5 ms·

I wrote about it before, but the smart poor face quite the uphill battle. Friend of mine scored a 1600 on the SAT but went to one of the worst high schools in t

by chuck- 8y ago

I wrote about it before, but the smart poor face quite the uphill battle. Friend of mine scored a 1600 on the SAT but went to one of the worst high schools in the area. He was rejected from elite universities. He couldn’t compare to those that also scored well on the SAT, subject SATs (which our high school didn’t make clear was a thing), and those that already took calculus 1-3, linear algebra, data structures, and proof based mathematics courses from magnet schools. It isn’t just about raw intelligence and scoring highly on exams. He was behind before he started by attending our high school. Some elite schools talk about free scholarships for those that make less than a certain income, but how many of those elite schools are admitting poor smart students? When you’re smart and attend a HS that doesn’t make you competitive, you tend to get rejected.

darkerside 8y ago
Where did he end up going to school? And is he successful now?
- chuck- 8y ago
  He went to a top 5 public school instead. No idea what he did after.
  - rhodysurf 8y ago
    How is that not elite? Being elitist about college level education in America makes no sense to me. Pretty much any Public Research University is good enough.
deogeo 8y ago
Perhaps there's too much focus on the truly elite schools, and not enough on the good or very good ones. Surely it's possible to succeed by attending those?
- chuck- 8y ago
  I agree. It’s difficult for poor kids to know what schools are a good fit for them. Least, that is my experience when I applied. I barely knew what colleges were out there.
- HarryHirsch 8y ago
  Have you looked closely at the website of Wellesley College, # 1 liberal arts college in the US? They sell themselves not on the education they provide, their spiel is that as a Wellesley alumna you will be able to draw on all sorts of connections.
- lotsofpulp 8y ago
  Depends on your definition of success. Since the top quintile (and especially top decile) is running away with all of the profits from the growth in the recent past, it does put them in a different league than the others.
- war1025 8y ago
  The obsession over elite schools makes even less sense if you frame it in terms of where these people are coming from. If you had the wherewithal to do well at a lousy high school, you'll be just as able to make something of yourself at a mid-grade university. Elite universities are important if you want to be in the "elite" clique. If you just want to make a better life for yourself, any old university will get you pretty far. One close to home will likely be a lot more relatable culturally as well. Not everyone wants to uproot their identity and go be someone else somewhere else.
- darkpuma 8y ago
  There is an obsession among the hyper-ambitious with being the very best. Some people won't be satisfied at having a shot at being a multi-millionaire with a successful career as skilled labor or operating a modest business. They want to be multi-billionaires that rub elbows with statement. Access to pretty good schools isn't enough for them, they want access to the most elite schools that will give them the most elite social connections.
jdavis703 8y ago
You don’t need to go to an elite university to make a better life. I went to community college and then a mediocre (in terms of rankings, not educational content!) state school. I was raised by a single mom. I now make roughly 7.5X what she made. My sister went to a brand-name state university in a different state on a full scholarship and is doing better than our mom, but not 7.5X better.
- baroffoos 8y ago
  The idea of an elite university confuses me. None of the universities I can think of in my country are thought of as elite. They are also all very easy to get in to. For courses like computer science you basically just have to fill out a form and you will almost certainly get in.
  - lolitan 8y ago
    Which country is it? If you don't mind.
    - baroffoos 8y ago
      Australia. I'm sure someone is about to point out the name of an elite university here but even if one exists, they are mostly unheard of and no one I know has put any effort in to applying or moved state to go to one.
rjf72 8y ago
You can't say for certain since these things are quite opaque but I am fairly certain that taking calculus and other such classes in high school is not positively factored into admissions at elite universities. In general those would not even receive credit. E.g. at MIT you can get, at most, credit for calculus 1 if you get a 5 on the calculus BC exam - AB is no credit. Elite universities tend to try to make admissions somewhat objective and so you get certain points for various things. And coming from a less privileged background gives you a pretty big boost. Pair that with a perfect SAT and you're already very near the finish line. Really strange he wouldn't get accepted. Extracurricular/sports are also important. I came from a crap school, went to an top university (and did not have a 1600), felt slightly behind early on in calculus since most of everybody had already taken it in high school and I had not, but the playing field leveled out very rapidly. Never felt the least bit disadvantaged in any other course. I'm also certain that I would not have gotten in if I had my exact same background but came from a more prestigious/wealthy school. Of course I'd probably have done more in my high school years if I had that background, which is exactly why you get that boost coming from a poor background.
