What is the point of this discussion anymore?
It’s really about the science of statistics and probablity. Different people look at the same data and come to very different conclusions. In my case I have a background in statistics and know that a 98-99% chance of admission and a 89% chance of rejection are two very different situations. But not everyone agrees. Elite college admissions is a very stressful experience that can color one’s viewpoint. But I do think you are right that this issue has throughly discussed and everyone can make their own decision on which position they would feel more comfortable on whether their child is likely to gain admission to Brown.
"Jared Kushner had a 99% chance of being accepted to Harvard after his dad donated 2.5 million in 250K annual installments.
Athletes with average stats often get recruited to elite colleges.
Being male is a hook at Brown."
Malia Obama had a 100% chance of getting into Harvard after she listed who her parents were on the common app. Same as Chelsea Clinton to Stanford. You can’t say that being a female is a hook at these two colleges.
lf your point is that people with money and power do well in the US, no one will disagree with that.
No that wasn’t my point @theloniusmonk - of course president’s kids have a lock unless they really are academically awful.
My point is that most of these advantages make sense to me -
-Having a president’s kid (or movie star or whatever) makes the school more prestigious - you can’t buy that kind of prestige/publicity.
-If you want $2.5 million for your library or whatever, you will save a spot for the academically average child of that donor.
-If you want a racially, ethnically, religiously, geographically, socio-economically diverse group of students, you will give an admissions tip if you fall short to make sure that happens.
-If you want an somewhat even gender balance, same - you will do what you can in admissions to meet that goal.
-If you want a schools newspaper, orchestra, theater whatever you’ll look for kids who have demonstrated interest and talent in those pursuits.
-If you want a sports culture, you will value athletic participation and talent. IMO this should be a hook about even with playing viola well, or having lots of theater experience.
-If you want more wealthy white kids you will admit legacies at a high rate, and you will make sure you have a crew, lacrosse, fencing, hockey blah blah blah team and set up a large, entire official program to give those kids likely letters and almost guaranteed admissions. (You will do it for a few athletic URM and low income kids too but they won’t count against your athletic admissions quota, that’s saved for the white and a few token Asian kids).
IMO only the last really doesn’t contribute much value to colleges. I think club teams with lots of walk-on possibilities would engage more students.
But I understand parents whose kids needed that hook to get into their college probably defend it.
Wealthy white students add value to the colleges in two ways:
- Colleges probably feel that they need a sufficient number of white students in order to be marketable to white students.
- Wealthy students need little or no financial aid.
Good point, @ucbalumnus . I suppose they do add some value in those ways, from a college perspective.
Good to know that wealthy whites are useful for something.
I’m referring to recruited athletes and legacies @Zinhead .
Though they happen to overlap to a significant degree.
Sub-categories of URMs or preferential treatment within them?!?
Ivy League Black Students Group: There Are Too Many African And Caribbean Students Here
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2017/10/01/ivy-league-black-students-group-there-are-too-many-african-and-caribbean-students-here-n2389020
“Identity politics is a nasty thing. Everyone who isn’t a progressive knows this. At Cornell University, that slice of politics is rearing its ugly head, with the school’s black students group demanding that more African American students be enrolled. They’re concerned that there are too many Caribbean and African students.”
Does he mean that those promoting white identity politics, who typically self-describe as “conservative” (not “progressive”) know that they are being nasty?
This letter was preceded by a violent racial assault and a previous harassment incident at Cornell, just for context. They are having a tough time this semester with that, apparently.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/18/nyregion/racially-charged-attack-slurs-cornell.html
…which is an issue that has come up in this thread a lot.
It sounds to me like these African American Cornell students feel like international students and first-gen immigrants are “taking their places” at Cornell under some “black but who cares where they come from” quota that means every one of those accepted replaces one of them. Might be true, might not.
What was your point in posting this, @i012575 ? I’m not sure what
means exactly.
