Keep it in perspective, temporally?

Applying to College
1

<p>I read this article a few days ago, and was quite shocked by this bit:

[quote]

The subtitle of the first chapter of How to Get Into an Ivy League School <a href="1985">b</a>** was "A Gate Crasher's Guide to the Ivy League," and the chapter described an admissions scene in which eagerness and grinding preparation were the very stuff of which an Ivy League admission was made. This was the beginning of the era in which Ivy League applicants needed almost ludicrously impressive bona fides if they were to be alive in the water.

[/quote]

Confessions</a> of a Prep School College Counselor</p>

<p>It's a little crazy to think that this whole ultracompetitive era began just 20 years ago, and that prior to that, "normal" kids got into HYPS, etc.</p>

<p>But then I started thinking, and I realized that means that there's whole generations of Harvard graduates who weren't super amazing when they enrolled, and that all these posts saying "There's nothing special about Ivy League.. you can go to Harvard and become a file clerk in life" could only really be applied to the previous generation. Maybe in a few years, when graduates of Harvard from THIS generation begin to mature, the attitude that "State U is ultimately as good as any Ivy" will be shot down. Or maybe not.</p>

2

<p>You have made a very important, yet oft overlooked point. Harvard wasn't always Harvard ;) </p>

<p>Ivy League degrees were more about whether or not one could afford the tuition. Now, tuitions are closer all across the board, making the Ivy League more accessible to all.</p>

3

<p>I am part of an older generation and I need to stress that competition for slots in Harvard, Yale, Princeton et al has been intense for a long, long time. I had a good friend who attended Yale. He was class valedictorian and had 1600 on his College Boards (back when that was the best). I knew three guys at Harvard and each was a straight A student with high scores and something unique as well. One guy was a state champion debater and another was an all-state basketball player. As long as a degree from HYP is a stepping stone to top jobs and careers (which it was and is) competition for scarce slots will remain high.</p>

4

<p>Ah lantern, I'm not saying Harvard didn't always attract the best... it's just that, comparatively, the average harvard class was not of the same quality as today's classes because:</p>

<ol>
<li>There just wasn't such a competitive, overpopulated, ivy-oriented pool of applicants that we have today</li>
<li>Some other reason, such as greater financial conservatism when it came to colleges, lack of name-brand mania...</li>
</ol>

<p>I did get this impression earlier when I read a different article, where a Harvard alum interviewer mused that so many talented and extraordinary kids weren't getting in these days, when he had gotten in a few decades ago with only "science fair projects" and "concession stand volunteering"</p>

<p>My point is that the world (our small, college-driven world) has changed so much since then, and that 20 or so years ago, we probably could have walked onto Harvard's campus and mistaken the student body as belonging to a far less prestigious school in today's era</p>

5

<p>"I did get this impression earlier when I read a different article, where a Harvard alum interviewer mused that so many talented and extraordinary kids weren't getting in these days, when he had gotten in a few decades ago with only "science fair projects" and "concession stand volunteering"</p>

<p>It's important to put things into context. While it's definitely true that college has gotten more competitive, when I applied was during the baby boom and I remember that one in 4 female applicants got into Harvard (Radcliffe College) while one in 3 male ones did. This was the most competitive that Harvard had ever been. The largest percentage ever of high school students were heading to colleges.</p>

<p>While it's true that few if any students had the kind of ECs and achievements that many applicants do now, at the same time, there were fewer such options for students. The intensive summer academic programs that can give students a leg up on science fairs, the academic competitions like Mu Alpha Theta, the extensive summer sports and music programs -- these things either didn't exist or were very rare. </p>

<p>Add to that the fact that many solidly middle class families had just one car for a family of as 6 to share (The "ideal" family back in my day had 4 kids -- 2 boys and 2 girls). While now, it's common for every teen in a middle class family to have their own car - and consequently be able to transport themselves to a variety of ECs. That wasn't possible in the old days.</p>

<p>And even the most rigorous high schools lacked the extensive number of APs that some above average high schools offer now. And to my knowledge, SAT prep courses didn't exist before. </p>

<p>Given what I remember of my Harvard class back in the 1970s ( a class whose alum have included a head of state, a U.S. ambassador, a Nobel Prize winner, a lieutenant governor, one of the original writers of Saturday Night Live, a U.S. solicitor general -- and those are just some of the notables), I do think that overall, the class would compare favorably to the people who are on campus now.</p>

<p>Harvard has long been known for having a very active student body who voluntarily are active in hundreds of ECs that are student-run often at a professional level. What I've seen on campus in recent years doesn't seem different from the vibrant atmosphere that existed when I was there. Perhaps the only difference is that taking over buildings doesn't seem as popular now.</p>