<p>Just considering Cobrat’s high school alone (Stuyesavant), it’s not that weird that Cobrat would know someone personally who went to many or most of the elite colleges. Once you’re in the working world, you run into even more people who went to elite colleges.</p>
<p>The old cousin retort is getting old. Many posters on here expound on colleges they have no personal experience with, only they say something like, “The people I know at college X thought this…” or simply, “I’ve heard that college X”. It seems Cobrat’s mistake is his rhetorical style; he identifies them (e.g., his cousin, classmate, etc.)</p>
<p>Most college graduates I know from work attended state universities.</p>
<p>You might find a lot of elite college graduates at places like school-prestige-conscious investment banks, consulting companies, big law firms (with respect to law schools), or faculty positions at elite colleges (with respect to their PhD schools). But the number of elite college graduates is too small that finding a high concentration in most workplaces is unlikely. Someone who attended an elite high school and keeps track of fellow alumni is likely to know a higher concentration of students or graduates from elite colleges than someone observing college graduates at most workplaces.</p>
<p>Linkedin offers a function to list the most frequently attended colleges for members who work at a specific company. Some examples are below for some of the tech companies considered particularly desirable by recent college grads, when searching for employees with the word “engineer” in their job title. There is both a location bias and a bias toward better ranked programs. CMU appears in the top 5 for all 3, in spite of being located thousands of miles away from their headquarters.</p>
<p>Google
Stanford
Berkeley
CMU
MIT
UIUC</p>
<p>Apple
Stanford
San Jose State
Berkeley
Cal Poly SLO
CMU</p>
<p>Microsoft
Washington
CMU
UIUC
Stanford
Berkeley</p>
<p>If I instead choose the 3 engineering companies with the largest revenue (excluding Apple), then the results show less of a bias towards better ranked programs and a stronger bias towards the nearby schools with the most graduates.</p>
<p>"When my HS classmates at Harvard and I were in college, Final Clubs were perceived so negatively by most of them/most of the Harvard student body as havens for wealthy intellectual dilettantes to such an extent that the contempt was mutual. Same for fraternities/sororities…but then again, most HS classmates who ended up at Harvard had no use for such social clubs. "</p>
<p>There are posters on here who have attended H, have kids at H, or otherwise have deep ties there. But you’re as much of a expert because of your third-hand discussions with acquaintances. Likewise, there are posters on here who went to Wellesley or have kids at Wellesley. But you dated a girl from there and suddenly you’re an expert on how much the societies affect the social tone. You know more about how the societies affect the tone than the two of us on this thread with daughters right there.</p>
<p>“Because they feel it perpetuates old Harvard traditions they perceive as not only outmoded and should be tossed into the dustbin of history long ago, but also perpetuates norms of unearned social privilege and elitism more appropriate to old European aristocracies of the 19th century and before…not 20th or now…”</p>
<p>Look, the finals clubs (and sororities and so forth) are only really important to the people who are in them. You give these clubs way too much power in your head by fretting about them, being upset that they exist, mocking or disdaining the members, or even your supposed “raid their parties for good food” behaviors. Why can’t you simply act as grownups do, and if a club doesn’t interest you, shrug and go on your merry way? Why do you need to have a reaction that’s any different from your reaction to the chess club if you don’t play chess or the theater club if you’re not in theater or the Muslim club if you’re not Muslim or the lacrosse club if you don’t play lacrosse? </p>
<p>The fact that your ire gets so worked up, and you do get “great glee” from your sophomoric “let’s steal their food and drink, ha ha ha” says that you actually DO want to be part of those scenes and you feel excluded and hurt. So drop the “I’m above it all” posing that you don’t care. If you didn’t care, you’d be able to shrug and go in your merry way - just like most students at H do with respect to finals clubs, most students at W do with respect to societies (which are MINISCULE on campus, which you seem not to realize) and most students do with respect to Greek life.</p>
<p>I think you’re more jealous of wealthy people than you’re willing to admit to yourself, since you’re not very able to talk about rich people without devolving very quickly into elitism and aristocracy and other concepts. Rich people are simply rich. That’s all. They’re people like everyone else - some jerks, some nice.</p>
<p>I was thinking about this whole conversation this morning. I suppose, in a bigger sense what we’re really arguing about is the meaning of ‘diversity on campus’ which might actually be very different than ‘diversity in the classroom ’ or ‘diversity in the dorms.’ I think the problem is that when university admissions people claim that the reason it’s ok to give this or that person a tip in admissions based on the fact that “they will add so much to the campus life or the classroom”, the assumption IS that this or that person will actually deign to mix with the commoners on campus and share that experience. I’m not sure how much the wealthy Middle Eastern guy or the European royalty guy or whomever actually adds to the campus climate when, for example, his parents buy him a car and pay for him to house it off campus despite rules saying that freshmen can’t have cars, and he’s mostly gone to whatever large city is nearby, not actually participating in campus life. Similarly, the concert musician or Olympic athlete or film star who pops onto campus now and again in between his full-time international job. I think maybe it’s actually important for university PR to have these people in the community since it probably helps them to achieve other university goals – but then they ought to admit that these students were taken to achieve other goals, or to generate money, rather than pretending it’s because they’re going to be part of the community or contribute to other students’ experiences. That’s my problem with the exclusivity – if Oxford University takes a bunch of wealthy rich people who want nothing to do with the rest of us commoners, who have their own events, etc. – then they don’t claim that they did so in order to create a diverse environment. They just admit that some people are extremely wealthy and sometimes they are useful to the university, but don’t couch it in all that holistic, PC language. Just seems more honest.</p>
