I’m sure there will be a lot of different opinions here because everyone should define it for himself/herself. For me, the “eliteness”, whether referring to a college or a department within a college, must be defined by the people at that college or department. So an “elite” college, or a “elite” department within a college, must have a roster of top faculty and many of the top students in the relevant field(s). As an example, I’d consider CMU SCS, but not the whole university, to be “elite”.
How does one know where top (undergrad) students in a field are?
From the profile of its students in that department, from the success of its students that came out of that department, etc.
@OHMomof2 -
One vote for a definition of “elite” as having students with among the highest average SAT/ ACT scores and GPA’s in the nation and being able to be selective enough to take only, or predominantly, such students.
E.g., https://www.businessinsider.com/the-50-smartest-colleges-in-america-2016-10
@thegreyking Exactly, it’s not the University, it’s the cohort, and when you get to select from the very best students, (and these elite colleges have been doing that for a long time), guess what happens, a reputation for excellence . Its really not even predominantly, it is the vast majority.
That link uses only test scores to generate the list. Going only by test scores can be gamed by colleges the overemphasize test scores in admission, relative to other academic measures (e.g. course selection, grades, rank).
Note that USNWR rankings have a “student excellence” component that is mostly based on test scores with a small part based on class rank. So overemphasizing test scores in admission also helps with gaming USNWR rankings.
There is a problem with using SAT/ACT scores and GPAs as some type of indicator of excellence. Because of academic coaching, intense SAT/ACT prep courses, tutors who often do everything but actually write homework for wealthier students, the GPAs and SAT/ACT scores of wealthier students are not comparable to those of students who cannot afford these luxuries. Since the majority of students attending “elite” colleges come from such families, the mid 50% range of GPAs and SAT/ACT scores are not really comparable to those of schools with a majority of students families are not of the wealthiest 10%-20%.
Seriously, there are people constantly posting here that their private SAT course, for which they paid $5,000, increased their kids’ SAT scores by 200 pt. If nothing else, that should indicate that money can buy much better SAT scores. So to use SAT scores as an indicator of academic excellence is kinda like the stuff produced in bovine bowels.
And to claim that a kid who shares their room with two siblings, does their homework in a loud, shared room, needs to work after school, etc, has the same opportunities to get an A as a kid with their own room, tutors, etc, is much of the same.
Money came buy higher stats, so colleges with richer kids are going to have kids with higher stats.
Now, the middle class kids at the colleges which mostly serve very rich kids are generally really smart, since they usually achieved these same stats without the monetary help that their wealthy peers got. However, you find these same brilliant middle class kids, and in the same numbers as which they are found in “elite” colleges, at all good “lower ranked” colleges.
Again, the kids at “elite” colleges are pretty smart. However, the bulk of them would have stats in the range of 1350-1450 SATs and 3.7-3.8 UW GPAs if they grew up in families in the bottom 50% of the population.
@MWolf To throw some fuel on that fire, I have many connections to parents (or their personal assistants) regarding ‘student-run’ organizations. I am the parent team manager of two of the HS’s sports teams, so I am an important cog in these machines as I have ready access to 300 parents and their student athletes. Several times a year I watch parents basically run these student organizations as a proxy for their children. I don’t deal with their kids; I deal with one or both of their parents. But their kids are listed as the ‘founder’ or whatever on their college apps.
I know there are several earnest students who do great service work in HS. But from my viewpoint, the majority of such orgs in our HS are really parent-run. I will help my kid sell Girl Scout cookies outside of the grocery store, but essentially running HS clubs/organizations so a kid can have a bunch of ‘good EC’s’ feels fraudulent to me. So when I see a long list of such EC’s for any HS kid, I can’t help but be quite suspicious. This is due to the 10 recent grads from our HS like that, 1 actually did the work. Perhaps the colleges they are all attending right now don’t care. But I do. And probably the 1 kid who DID put in the service hours instead of spending more hours studying for the SAT.
Money also buys better (even possibly fake?) essays, better (even possibly fake?) ECs, better GC and teacher LoRs, better overall packaging… to an even greater extent. 200-point increases in SAT scores, on the other hand, are rare (and would have been even rarer if the College Board hadn’t made the test less cognitive and easier upon every revision).
I agree lots of equally smart kids at non ‘elite’ schools who are there for myriad reasons. I am not big believer of pick an elite college for ‘cohort’ reasons. You can find equally smart and motivated kids at any flagship. I suppose the ‘network’ reason holds water, but I find it personally a little distasteful.
We chose an elite LAC for my D over honors at our highly ranked public flagship for three reasons. First, they gave her just enough aid to put it in financial range, albeit top of range. so we could actually consider it as an option. Second, she figured out she really wanted a small learning environment. The crowds of accepted students’ day at the flagship were overwhelming to her and she couldn’t picture herself in large lecture classes even though she knew she’d be past them mostly after first year. Distant 3rd reason was flagship is very close to home so she wanted to be farther away.
All that said, she knows she’s very fortunate to make that and I have she would have likely thrived at the public flagship too.
@cypresspat. That’s crazy. So if the kid doesn’t show up to do the work then how does the school justify their applications. Personally, I would just say no to the parent and ask where’s the kid… Or maybe I am not understanding…
@Knowsstuff The school has no idea who actually does the work for many of these organizations. And often they are run by earnest kids who care about the effort and they do a good job. But there are several helicopter moms who are going to do whatever it takes to ensure their child goes to an elite school. If that means encouraging him or her to take on every leadership role (or create a bunch) and then ‘help’ him or her in those roles, so be it. I just happen to interact with many because of my team manager roles.
I didn’t even realize my kid did well on his SAT until we met with his GC to plan for college. So I am the opposite of helicopter, bordering on negligent when it comes to school. I have stepped up the attention for the college search, but prior to that, he was kind of on his own. Third kid. We’re tired.
@cypresspat. Thx for the explanation. “Third kid. We’re tired.” I feel for you. Our two kids are in college now. Glad that phase is over with.
@Knowsstuff I am not a big facebook person, but all of my ‘friends’ post a pic of their kid at their front door on their first day of school. While I take the pic every year, this is the first time I shared one on social media. I mainly did it as an early farewell to a school system that I am so grateful for. In my post I mentioned my oldest’s kindergarten teacher. She was a treasure. As if Mr. Rogers and Mary Poppins had a baby. That was the last year she taught before she retired. A teacher/friend reminded me that she retired 25 years ago. So I will have had a kid in this SD for 26 years when youngest finishes next June. No wonder I am tired.