“Hmm…couldn’t get into Yale. You’ll be OK.” 
All of these statements suggest certainty, but reaction is far from certain. I expect the vast majority of the population isn’t particularly concerned about who attended Harvard and who did not, and isn’t going to have an extreme reaction upon learning that someone attended or did not attend. I’d expect the population as a whole is far more likely to have a strong reaction, upon hearing someone attended a sports rival college. Of course there is also a large portion of the population that doesn’t particularly care about football/basketball rivalry and won’t have any particular reaction to learning about attending the rival college. In both cases, the rate of a reaction varies with what subgroup of the population you are talking to.
I don’t think anyone said that every person at Harvard is wealthy, but there is no question that wealthy persons are tremendously overrepresented, and lower income persons are tremendously underrepresented. The previously linked NYT study found that the majority of Harvard’s class was top 10% income, and 1/3 of the class was bottom 80% income. Very few were truly low income.
However, the same study found that Harvard was not especially unique in that respect compared other highly selective private colleges. Many highly selective privates had a notably larger portion of wealthy students than Harvard, including the majority of Ivy League colleges, the majority of NESCAC colleges, half of the Patriot League private colleges (not including Army and Navy), etc. Where Harvard may differ is in wealth of matriculating legacies. In the freshman survey, 46.4% of legacies reported an income of >$500k. I doubt many other highly selective privates can match that figure.
@Data10 Yeah, I seriously doubt the legacy figure. That means two people earning more than 250K per year. Know a ton of legacies and very few earn that much. You also have to figure in many are Phds or went into some esoteric field. Not earning that income or anywhere close. Very few families in the US earn that much(especially if they work for someone else), add in that they have to have a kid in the age range, then a kid whose stats are somewhat acceptable to Harvard range ( even bottom 25%) and you get a tiny number of legacies who get the nod. Not tens of thousands or even thousands. hundreds. And then all those folks are from families making more than 500K. I just don’t believe the data. It’s highly dubious.
Funny re: reaction. College v. sports. Definitely depends on where you live. Otherwise, reaction=blank stare.
Schools like legacies who DONATE.
One of my few pet peeves about Harvard is its Z list program which is all about favorable treatment to non-standouts with wealthy connections. Something I find pretty deplorable given the monstrous size of Harvard’s endowment.
The Harvard freshman survey has a decent response rate – 65% of the class participated in the most recent one. The reported income of the class as a whole is also reasonably consistent with the NYT study. And the % legacy with >$500k income seems reasonably consistent with previous years. For example, this year is 46.4%, and last year it was 46.0%. It’s possible that legacies are far more likely to overrestimate their income and/or lie about their income than the general Harvard population, but I see no reason to expect this. I think the more likely explanation is matriculating legacies actually have a very high median income. There are several contributing factors:
- Harvard grads are more likely to become very high income than the general population. It's still only a very small minority of Harvard grads, but it's a much larger concentration than occurs in the general population.
- In the general population, as income increases, so does rate of applications. Higher income students are far more likely to apply than middle income students, and middle income students are far more likely to apply than lower income students. I expect this trend also extends to legacies. The higher a legacy family's income, the greater the chance that their kid applies.
- Higher income legacies are more likely to have especially strong hooks than lower income legacies. This includes the donation effect mentioned above, but is not limited to it.
The lawsuit analysis, published studies using the lawsuit sample, and Harvard internal studies all found that legacy is a strong hook on average (roughly on par with URM), but there was significant variation among individual legacies, depending on things like whether the legacy applicant also appears on the Dean or Director’s special interest lists.
My experience is that the value of Harvard goes up with the square of the distance from Cambridge. Big deal in Australia for example.
I think there is a remnant of New England waspiness – don’t be showy. I went to three of HYPSM and my son went to one and a prestigious LAC and we never had any bumper stickers of any of the schools. It is a somehow déclassé in Boston but not in Palo Alto.
But, the benefits outweigh any modest discomfort or faux discomfort one might feel.
Definitely. Not a WASP but raised in New England. I wouldn’t sport a bumper sticker from college or boarding schools on our cars although I’ve received many free stickers. It would seem showy and too much personal info to impart on one’s vehicle.
I’m also not in the practice of asking/talking about where one went to college. Most of my friends or acquaintances are the same way. There is the occasional adult, decades after graduating, that still works it into the first conversation - and often subsequent conversation - somehow. I find that pretty boorish.
