Top colleges seem to talk a lot about evaluating applications holistically and giving opportunities to disadvantaged students, but the data show that most students come from the top 10% of the income bracket. At Harvard, 15% of the students are from the top 1% and 53% are from the top 10% of the income bracket. By contrast, only 4.5% of students at Harvard come from the bottom 20% of the income bracket, which is about the same amount from the top 0.1% income bracket.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/college-mobility/harvard-university
Also, 38 colleges had more students from the top 1 percent than the bottom 60 percent, which I think is a little astounding.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/01/18/upshot/some-colleges-have-more-students-from-the-top-1-percent-than-the-bottom-60.html?mc=aud_dev&mcid=fb-nytimes&mccr=EDUMayDOM&mcdt=2017-05&subid=EDUMayDOM&ad-keywords=EDUMayDOM&_r=1
I personally know a high school senior now who got waitlisted at one of the Ivy League universities, and his dad cut a check for a lot of money, and he was suddenly removed from the waitlist. I know the students admitted to these universities have all achieved amazing things, but it seems like a lot of money and influence goes into their success and admission. It makes me wonder how we can address such educational inequality for disadvantaged students.
Donate a library or create an endowed position and doors will open. That’s just how it works. College admissions are not a meritocracy.
Looking at this data, it makes me feel like elite colleges are perpetuating income inequality and elitism.
It definitely is imperfect but it sure is better than it used to be. I do think some of the better endowed schools are trying to make some progress. I think there are many factors at play. I do think many in this country don’t get a fair shake and that starts with unequal opportunities from birth and some substandard K-12 experiences. Can’t blame it all on the colleges.
@doschicos I think you made an important point that the primary and secondary education systems are to blame too
This is discussed endlessly here and your post has no surprises. Rich people can afford to buy better educations and experiences for their kids. No earth shattering revelation. Wealthier kids (generally speaking) have access to tutoring, live in safe, stable communities, have access to all kinds of enriching extracurriculars, attend well-funded schools, and so on. Elite colleges want students with those qualities, so it’s not surprising that rich kids make up a large percentage of an accepted class. And of course, elite colleges are tyring harder than ever to address the disparity and admit more and more kids from diverse backgrounds.
To answer the question asked in your title, money is a boost if your parent or grandparent is donating mega-millions. Many of the students admitted have parents with money, but it’s not going to get you in by itself. And as far as social status, presumably many kids at the top private schools come from extremely well-connected families, and yes, may of those kids go to elite colleges. But are they admitting students because their parent was featured in WAG magazine at the gala? Not so sure about that.
Intelligence is an inherited trait so it makes sense that successful people will have successful children.
Intelligence doesn’t always translate into financial success, though. I am a Mensa member, and have many friends in it that are in professions that aren’t that lucrative. They are generally happy with their work. You can’t assume that everyone wants to use their talents just to make money. Thankfully – among those friends are excellent nurses, artists, auto mechanics, librarians, state transit engineers, and teachers.
I think it is indisputable that wealth/income is positively correlated with intelligience, and intelligence is hereditary. Unfortunately, social norms reinforce this correlation.
Intelligence is NOT solely due to heredity and it is now standard knowledge that environment plays a huge role in intelligence. Up to fifty percent of a person’s intelligence is directly influenced by environment: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-intelligence-hereditary/
Moeny is largely the big determining factor in how influential environment becomes in regards to a person’s potential for intelligence.
I sense happy hour is coming up.
Here’s the thing, though: At top UK unis, which are much more meritocratic (entrance based much more on academic marks and academic achievements), you find almost the same SES distribution as at top US colleges.
@PurpleTitan , because just like here, people with money can hire tutors, etc… The Russell Group unis are making efforts to enroll a more diverse student body, and despite the emphasis on stats, they are relaxing their standards somewhat to admit more diverse students.
@Lindagaf: I’m certainly not denying that being rich gives advantages but am noting that with all the “artificial” boosts and hooks that top American colleges use, they end up with the same SES distribution as a system that comes down mostly to academic achievements.
It actually would be even more useful to see the SES distribution at top Canadian unis as there, outside of a few elite programs at certain schools, admission for Canadians comes down solely to HS grades.
You’re a recent college graduate. What you can do is get involved in your local school district. Attend board meetings, try to understand what opportunities are available for students, and find out what the district’s challenges are. Students who are well prepared for college will have more opportunities, but the preparation starts early. Make sure the kids in your area have the foundation they deserve.
Or get involved with a group like The Breskthrough Collaborative, working to get lower income kids with high potential to college.
The more selective US universities have some boosts for students at various SES levels. E.g. the huge donor boost helps those at the very top, the legacy boost helps the upper half, and then they boost a few from the lower half to avoid losing all SES diversity (even then, the SES distribution tends to be heavily skewed upward).
Of course, that means that those in the various SES ranges without the specified boosts (donor, legacy, etc.) are at a disadvantage in admissions compared to those who do have them.
@intparent I will look into that thanks
To get a glimpse into how wealth plays a role in access to elite colleges, read “The Price of Admission: How America’s Ruling Class Buys Its Way into Elite Colleges–and Who Gets Left Outside the Gates” by Daniel Golden. It’s an outstanding investigative journalism by the Pulitzer winning author who exposes how things really work in elite college admissions. Although it was published a decade ago, nothing much has really changed since except for perhaps that elite colleges are ever slightly more sensitive to admitting a few more students from economical bottom strata.
There are not many low income kids who are “college ready”, especially at the level of “top colleges”, compared to kids from wealthier families. That’s for a myriad of reasons from exposure to environmental hazards like lead paint, school quality preK-12, parent education level, safety of neighborhood…factors that disadvantage poor kids long before the first SAT test taken or high school GPA.
Just with that fact, there is a much smaller pool of low income high school seniors who can successfully get into, or succeed at, college.
So top colleges mostly do what they can to recruit and pay for the poor kids who do manage to succeed in sub-optimal conditions. A handful try to reach out sooner, to middle schools students, but not many.