8 ms·

I'm surprised that this scandal doesn't seem to be causing anyone to think one step further and realize that the entire premise of "elite" colleges with competi

I'm surprised that this scandal doesn't seem to be causing anyone to think one step further and realize that the entire premise of "elite" colleges with competitive admissions is a device for the perpetuation of inequality. We're devoting most of our advanced educational resources to helping people who would already be successful reap even more rewards. I understand the idea of meritocracy in fields with life or death urgency—maybe we should be as selective as possible to make sure we're finding the best scientists or whatever. But the idea that Harvard is using its hideously huge tax-deductible endowment to teach rich people's children to do high frequency trading is far more scandalous than these marginal cases of bribery. As a society, we should not be devoting so many resources to helping the best-positioned kids succeed to the exclusion of kids starting with less advantage.

munk-a 7y ago
Back a while high school was the sort of "standard education" things have changed and now college is considered the default level people should have in the workforce, back when college was rare I think private colleges made sense, they were more of a final specialty training step at the end of your education - now that has shifted over to PhDs - let PhD programs remain privatized for whatever reasons, but we should extend government grants to cover all two and four year degrees and publicize the sector. Some kids will still stop their education at middle school - or high school, but we as a society benefit if everyone who wants one can get a college education.
- madengr 7y ago
  I don’t want the USA to turn into India or China, where your academic fate is decided by some cruddy standardized test given in 5th grade.
  - munk-a 7y ago
    I don't either - but neither do I want it to be determined on the even more absurd basis of who your parents are. There should be a fair evaluation of students, designing that fair evaluation isn't trivial, but it's something we can work toward.
  - povertyworld 7y ago
    Well, I guess that opinion just depends on how well you did on standardized tests in 5th grade. I smoked all my peers on that test they give you at the end of elementary. It would have been great if some communist party bureaucrat swooped in and took me to a school full of high scorers. Too bad that was my peak academically. Ha.
- jtbayly 7y ago
  So that college can have the same drop in quality that high schools have had, and PHD’s can be the next bachelors degree and we can continue pouring more and more of the GDP and percent of people’s lives into “education”? Why?
  - maxxxxx 7y ago
    That’s probably where it’s going. Companies want to have the “best”
  - FiddlyPack 7y ago
    Gotta find some way to keep the population occupied with something “meaningful” as you automate away their jobs while providing longer lifespans!
- asdff 7y ago
  The whole labor dynamic has changed in the US over the last half century. Manufacturing left and never came back. Unskilled labor is not in demand any longer, skills are, so it's no wonder that there are a lot of people with bachelors degrees. Most PhDs, at least in stem, are fully funded at least.
manfredo 7y ago
Many of these "elite" colleges are one of the best avenues to eliminate inequality. Many of them have significant (at least double digit) percentages of the student population that are first generation college students. Elite universities often have the greatest degree of racial diversity.
- akhilcacharya 7y ago
  You shouldn’t be condemned for life for not being elite material when you were 18. Disclaimer - I was not elite material when I was 18 and feel like I’m condemned for life when I read these posts.
  - saagarjha 7y ago
    What makes you feel "condemned for life"?
    - akhilcacharya 7y ago
      I know I’ll never be able to match the accomplishments of people that got into Duke the year I didn’t, for example.
      - opportune 7y ago
        You shouldn't feel that way at all, there are lots of unsuccessful people from each year's class at those kinds of universities, you just don't hear about them.
      - saagarjha 7y ago
        Why not? The relationship between colleges and the accomplishments of the people attending them is tenuous at best. There are thousands of people at good universities that do essentially nothing, and wherever you are you have the opportunity to do better than them.
        akhilcacharya 7y ago
akhilcacharya 7y ago
You’re correct. This country should work just as well for the hard working kids at UMass Boston as it does for kids at MIT.
noego 7y ago
The problem with elite colleges like Harvard, has nothing to do with meritocracy. In fact, it's the opposite. They use opaque and subjective criteria in their admissions process, in order to favor those born into privilege. For a better example of a meritocracy, take a look at New York's elite magnet schools like Stuyvesant. Their admissions process is a pure meritocracy - based entirely on a standardized exam that is taken by all applicants. The end result - Stuyvesant has far more economic diversity than any elite university. Almost half the students come from families poor enough to qualify for subsidized lunches. Harvard would do the nation a tremendous service if it became more meritocratic, not less https://outlookzen.com/2017/03/24/481/ https://outlookzen.com/2017/03/24/481/
- shaklee3 7y ago
  Economic diversity, yes. But Stuyvesant is 92% white and Asian, which is not racially diverse.
  - p1esk 7y ago
    Are you suggesting they let in people who failed the standardized exam just to improve racial diversity?
    - killjoywashere 7y ago
      Perhaps you're not from the US? There is a strong current of sentiment in some quarters of the US that this is exactly what should happen if society's playing field is every going to be leveled.
      - achillesheels 7y ago
        And that’s how bridges collapse.
      - p1esk 7y ago
        I care more about what people on this forum think.
barkingcat 7y ago
Many people would argue that "We're devoting most of our advanced educational resources to helping people who would already be successful reap even more rewards." is exactly the point of higher education, and serves the goal of sustaining the power structures that currently exist. That's why "legacy admissions" even exist. If your dad or your mom went to Harvard, of course you'd want to sustain the family line and have an easy time to get admitted to Harvard too.