Reading through this thread, I’ve often wondered how these discussions even come up outside of a job search setting.
It’s a New York thing. Which may explain why so many Harvard people stay in Cambridge.
In Japan, people about to have a conversation need to place each other in the social hierarchy so that will know what verbs to use and maybe descriptors. I’m no expert but that is the explanation I have received when watching the initial conversations of folks.
I have a friend who from Western Canada who is a lawyer who worked in Boston for a few years and he noticed how people in Boston and NY sort themselves out into a social hierarchy by finding out where you went to undergraduate and grad school. It was odd as that doesn’t happen in Canada and he said people in Boston/NY were a little floored when he said “I went to the University of Calgary.” They couldn’t figure out where he belonged in the social hierarchy. This is similar in some ways to what I saw in Japan.
So, it does come up, often early, in conversations.
@Data10 Still not buying the income. Having lived in a town with average home cost above 1 million and no low cost alternatives, the town once did an income survey. The income was high 100s. Not 200k or 400 or 500+. Since I am middle age and about three decades out from graduation I will also say this is likely to be at the top of the income curve. Others who graduated around the same time are friends they do not make 500k plus either ( with a couple of exceptions). I know folks who were in the higher level $wise majors and folks who took mythology. If you comb through their income and kids very few are going to fall into the >500k legacy pile. Like many stats I find these unbelievable.
Do super high income people apply to Harvard in disproportionate numbers, most definitely. How many are legacy? Very few. It’s not like every millionaire/billionaire in America went to Harvard. Many people were/are intellectuals and went for the education. Many others went into public service ( and we know two people in public service are not making >500k. Even for the folks who followed the $, as I did, very few single jobs pay in that range. And if you are counting two incomes that’s unlikely also.
That’s a very high income even if you tap into prestigious BS, high income neighborhoods and other places where incoming Freshman are overly represented.
Might be a case of bad math, bad stats or just poor journalism with bias.
BTW, this >500k wouldn’t stand up against class notes about what people are doing. Or Facebook posts.
Yup, yup, yup. My kids are always wanting to put things on the car. oof, I hate the thought of people seeing my car and knowing stuff about me.
@one1ofeach Yep. Would NEVER ever wear a shirt or hat or , buy a bumper/window sticker with college, BS or private school name. How do they even see out the back window?
I do find it funny that the father of twins in my daughter’s high school class (of 2019) has three Harvard stickers on his car (for his daughter who’s a freshman there) and one tiny sticker for the local state school where his son goes.
In New York City, you don’t get into a coop apartment building without submitting a full CV complete with where you went to college and grad school. Same for any level of political involvement beginning at the community board level; any church vestry or synagogue board of trustees. It isn’t just a matter of employment; it’s a matter of social currency. New Yorkers are likely to already know where you went to college before they’ve even met you which makes the whole “I went to college in Boston” business a little off-putting.
I expect you are discussing median or average income. I’m sure there are a significant portion of families with well above high 100s income in your neighborhood, even though most are 100s. It’s quite common for a significant minority to have earnings far above the median.
For example, the NYT study also shows tax reported earnings at age 34 for different colleges . Harvard is at https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/college-mobility/harvard-university . The median listed income for Harvard grads at age 34 was $81k during their reference year, which inflation adjusts to ~$90k. This corresponds to 77th percentile (for individuals at age 34). However, 21% of Harvard grads were in 99th percentile, with a top 1% income – far higher earnings that the 77th percentile Harvard median. Harvard had more top 1% grads than various other colleges with higher median incomes, such as tech oriented schools, like Harvey Mudd, Caltech, and MIT. Maybe some have professional degrees such as MD, JD, or MBA. Maybe family are upper management, with influence from family/special connections.
Those 21% in top 1% with far higher earnings than typical for Harvard are also far more likely to have kids who apply to Harvard than the median. I’d expect those kids are far more likely to get accepted when they apply than the overall legacy admit rate. So if you look at the matriculating legacies, those 21% are tremendously overrepresented, such that the percentage of students whose parents had individual income in top 1% at age 34 will be far more than 21%.
The Harvard freshman survey asks about “family income”, which would include both parents. Their total for portion of the the overall class matches the NYT referenced study, (17% over $500k vs 15% over ~$500k), so at least the overall class seems consistent with other sources.