<p>My D doesn’t have a car, but she has friends with cars, and she can rent a zip car if she likes. She does have a bike And part of the attraction of Wellesley is that you have Boston to explore. I wish my D would explore Boston more - it’s just a hassle to get down there. If she were to go down there more, enjoying the art or club or music scene, is she not fulfilling her obligation to “stay on campus and participate in campus life”? </p>
<p>It seems that both you and Cobrat have issues with people not “socializing sufficiently” or to your taste. If my D wants to sit in her room playing cards with a few close friends, or join a society and hang out with those girls, or spend her time at Tufts or Harvard or Olin where she might have friends, or whatever, it seems to me it’s her business. It’s nice to participate in campus activities, and I highly encourage it, but no, I don’t think you should “have to” socialize with anyone you don’t want to. As an example, I doubt my D would be amused by the kind of crowd that thinks it funny to “raid snobby parties for food and drink, tee hee.”</p>
<p>" That’s my problem with the exclusivity – if Oxford University takes a bunch of wealthy rich people who want nothing to do with the rest of us commoners, who have their own events, etc. – then they don’t claim that they did so in order to create a diverse environment. They just admit that some people are extremely wealthy and sometimes they are useful to the university, but don’t couch it in all that holistic, PC language. Just seems more honest."</p>
<p>What are you suggesting? When Wellesley College is welcoming the class of 20xx to campus, they should say “most of you were admitted due to your academics, but (insert names here), welcome to you too – you were admitted because you are wealthy international students but you probably won’t mingle with anybody”? I don’t see what they need to “admit” or not about any given student. </p>
<p>Part of diversity is also that people will vary in terms of how much they want to mingle and how big they want their social circles to be. There seems to be an unspoken prejudice here against people who want smaller social circles. As an introvert, that’s how I like my social circles and I don’t WANT to “mingle with everybody at all times.”</p>
<p>"When my HS classmates at Harvard and I were in college, Final Clubs were perceived so negatively by most of them/most of the Harvard student body as havens for wealthy intellectual dilettantes to such an extent that the contempt was mutual. "</p>
<p>I doubt the contempt was mutual. I think you don’t understand that people in these kinds of clubs are simply indifferent towards people not in them. Not contemptuous. Your insecurities about your own socioeconomic status lead you to project that people in finals clubs, fraternities, whatever, are “contemptuous” towards you. It’s you and your friends who are wasting the mental energy being contemptuous and disdainful towards these folks. Clue-they’re not paying a bit of attention to you. Get over it.</p>
<p>"One thing about me is that I tend to get bored if I stick with one group for far too long. Being able to mix in with multiple crowds and randomly chat up folks in public keeps life interesting. "</p>
<p>Here’s a consideration for you, cobrat. You claim to love diversity, but only if people are like you and want to flit from group to group. You don’t seem to have a lot of tolerance for introverts, for people who want to find a few close friends with whom they have common interests and hang mostly with that crowd an not flit from crowd to crowd. Why is that style of interaction so bothersome to you? If people are happy socializing their way, why must you insist they do it YOUR way or else they are snobby, elite, stuck-up, etc.?</p>
<p>When I went to one of those wealthy LAC many years ago, I really didn’t have any idea of how the half (or top 1% lived). I knew my parents were very frugal, but I thought most people lived like we did. I did learn few things from some of my very wealthy friends, just as well from people like me. In my case, diversity at my LAC was very educational.</p>
<p>I didn’t disdain Final Clubs - they were irrelevant. None of my friends were in them and no one talked about them. Well that’s not quite true, there were periodic articles in the Crimson about the fact that they were all male. In 1984 Harvard said they had to become co-ed or cease being part of Harvard. They all opted to sever the connection with Harvard.</p>
<p>Finals Clubs aren’t only bastions of the wealthy elite. Deval Patrick grew up on the south side of the Chicago, but attended Milton Academy on scholarship. Thanks to those connections with the wealthy elite that he made at the Fly Club he’s now governor of Massachusetts. (I’m told the idea that he should run for governor occurred at a panel he sat on at our 25th reunion by the way - I believe Grover Norquist was on the same panel.)</p>
I think this can be more true or less true at different colleges, and can also change over time at the same college. It’s easy to say that nobody cares, but (for example) people do care at Princeton about who gets into the most selective eating clubs. At many universities, people care a lot about who gets into the most desirable fraternities and sororities. One reason people may care more or less is the degree to which these institutions play an important role in the social life of the university. At Yale, the fraternities have begun to play a bigger role in recent years, partly because students can no longer drink at residential-college sponsored events. I still don’t think it’s an overwhelming role for Greeks there, but it’s much, much bigger than when I was there. People care somewhat about the secret societies–but they don’t really host parties, so they don’t have a very big effect on the social life of the school. Kids who don’t get in one may be disappointed, but it doesn’t affect them all that much.