munk-a 7y ago

Back a while high school was the sort of "standard education" things have changed and now college is considered the default level people should have in the workforce, back when college was rare I think private colleges made sense, they were more of a final specialty training step at the end of your education - now that has shifted over to PhDs - let PhD programs remain privatized for whatever reasons, but we should extend government grants to cover all two and four year degrees and publicize the sector. Some kids will still stop their education at middle school - or high school, but we as a society benefit if everyone who wants one can get a college education.

madengr 7y ago
I don’t want the USA to turn into India or China, where your academic fate is decided by some cruddy standardized test given in 5th grade.
- munk-a 7y ago
  I don't either - but neither do I want it to be determined on the even more absurd basis of who your parents are. There should be a fair evaluation of students, designing that fair evaluation isn't trivial, but it's something we can work toward.
- povertyworld 7y ago
  Well, I guess that opinion just depends on how well you did on standardized tests in 5th grade. I smoked all my peers on that test they give you at the end of elementary. It would have been great if some communist party bureaucrat swooped in and took me to a school full of high scorers. Too bad that was my peak academically. Ha.
jtbayly 7y ago
So that college can have the same drop in quality that high schools have had, and PHD’s can be the next bachelors degree and we can continue pouring more and more of the GDP and percent of people’s lives into “education”? Why?
- maxxxxx 7y ago
  That’s probably where it’s going. Companies want to have the “best”
- FiddlyPack 7y ago
  Gotta find some way to keep the population occupied with something “meaningful” as you automate away their jobs while providing longer lifespans!
asdff 7y ago
The whole labor dynamic has changed in the US over the last half century. Manufacturing left and never came back. Unskilled labor is not in demand any longer, skills are, so it's no wonder that there are a lot of people with bachelors degrees. Most PhDs, at least in stem, are fully funded at least.

manfredo 7y ago

Many of these "elite" colleges are one of the best avenues to eliminate inequality. Many of them have significant (at least double digit) percentages of the student population that are first generation college students. Elite universities often have the greatest degree of racial diversity.

akhilcacharya 7y ago
You shouldn’t be condemned for life for not being elite material when you were 18. Disclaimer - I was not elite material when I was 18 and feel like I’m condemned for life when I read these posts.
- saagarjha 7y ago
  What makes you feel "condemned for life"?
  - akhilcacharya 7y ago
    I know I’ll never be able to match the accomplishments of people that got into Duke the year I didn’t, for example.
    - opportune 7y ago
      You shouldn't feel that way at all, there are lots of unsuccessful people from each year's class at those kinds of universities, you just don't hear about them.
    - saagarjha 7y ago
      Why not? The relationship between colleges and the accomplishments of the people attending them is tenuous at best. There are thousands of people at good universities that do essentially nothing, and wherever you are you have the opportunity to do better than them.
      - akhilcacharya 7y ago

akhilcacharya 7y ago

You’re correct. This country should work just as well for the hard working kids at UMass Boston as it does for kids at MIT.

noego 7y ago

The problem with elite colleges like Harvard, has nothing to do with meritocracy. In fact, it's the opposite. They use opaque and subjective criteria in their admissions process, in order to favor those born into privilege. For a better example of a meritocracy, take a look at New York's elite magnet schools like Stuyvesant. Their admissions process is a pure meritocracy - based entirely on a standardized exam that is taken by all applicants. The end result - Stuyvesant has far more economic diversity than any elite university. Almost half the students come from families poor enough to qualify for subsidized lunches. Harvard would do the nation a tremendous service if it became more meritocratic, not less https://outlookzen.com/2017/03/24/481/ https://outlookzen.com/2017/03/24/481/

shaklee3 7y ago
Economic diversity, yes. But Stuyvesant is 92% white and Asian, which is not racially diverse.
- p1esk 7y ago
  Are you suggesting they let in people who failed the standardized exam just to improve racial diversity?
  - killjoywashere 7y ago
    Perhaps you're not from the US? There is a strong current of sentiment in some quarters of the US that this is exactly what should happen if society's playing field is every going to be leveled.
    - achillesheels 7y ago
      And that’s how bridges collapse.
    - p1esk 7y ago
      I care more about what people on this forum think.

barkingcat 7y ago

Many people would argue that "We're devoting most of our advanced educational resources to helping people who would already be successful reap even more rewards." is exactly the point of higher education, and serves the goal of sustaining the power structures that currently exist. That's why "legacy admissions" even exist. If your dad or your mom went to Harvard, of course you'd want to sustain the family line and have an easy time to get admitted to Harvard too.