@Data10 The 21% with top 1% is credible. That still doesn’t get you to >500K for 40ish %. Never will. Also, the NYT has very little cred in reporting anything these days. (and top 1% was 966K, top 5% only 166k, so you are saying that 40% of Harvard grads are in the top 1-3%ish depending on the years you use. Nope. )
Another factor which I find odd, how can students know parental income? That assumes that 40ish% reported ( why would they fill out this survey and what is their incentive to report personal income to the NYT?) Next, how many students know their parents income? Some who fill out FA might ( but we are not talking about those kids). Very high incomes often fluctuate more than lower incomes ( due to large bonuses, ownership of personal company business and other major factors). So, you put cred in the NYT not only reporting 40Ish% reported, but they also knew their parents income. Highly unlikely. Our kids know a lot about the family income but not a number. Honestly, we often don’t even know the number til tax time.
And the 81K income I totally believe at 34ish. So they jump from a median of 81K to 40% ish making over 500 k ( or let’s just say 250K each) in 15 years? Just not happening. People who make 500K plus often make 300K in their 30’s. That has been the track with folks we know. And most make 25% + in bonuses.
Seems like someone in the research dept at NYT forgot to take statistics or fudged the number to suit their bias. Either way. There’s no way it’s statistically possible. And, I also don’t believe that 40% of people would share their income with the NYT. I certainly would not. And many high income folks are less likely to share.
What I am saying about housing prices and income, it people are spread across the spectrum based on age. Someone who purchased a home in the 1960’s was making top dollar at that time, someone who is in prime income making ages is making comparable wages today. And so on.
Lies, #$$% lies and statistics. Always available from the NYT and others, if you believe stats without discerning the data.
You know Harvard used to teach a class specifically to discern facts/fiction from data and it was part of a mandatory requirement. I bet it’s still taught to ensure people think through these type of claims.
21% in top 1% was for all Harvard grads. As noted all legacies are not equally represented among those who have kids in the entering class. Higher income legacies are far more likely to be represented than the average.
The top 1% household income was ~$500k in 2019. It’s never been anything approaching $966K.
NYT didn’t do the study. The study was done by professors at Stanford, Brown, and Berkeley. The authors of the study allowed NYT to link to their database (and presumably reviewed the result prior to publication). A copy is of the study is at http://www.equality-of-opportunity.org/papers/coll_mrc_paper.pdf .
NYT linked study is based on federal tax reported earnings. The figures roughly matched the Harvard freshman survey for the full class, suggesting that Harvard freshman as a whole report similar earnings to the earnings filed on tax returns. As I said, it’s possible legacies differ, and dramatically overrestimate their earnings, but I see no reason to expect this.
In every post, I’ve explicitly explained that higher income legacies are both more likely to apply than average and more likely to be accepted than average, listing reasons why. So the median legacy income for all legacies in the US population is expected to be completely different than the median for the small subgroup of legacies who have children in the entering Harvard class. Yet you suggest that there is no difference. Do you not agree that top ~1% family income students are both more likely to apply and more likely to be admitted?
@RichardMZhlubb, does the father live near Harvard? That’s where I see the downplaying.
@circuitrider, what you are describing is not inconsistent with what I experience in both Boston and NY. Many people need to slot you in the social hierarchy. ShawWife was talking to a Harvard-trained architect friend who calls the “How long will it take before he says Harvard” syndrome Harvard Tourettes. So, while kids may feel reluctant to drop the H Bomb, older alums may blurt it out as part of social positioning.
Pretty pathetic when grown adults think their social currency is something that happened in their lives 2, 3, 4 or more decades ago.
Very interesting income info, @Data10 & @Happytimes2001 .
" And the 81K income I totally believe at 34ish. So they jump from a median of 81K to 40% ish making over 500 k ( or let’s just say 250K each) in 15 years? Just not happening. People who make 500K plus often make 300K in their 30’s. That has been the track with folks we know. And most make 25% + in bonuses."
In the medical field, it is absolutely reasonable that a dual-MD family makes this jump:
We know lots and lots in this boat(and MD-JD or similar dual income families), and many made <100k combined in early 30s and make >500k combined in their mid 40s to 50s. The vast majority do. And many also paid off grad loans during this time. To me the 46% of legacies making 500k+ per family seems quite accurate.
BTW, back on topic, I do think there should be sympathy or at least acknowledgement of the awkwardness that (some) Harvard grads have at “revealing” the name.