to put together a set of courses that approximates the offerings at a “top” school. Depending on the major and the flagship, it may actually not be possible. That is not to say that the student is debarred from becoming wealthy. There are many routes to wealth in the U.S., as Pizzagirl has pointed out. </p>
<p>But for those of us for whom an education of high quality is a good in itself, it does make a difference. I don’t fool myself that my colleagues and I are on par with the Harvard faculty in my area. It might be argued that occasionally one or two of us (not I!) rise to that level, but collectively, we leave a pretty big margin. For most of our students, this makes no difference at all. As my freshman calculus prof remarked, “At this level, it does not make any difference whether you are being taught by John von Neumann or John von Brand X.” Not that John von Brand X was a slouch–not at all; but he wasn’t von Neumann, either. But for a few undergrads [a quite small number], I think that the difference does matter.</p>
<p>I think the nation would be better off if these students were admitted to the schools where the curriculum challenges them. To the extent that we regard education as a personal good, this argument does not apply–but viewed in the context of what an unusually bright student can do with a first-rate education, to benefit the country/world, it does matter. In any event, I hate to think that such a student is being declined by a place like MIT because admissions preferred a student with multiple B’s in science and math at a not overly challenging high school, because that student liked to make popcorn and watch movies with friends to have fun (actual example taken from the MIT web site about 6 years ago now).</p>
<p>I am wondering whether the arguments on this thread tend to support my statement that the Harvard students I have known understand how to work the status quo, and argue that one should either get with the program or go elsewhere–while alh, collegealum314, a few others and I think it’s legitimate to question the admissions priorities, even though the schools are private.</p>
<p>[Also, sorry alh–my last post is pretty much what I have said before, and not even funny!]</p>
<p>Perhaps of some relevance to the discussion: I heard a snippet on NPR today referring to employers who asked new hires to read Suetonius and speeches of Cato the Elder, apparently to compensate for their inadequate educations to that point. I am not sure in how many universities one could read Suetonius or Cato.</p>
<p>And furthermore, I believe that Carthage must be destroyed.</p>
<p>But you question a process you freely admit you do not know.</p>
<p>Where do you get the idea a kid with multiple Bs is being coveted? Saying that adds fuel to the fire. Distracts. Doesn’t a “scientific” view suggest speculation is only a start?</p>
<p>I don’t know that the student is being “coveted.” But it appears that such students are being admitted to MIT, specifically. I could understand completely if MIT is admitting students with B’s (or worse) in literature, history, or foreign languages. But either there is a lot of lying going on, over in the MIT forum, some of it from people affiliated with admissions, or MIT is admitting some students with multiple B’s in science/math, and not from Thomas Jefferson, or IMSA.</p>
<p>"I agree 100% that the resources at Yale are amazing. And the kids that I know who have attended Yale in the last 10 years are amazing. And my college friend who is now a faculty member at Yale is amazing- and says the kids are more amazing than the college kids we knew back when.</p>
<p>But this means what exactly? That the citizens of the US get to tell Yale who they should be admitting, and who they should NOT be admitting? Or that every kid we know who does not get into Yale is somehow being cheated out a birthright?"</p>
<p>Blossom, speak for me any time on this. Fundamentally, Yale’s resources belong to Yale for Yale to deploy as they see fit.</p>
<p>Put it another way. Let’s say some wealthy benefactor of Yale decides to give them, oh I don’t know, $30,000,000 for construction of an athletic facility, or a dance facility, or a theater. (Number pulled out of thin air) is Yale “obligated” to do something with that money that benefits society as a whole, versus the relative handful of Yale undergrads who will work out, dance, or act? I don’t think so.</p>
<p>I should add–the admitted students with B’s in science/math are not directly coupled to the popcorn-poppers, but that is the impression that the web site gave.</p>
<p>"If you’re restricting it to wealth and income level, yes. However, there’s also the dimension of being part of an upper/upper-middle class in terms of being associated even as a hanger-on of a select exclusive “intellectual social club”…especially one associated with preppy culture…however illusory such notions may be in practice. "</p>
<p>I have no interest in being in such an “intellectual social club.” Neither does my H and neither do my kids. And given that I don’t have a WASP bone in my body, I can’t make claims to preppy culture.</p>
<p>Addendum to #868–Actually, I would hope that a student could read Suetonius in any university in the country, even if he/she had to rely on interlibrary loans. What I meant to ask was: How many universities offer courses in which the students read Suetonius?</p>
<p>I did a cursory google and believe that i saw, in addition to Duke and U Chicago – UNC / Chapel Hill, U of Arkansas, Fordham, Wofford College, and a college I never heard of called (I think) Blackhawk College in the quad cities of IL/IA.</p>
<p>ETA: I saw Suetonius mentioned in the syllabus of a Florida State class as well.</p>
<p>Re Pizzagirl’s recent question about the hypothetical donor, and who benefits from the donation: I think Yale is hoping that its theatre students will influence the direction of the country in terms of theatre arts, and perhaps more broadly. </p>
<p>Does anyone else recall the Sigourney Weaver riff on German existentialist theater on the 1930’s, in a piece on Saturday Night Live? (Instead of “Mack the Knife,” “Mack the Skillet, etc.” That was directly referential to the fashions in the Yale School of Drama when she attended it (and was told she had no future as an actress).</p>
<p>The thing is: All across the country, there were colleges running shows that revived Weill’s plays and similar works. I think the influence did spread out from Yale. (And perhaps other similar places.)</p>
<p>I think Blossom and I agreed on another thread that a reasonably intelligent motivated individual could teach themselves Latin at the kitchen table. Like in the teaching of math/science - Classics will vary hugely from school to school, correct?</p>
<p>Yale used to be entirely WASP males from relatively affluent backgrounds. Why did it change? Was this Yale’s idea or a capitulation to outside pressures?</p>
<p>It might be nice if it had never changed and all those old Yale families were spared the heartache of having their intelligent and well-qualified children denied. I find that very sad and I am not being in the least sarcastic here.</p>
<p>I pretty much think I can criticize whatever I want. No one has to pay me any mind.</p>
<p>I looked at a Blackhawk College post on Suetonius. It’s in English. (/shudders snobbishly)</p>
<p>I wasn’t really asking who benefits. I’m asking what obligation Yale has to society as a whole. They may want to, and have it be part of their mission, but they choose that mission; it was not thrust onto them.</p>
<p>You snob, you, QM! (I must say I thoroughly enjoy your posts and would admit you to any university I decide to start.)</p>