It looks like they have also discovered the interaction between selective immigration (selection of highly educated immigrants) and the high level of transmission of educational attainment from (highly educated immigrant) parent to (American born) child. This is probably also noticeable among the white population if one looks (but probably no one looks or notices). It is most noticeable among the Asian population, where those of recent highly educated immigrant heritage are quite large in number compared to others.
It sure is a good thing that the schools have developed their own carefully thought out system. Anyone who thinks a D1 school can field proper teams with walk ons has a very limited experience or understanding of D1 level sports. Without a major recruiting effort and likely letters the Ivies simply could not field any competitive D1 teams. People who did not attend an Ivy have absolutely no idea just how competitive they are about everything including sports. The H-Y Football Game is a major event at both schools and outsiders will never quite be able to understand the mentality. Winning that one game makes for a successful season in the minds of the alums. For all of it’s flaws the schools today do about as good a job as can be done to balance all the competing interests. I never ceased to be amazed by the incredible people my children have met and roomed with during college. The other thing to keep in mind is that this most extreme competition only exists at a handful of medium sized private universities. The situation is much more predictable outside the top 5-8 schools or for LAC’s.
It makes sense that if one’s kid needed the athletic boost to get into a selective college, one would be in favor of that specific preference.
But someone should have told my parents’ Ivy that football is so important…longest losing streak in the Ivies (or period, who knows) during much of the time I was living there and the stands were mostly empty for every game.
It’s a wonder the college survived, since football is SOOO important.
Far from being empty the stands are packed every year. This is one of the reasons H/Y are what they are. Outsiders often don’t get it but the schools and alums consider this tradition very important and will do everything possible to preserves this tradition.
https://infogalactic.com/info/Harvard–Yale_football_rivalry
http://www.businessinsider.com/harvard-versus-yale-game-college-football-2014-11
http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2015/12/16/harvard-yale-beyond-the-game/
http://www.gocrimson.com/sports/mcrew-hw/tradition/harvard-yale
The 1968 was the most famous and is still discussed today. I’m sure you have seen the comic character BD.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Dowling_(American_football_player)
Obviously I was referring to a different Ivy, was that unclear?
The state U I currently reside in makes a really big deal about football too, I get the appeal of the game to alumni and students there. But it’s not exactly an academic powerhouse, certainly not ranked anywhere near the top 20.
Of course you were talking about Columbia. It’s not really about the game. It’s about an ancient rivalry to be the best between the best. I know you don’t understand and in truth most people don’t get it. But for some strange reason it’s important to the alums and as such the schools will always compete for the best players. Maybe someday you will have a chance to attend a game and you will see it’s much more than you thought. My son couldn’t believe the atmosphere the first time he attended. It’s like a smaller version of Mich/Ohio St. game.
I highly doubt it, I’ve never been to any type of football game, ever. A member of my immediate family went to Yale and never attended a game. It wasn’t his thing either.
I don’t dispute that the H-Y game is important to many, it may drum up alumni donations and improve school spirit. But I believe it to be an exception to the rule with regard to top Us and LACs. And there’s a tradeoff in that most recruited players wouldn’t otherwise be admitted.
But I have no personal reason to critique the current holistic system. I did well in it in the 80s and so have my kids. We did it without being the beneficiaries of athletic/racial/gender/legacy/development preferences, though.
To add a bit of levity to the above discussion. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4kai4FL0MQ
Yes that sums up the emotions pretty well. The LAC’s are a different animal and can’t be compared to HYPS for many reasons. Every major decision in life comes with consequences/tradeoffs. She obviously would prefer a different type of holistic system. Everyone is entitled to there own opinion but each and every system is open to critique when there are such limited positions and so many qualified students. There is no perfect answer and the current system seems to be least worst. If seats at HYPS could be traded in an open market I’m sure they could be sold for hundreds of thousands and probably even 7 figures such is the demand for these seats today.