BeetleB 8y ago
>He was rejected from elite universities. I'm not sure I see a problem. You can get a great education in most non-elite schools. You can do well in undergrad and it makes it easier to go to an elite grad school (it's a much more level playing field to get in there). It's not as if the landscape of education has a sharp cutoff at the elite level. I know this is going to rub people the wrong way, but your comment reminds me of a documentary I saw where a couple tried to live on food stamps to show how difficult life is (as in that food stamps don't provide for much food). The couple insisted on buying everything organic. Yes, that is going to make life difficult!
- sonderb 8y ago
  And yet it's not uncommon to see job postings here on HN from time to time at pretty well-positioned places where it's basically stated in the ad that they won't consider you unless you're from an Ivy League institution or someplace equivalent like MIT. I completely agree with you that you can get fantastic educations in a number of places. But I think part of the problem is how much of a walled garden there is associated with these elite institutions in terms of top positions. Tech isn't the only place this happens either. I've become convinced that part of the source of our inequality in the US is hypercredentialing. That is, your abilities and skillset are equated with your degree. You're not that competent if you didn't go to an elite college, you can't do task X unless you have this very specific degree in Y, etc. and so forth and so on. It's rampant and affects all sorts of realms, from unemployment to licensing laws.
  - BeetleB 8y ago
    >And yet it's not uncommon to see job postings here on HN from time to time at pretty well-positioned places where it's basically stated in the ad that they won't consider you unless you're from an Ivy League institution or someplace equivalent like MIT. Interesting - I never browse job postings here. Do you have a reference? What's posted on HN is not at all representative of the rest of the country, though. I've certainly worked in places where they tend to prefer "top schools", but once again, that was for graduate degrees, where as I said, being from a wealthy background doesn't help all that much. And for engineering schools (Princeton would not be viewed favorably, for example). >Tech isn't the only place this happens either. In my experience, tech is probably where it happens less. In most of my peer companies, after something like 4-5 years experience, no one cares where you went to school. It's much more common for things like MBA and Law (one lawyer told me that many of his firm's clients stipulate that the lawyers working on their case must be from a top school, and graduated in the top N of the class). >I've become convinced that part of the source of our inequality in the US is hypercredentialing. That is, your abilities and skillset are equated with your degree. You're not that competent if you didn't go to an elite college, you can't do task X unless you have this very specific degree in Y, etc. and so forth and so on. It's rampant and affects all sorts of realms, from unemployment to licensing laws. I'd be interested in seeing studies supporting this. In my anecdotal experience, I've seen it much more acutely in other countries. But then again, those countries also tend to have much more inequality.
zdragnar 8y ago
You may be interested in https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/college-mobility/harvard-university https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/college-mobilit... which compares Harvard against "other Ivy league schools" on a typical / above / below average. Looks like just under 5% is typical for bottom-20%-income background for admitted students. It's also worth noting that Harvard, for example, admits fewer than 3,000 students per year. That means that 100-150 students (out of 40,000 applicants) will come from a poor background. Seems like being rejected from an Ivy league school is statistically the most likely outcome, regardless of what your qualifications are.
lazyasciiart 8y ago
Overcoming the disadvantage of a poor high school is the basic idea behind Texas '10% law': any student who graduates among the top 10% of a public high school is guaranteed admission to any public Texas university.
T2_t2 8y ago
> It isn’t just about raw intelligence That's the problem though - blank slate theory. If we had a more biological attitude towards this, we'd be able to help individual more effectively. Do IQ tests yearly, find smart kids and get them into better programs. On the flipside, accept that some schools have naturally less intelligent kids, and that their performance will, as a result, be lower. Blank slate and no child left behind and similar ideas create this false belief that bad results are the teachers fault. If you teach kids that all have below average IQs, and they achieve average results, you are an awesome teacher. If you teach geniuses and the get average results, you are awful.

