6 ms·

It's clearly a token effort at disguising their elitist admissions procress. If they let in too many poor people the rich wouldn't send their chilren there. The

by simbomi 10y ago

It's clearly a token effort at disguising their elitist admissions procress. If they let in too many poor people the rich wouldn't send their chilren there. The whole point of these Ivy League schools is to prove membership in the club of the elite.

djf1 10y ago
Admission to all the Ivy League schools is need blind, so I don't think letting in too many poor people is a big concern for them.
- saretired 10y ago
  When I was in grad school at an Ivy League university in the early 80s, it was reported in the school paper that about 50% of undergraduates were legacies. Has that changed?
  - _acme 10y ago
    Yes. It was far easier to get into college in the '80s, in part because far fewer bothered to attend; this resulted in more legacies then than now (I believe the percentage of legacies at Harvard is in the single digits).
    - saretired 10y ago
      According to this article, 16% of the Harvard class of 2019 are legacies: http://features.thecrimson.com/2015/freshman-survey/makeup-narrative/ http://features.thecrimson.com/2015/freshman-survey/makeup-n... (The survey was voluntary, and there is no mention of the percentage response. Apparently Harvard does not publish the actual number of legacies.) So yes, things are better than in my day. I would say that the number of people who would not have bothered to attend Harvard in the 80's was very small indeed.
DasIch 10y ago
You don't need to come up with a conspiracy here. Ivy League schools simply don't care about providing as many people as possible with a good education. The goal is rather to be the best in research, education and in the experience of studying for the people that do attend. They achieve that goal by significantly limiting how many people are allowed to attend, especially poor students that take money away from the school. If you really want to help poor people, ignore what the rich are doing, ignore inequality and identify who those poor people are, what problems they have and fix them. That will be far more beneficial than attacking the "elites".

by simbomi 10y ago

djf1 10y ago

Admission to all the Ivy League schools is need blind, so I don't think letting in too many poor people is a big concern for them.

saretired 10y ago
When I was in grad school at an Ivy League university in the early 80s, it was reported in the school paper that about 50% of undergraduates were legacies. Has that changed?
- _acme 10y ago
  Yes. It was far easier to get into college in the '80s, in part because far fewer bothered to attend; this resulted in more legacies then than now (I believe the percentage of legacies at Harvard is in the single digits).
  - saretired 10y ago
    According to this article, 16% of the Harvard class of 2019 are legacies: http://features.thecrimson.com/2015/freshman-survey/makeup-narrative/ http://features.thecrimson.com/2015/freshman-survey/makeup-n... (The survey was voluntary, and there is no mention of the percentage response. Apparently Harvard does not publish the actual number of legacies.) So yes, things are better than in my day. I would say that the number of people who would not have bothered to attend Harvard in the 80's was very small indeed.

DasIch 10y ago

You don't need to come up with a conspiracy here. Ivy League schools simply don't care about providing as many people as possible with a good education. The goal is rather to be the best in research, education and in the experience of studying for the people that do attend. They achieve that goal by significantly limiting how many people are allowed to attend, especially poor students that take money away from the school. If you really want to help poor people, ignore what the rich are doing, ignore inequality and identify who those poor people are, what problems they have and fix them. That will be far more beneficial than attacking the "elites".