Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yes 1 in 3 applicants are accepted. So what. Look you got smart parents, and a child who can't make the grade, they're not going to apply, they'll self vet the application, reducing rejection ratios then there's private tutors, private schooling, etc. All making for a more academically able applicant, and of course there's someone who knows the ropes. University isn't about IQ it's about meeting expectations, someone with 1 SD below average IQ, or above, can meet acceptance expectations at any University if they know what's expected of them and apply themselves to meeting those expectations.
In comparison you've got everyone who has not been to Harvard, who don't know the ropes, don't know the expectations, and can't coach the kid.
And you're surprised? Wow.
I'm informed enough to consider that the difference probably has much more to do with coaching a kid than anything else. Universities like cookie cutter kids at under-grad, they can't handle outliers. Even if MIT PhD's kids do apply they can't coach the kid in the same way because they were never at Harvard so don't entirely know what Harvard is looking for.
Certainly I'm not surprised at 1 in 3 being accepted prima facie, and I've been to three Universities (under grad, grad, and doctorate, all had different expectations and not just because they were higher levels of qualification).
Huh, I did not bring up the "smart children" argument, instead I argue against it. It is obvious that Harvard does not just pick the smartest.
You think other applicants to Harvard are just "cookie cutter kids"? Evidence? One has to have Harvard-trained parents to succeed at Harvard? I do not even need to list all the counterexamples to prove the absurdity.
Legacy is generally banned in Europe and Asia, and not applied in many top US universities. You guys support a caste system de facto, which is OK, since I am not an extreme advocate of meritocracy. However the way you lay out your arguments reveals something much more serious than the legacy system per se.
Actually, I blame , Asians and Jews, Hispanic then least of all blacks for whites not getting into Harvard .
Ron Unz makes a convincing case for Jewish being favored over other whites. It's really bogus for Hispanics to receive affirmative action, but if we're going to have affirmative action whites particularly non-Jewish are carrying all the burden while Asian get overrepresentation.
I wouldn’t be me if I didn’t keep it real despite our frequent disagreements, but you’re the only white conservative on CD that has ALWAYS been consistent on that point. Your comments about blacks with regard to other topics are petty in my book, but it’s definitely true that when it comes to elite college admissions, you’ve never once thrown shade at African Americans.
Your conservative fellow travelers are a different matter however. They’ve consistently blamed blacks for the underrepresentation of ANY other group at elite universities. For some reason, they’re especially enraged at blacks for what they see as Asian underrepresentation. And what really cracks me up is that Asians mostly blame whites for what they see as unfair barriers to getting into elite schools, while whites are so busy pointing at us!!
I’ve even had whites lie to me and say that they don’t care if elite universities are 100% Asian if Asians have the highest scores! Of course I know it’s bunk, but those are the lengths they’ll go to to try and convince me that they want college admissions to operate in a way that takes only the highest scores with mechanistic constancy without regard for any other admissions standards outside of academics.
At this point, I just laugh at it. The whole idea of white folks being the sentinels for Asians to get into elite schools (and everything else) is a joke. When did Asians ever elect white people to be their spokesmen and protectors?
So what they're saying is, is that kids of Harvard Grads (who often have good jobs, good pay, the ability to provide good education for their kids etc.). Have higher admission rates than everyone else.
Wow that's incredible. In other news rain makes you wet, and it gets dark outside when the sun goes down.
This the kind of stuff I challenged BETA on in an earlier post and received no reply.
Very smart people tend to have smart kids and value education.
They also know how to prepare kids for admission AND can afford to send them there.
Other folks that went there due to things like political connections also have desirable (full paying) legacies.
Just look at Trump and Clintons daughters knowing each other at college and being respectful friends.
The idea that colleges should just be packed full of kids that have spent their entire life cramming for SAT exams etc. is ridiculous.
P.S. Both myself and one of my kids would have likely qualified for Harvard and been accepted. My family couldn't afford it back then....my son could have but chose another option that worked better.
Why do people go to Harvard? You can get a rigorous education at many fine institutions. You justify Harvard with the idea that you're making valuable connections into the established power/influence circles. So you want to be sure there is plenty of representation from those circles.
Why do people go to Harvard? You can get a rigorous education at many fine institutions. You justify Harvard with the idea that you're making valuable connections into the established power/influence circles. So you want to be sure there is plenty of representation from those circles.
It looks good on a resume. You give your parents bragging rights. You yourself get bragging rights.
This nepotism is incredible.
“From 2010 to 2015, Harvard’s admission rate for legacies was 34%, while its admission rate for non-legacies was 6%.”
Why nobody fights against it?
3/4 of the top 100 schools give a boost in admissions to relatives of alumni. Most defend the practice as a tie- breaker between two highly qualified applicants.
Then there’s the “ Development Cases”; applications from students whose families have or will donate a minimum of $500,000 to the school’s endowment. A portion of Investment income from endowments are used for scholarships.
Legacy and/ or donations are not going to get a C student accepted at the most highly selective schools.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
.