by chuck- 8y ago

darkerside 8y ago

Where did he end up going to school? And is he successful now?

chuck- 8y ago
He went to a top 5 public school instead. No idea what he did after.
- rhodysurf 8y ago
  How is that not elite? Being elitist about college level education in America makes no sense to me. Pretty much any Public Research University is good enough.

deogeo 8y ago

Perhaps there's too much focus on the truly elite schools, and not enough on the good or very good ones. Surely it's possible to succeed by attending those?

chuck- 8y ago
I agree. It’s difficult for poor kids to know what schools are a good fit for them. Least, that is my experience when I applied. I barely knew what colleges were out there.
HarryHirsch 8y ago
Have you looked closely at the website of Wellesley College, # 1 liberal arts college in the US? They sell themselves not on the education they provide, their spiel is that as a Wellesley alumna you will be able to draw on all sorts of connections.
lotsofpulp 8y ago
Depends on your definition of success. Since the top quintile (and especially top decile) is running away with all of the profits from the growth in the recent past, it does put them in a different league than the others.
war1025 8y ago
The obsession over elite schools makes even less sense if you frame it in terms of where these people are coming from. If you had the wherewithal to do well at a lousy high school, you'll be just as able to make something of yourself at a mid-grade university. Elite universities are important if you want to be in the "elite" clique. If you just want to make a better life for yourself, any old university will get you pretty far. One close to home will likely be a lot more relatable culturally as well. Not everyone wants to uproot their identity and go be someone else somewhere else.
darkpuma 8y ago
There is an obsession among the hyper-ambitious with being the very best. Some people won't be satisfied at having a shot at being a multi-millionaire with a successful career as skilled labor or operating a modest business. They want to be multi-billionaires that rub elbows with statement. Access to pretty good schools isn't enough for them, they want access to the most elite schools that will give them the most elite social connections.

jdavis703 8y ago

You don’t need to go to an elite university to make a better life. I went to community college and then a mediocre (in terms of rankings, not educational content!) state school. I was raised by a single mom. I now make roughly 7.5X what she made. My sister went to a brand-name state university in a different state on a full scholarship and is doing better than our mom, but not 7.5X better.

baroffoos 8y ago
The idea of an elite university confuses me. None of the universities I can think of in my country are thought of as elite. They are also all very easy to get in to. For courses like computer science you basically just have to fill out a form and you will almost certainly get in.
- lolitan 8y ago
  Which country is it? If you don't mind.
  - baroffoos 8y ago
    Australia. I'm sure someone is about to point out the name of an elite university here but even if one exists, they are mostly unheard of and no one I know has put any effort in to applying or moved state to go to one.

rjf72 8y ago

You can't say for certain since these things are quite opaque but I am fairly certain that taking calculus and other such classes in high school is not positively factored into admissions at elite universities. In general those would not even receive credit. E.g. at MIT you can get, at most, credit for calculus 1 if you get a 5 on the calculus BC exam - AB is no credit. Elite universities tend to try to make admissions somewhat objective and so you get certain points for various things. And coming from a less privileged background gives you a pretty big boost. Pair that with a perfect SAT and you're already very near the finish line. Really strange he wouldn't get accepted. Extracurricular/sports are also important. I came from a crap school, went to an top university (and did not have a 1600), felt slightly behind early on in calculus since most of everybody had already taken it in high school and I had not, but the playing field leveled out very rapidly. Never felt the least bit disadvantaged in any other course. I'm also certain that I would not have gotten in if I had my exact same background but came from a more prestigious/wealthy school. Of course I'd probably have done more in my high school years if I had that background, which is exactly why you get that boost coming from a poor background.

