3 ms·

Any references you have on this?

• Retric 10y ago
  Having trouble locating sources, I heard it from a collage professors. But, from what I recall it works something like this. Poor students are vastly less likely to have motivated parents that push and pay for activity's to look good on collage applications. If test prep can add 100 points to a standardized test and two students both have the same score but only one did test prep then the other likely has higher innate intelligence. After the first year innate intelligence makes up a larger role than pre-collage preparations for students motivated enough to get into an Ivy. After school social networks play a larger roll in success than small gaps in innate intelligence. Richer students tend to form more valuable social networks.
  • kartD 10y ago
    While I can't agree/disagree with you points due to the lack of evidence, I was curious to see who did best at Ivies. I felt it would be Indians/Americans of Indian origin. Probably biased because I fall into that category :P
  • projectramo 10y ago
    So the professor could be just as biased. You can justify any bias in such an ad-hoc manner. Rich students might to better because they had better preparation. (Which I had heard but I discount in the absence of evidence.)
    • Retric 10y ago
      Some subjects like math are less subjective. The gentleman's C is an old concept with a range of meanings. But, there has been a long history of students who don't really need to learn anything at collage. However, they greatly benefit from connecting to their peers.
      • projectramo 10y ago
        That seems like a non-sequitor. Perhaps I wasn't clear enough but I was saying you are making your claims without any data, but you were relying on the personal observations of a professor.