If the big parties are open to everybody, even if they are at a frat, the impact of membership may be less. But that also is something that varies from school to school. I remember reading an editorial written by an “independent” girl (somebody who was not a member of a sorority) complaining that she couldn’t get into the most desirable part of the football stadium because she didn’t have a date who was in a fraternity. The best areas were reserved for the fraternities. (I would just note that one way to tell if Greek organizations have a major role on campus is if there is a common term to describe people who aren’t in one of them.)</p>
<p>“traditions they perceive as not only outmoded and should be tossed into the dustbin of history long ago, but also perpetuates norms of unearned social privilege and elitism more appropriate to old European aristocracies of the 19th century and before”</p>
<p>People only have social privilege if others ascribe that prestige to them. If Rich Mary and Rich Suzie wish to link arms, skip off to Newbury Street and compare the price of Prada bags all the livelong day, there IS no inherent social prestige in that. You are free to say “have a nice day!” or otherwise ignore them and let them do their thing. </p>
<p>If, however, you react by getting all your buddies together to mock Mary and Suzie, lifting your pinkies high, exclaiming about tea sandwiches and butlers in exaggerated voices, and scheming how to raid Mary and Suzie’s next party for hopes of finding the best caviar, then you are ASCRIBING privilege to them, by implying that their behaviors are so important that they must be mocked or made fun of or that Mary and Suzie need to be taken down a peg or two. </p>
<p>Didn’t you learn anything about deconstructing social norms at Oberlin?</p>
<p>You make a fair point, Hunt. It’s just interesting to watch cobrat froth at the mouth over “elitist societies at W” when they are truly minuscule and of no importance or influence to girls not in them.</p>
<p>Son enjoyed his time at p’ton and we are a 0 EFC family. Financial aid package there includes enough to join an eating club when you are an upperclassman. Supposedly they are “elite” but it didn’t strike son as elite. Rather it was more “group” oriented. Football players join one, lacrosse another, tennis another, econ majors one, “partiers” another…not dictated by money or prestige but rather your interests, ECs and friends.</p>
<p>He was chosen to to be one of the executive officers of his eating club and for those few they do get to reside within the eating club during their tenure. They also have the privilege of visiting the other clubs since they are part of a smaller council (not the right name). Just a few from each club so not many. Living at the house did save him money on room and board and the chef was on hand for late night meals…</p>
<p>Granted son did say while he was a sophomore in high school and a HUGE eater that since p’ton had eating clubs then that was the school for him!! As a football player he was always hungry and having early wake-ups for practice and meals cook to order for his last years made him a happy camper! He attends reunions every year, even this year with a USMLE exam following quickly afterwards.</p>
<p>Son made many friends from all levels of socio-economic status and they were mindful of his lack of funds and never made him feel bad. He was and still is overcome by their generosity that goes well beyond their wallets. He has made life-long friends that he feels are the real wealth the school had to offer. Two weekends ago they knew he would be in the midst of his clinical years and it would be difficult for him to visit them so six of them, from all the parts of country flew and drove to his place and had a blast over the weekend. It really meant a great deal to him.</p>
<p>Again he has never mentioned feeling excluded due to his lack of funds, rather was included because of where is future was taking him.</p>
<p>No offense, katwkittens, but what you say about the eating clubs is what is typically said by persons who managed to get into one of them. People who have been “hosed” may have a different point of view. And even the selective clubs are not all the same.</p>
And part of the attraction of Wellesley is that you have Boston to explore. I wish my D would explore Boston more - it’s just a hassle to get down there. If she were to go down there more, enjoying the art or club or music scene, is she not fulfilling her obligation to “stay on campus and participate in campus life”? </p>