BeetleB 8y ago

>He was rejected from elite universities. I'm not sure I see a problem. You can get a great education in most non-elite schools. You can do well in undergrad and it makes it easier to go to an elite grad school (it's a much more level playing field to get in there). It's not as if the landscape of education has a sharp cutoff at the elite level. I know this is going to rub people the wrong way, but your comment reminds me of a documentary I saw where a couple tried to live on food stamps to show how difficult life is (as in that food stamps don't provide for much food). The couple insisted on buying everything organic. Yes, that is going to make life difficult!

sonderb 8y ago
And yet it's not uncommon to see job postings here on HN from time to time at pretty well-positioned places where it's basically stated in the ad that they won't consider you unless you're from an Ivy League institution or someplace equivalent like MIT. I completely agree with you that you can get fantastic educations in a number of places. But I think part of the problem is how much of a walled garden there is associated with these elite institutions in terms of top positions. Tech isn't the only place this happens either. I've become convinced that part of the source of our inequality in the US is hypercredentialing. That is, your abilities and skillset are equated with your degree. You're not that competent if you didn't go to an elite college, you can't do task X unless you have this very specific degree in Y, etc. and so forth and so on. It's rampant and affects all sorts of realms, from unemployment to licensing laws.
- BeetleB 8y ago
  >And yet it's not uncommon to see job postings here on HN from time to time at pretty well-positioned places where it's basically stated in the ad that they won't consider you unless you're from an Ivy League institution or someplace equivalent like MIT. Interesting - I never browse job postings here. Do you have a reference? What's posted on HN is not at all representative of the rest of the country, though. I've certainly worked in places where they tend to prefer "top schools", but once again, that was for graduate degrees, where as I said, being from a wealthy background doesn't help all that much. And for engineering schools (Princeton would not be viewed favorably, for example). >Tech isn't the only place this happens either. In my experience, tech is probably where it happens less. In most of my peer companies, after something like 4-5 years experience, no one cares where you went to school. It's much more common for things like MBA and Law (one lawyer told me that many of his firm's clients stipulate that the lawyers working on their case must be from a top school, and graduated in the top N of the class). >I've become convinced that part of the source of our inequality in the US is hypercredentialing. That is, your abilities and skillset are equated with your degree. You're not that competent if you didn't go to an elite college, you can't do task X unless you have this very specific degree in Y, etc. and so forth and so on. It's rampant and affects all sorts of realms, from unemployment to licensing laws. I'd be interested in seeing studies supporting this. In my anecdotal experience, I've seen it much more acutely in other countries. But then again, those countries also tend to have much more inequality.

zdragnar 8y ago

You may be interested in https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/college-mobility/harvard-university https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/college-mobilit... which compares Harvard against "other Ivy league schools" on a typical / above / below average. Looks like just under 5% is typical for bottom-20%-income background for admitted students. It's also worth noting that Harvard, for example, admits fewer than 3,000 students per year. That means that 100-150 students (out of 40,000 applicants) will come from a poor background. Seems like being rejected from an Ivy league school is statistically the most likely outcome, regardless of what your qualifications are.

lazyasciiart 8y ago

Overcoming the disadvantage of a poor high school is the basic idea behind Texas '10% law': any student who graduates among the top 10% of a public high school is guaranteed admission to any public Texas university.

T2_t2 8y ago

> It isn’t just about raw intelligence That's the problem though - blank slate theory. If we had a more biological attitude towards this, we'd be able to help individual more effectively. Do IQ tests yearly, find smart kids and get them into better programs. On the flipside, accept that some schools have naturally less intelligent kids, and that their performance will, as a result, be lower. Blank slate and no child left behind and similar ideas create this false belief that bad results are the teachers fault. If you teach kids that all have below average IQs, and they achieve average results, you are an awesome teacher. If you teach geniuses and the get average results, you are awful.