3 ms·
It's not even remotely controversial that students at top schools are overwhelmingly more well off than average. At Stanford theres roughly the same number of s
by bob_marley2 8y ago
It's not even remotely controversial that students at top schools are overwhelmingly more well off than average. At Stanford theres roughly the same number of students whose families are in the top 1% of income as those in the bottom 60%.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/01/18/upshot/some-colleges-have-more-students-from-the-top-1-percent-than-the-bottom-60.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/01/18/upshot/some-c...
- JoeAltmaier 8y agoBut isn't that a tremendous endorsement of Stanford? That they have recruited so well and changed their cost structure so effectively that even the poor can attend? How do other top-level schools compare?
- bob_marley2 8y agoNot really? Yes there are other schools that are worse than Stanford, sometimes significantly more but take a top public school like University of Texas which has 5x as many students from the bottom 60% as from the top 1% (5.4% and 27.7%) Stanford is at 17.5% and 18.6%. For comparison Harvard is better, MIT is significantly better, on par with Texas, Yale and Princeton are slightly worse.
- JoeAltmaier 8y agoBut do they charge tuition to their bottom 60%? Stanford has a tuition program where its no-cost if your family income is low.
- bayesian_horse 8y agoMy point was about whether or not the Stanford Students' wealth distribution is more skewed towards higher family income, as compared to other schools. And additionally, whether or not these differences are driven by academic achievement (which is often higher in higher income families, for various reasons if not more money spent on good grades) or other reasons.