3 ms·

I wanted to go to Harvard, and didn't get in, so I went to a slightly less prestigious school instead. I had perfect test scores and grades so I potentially cou

I wanted to go to Harvard, and didn't get in, so I went to a slightly less prestigious school instead. I had perfect test scores and grades so I potentially could have been part of this lawsuit, and I used to be super bothered by affirmative action. But now I don't really care. Even if you don't get into your favorite top school, if you're actually a strong applicant you're likely to get into at least one, or if not, somewhere like Berkeley. Not getting into the tippy-top schools only hurts you if you want to do high octane finance (which these days is less attractive than tech IMO), and maybe puts you slightly behind where you could have been regarding internships or where you land your first job/grad school. I felt like I had "caught up" to where I would have likely been if I had got into Harvard by the time I hit 23. I had to work a bit harder and smarter than if more opportunities were handed to me on a silver platter, since I went to a slightly worse school, but it wasn't a big deal. Meanwhile there are probably people who got into Harvard for which it was actually a completely make-or-break, life-changing event in their lives. Arguably, they deserved, and certainly needed it, more than someone like me.

paulcole 7y ago
> I had perfect test scores and grades If Harvard wanted to admit 1,000 kids with perfect test scores and perfect grades they’d just take the first 1,000 applicants and call it a day. They can be and are much choosier than that. Why wouldn’t they be? If you have the choice between a 4.0/1600 kid and a 4.0/1600/world-class pianist, who would you take? When applying to Harvard grades and test scores aren’t even worth mentioning. If you’re counting on those to get you in then you’ve got almost no shot.
- opportune 7y ago
  Sure, but there are at least 4 other colleges that are about as prestigious and selective as Harvard for STEM. Back in my day I think it was something like 1000 kids a year got perfect scores between the two standardized tests, and the class sizes at all of these places is about 1600 (except Caltech which was like 250). I agree it is about more than grades and test scores, and I did have other stuff too, but that's beside the point. Arguing about that is missing the point of what I intended - what I meant is that if you are one of the better applicants, which I do think I was quantitatively (obviously not good enough lol), you don't need to go to Harvard. Whereas for some of the people getting in who might not have without affirmative action, getting into Harvard is actually life changing.
- jessriedel 7y ago
  Sort of. They certainly could take a class that had only perfect scores, and they also certainly select based on other criteria, but selecting on these other criteria seriously impact the typical scores of admits. I think Caltech students do noticeably better on every quantitative metric, both in terms of means and medians.
- bsder 7y ago
  > If you have the choice between a 4.0/1600 kid and a 4.0/1600/world-class pianist, who would you take? Which would be fine. Unfortunately, they take the 3.4/1420/Tennis Player instead. All of these schools have been proven over and over to reduce their standards when an athlete is involved.
munchbunny 7y ago
In general I think the community I grew up in (a fairly large community of Asian immigrants) over-emphasizes the role that "getting into Harvard" plays in the trajectory of your life. For most people, the thing that determines long term success isn't getting into Harvard, it's having the internal drive to work hard for it over the course of years. The latter translates into sustained career momentum. Also, some number of years out of college, I think the test scores aren't actually worth much except as a broad way of bucketing applicants. They are a poor proxy of key qualities like resilience and self-awareness, which, in my experience as both a job interviewer and alumni interviewer, show up much more in the work history/extracurriculars and the way they write/talk.

paulcole 7y ago

> I had perfect test scores and grades If Harvard wanted to admit 1,000 kids with perfect test scores and perfect grades they’d just take the first 1,000 applicants and call it a day. They can be and are much choosier than that. Why wouldn’t they be? If you have the choice between a 4.0/1600 kid and a 4.0/1600/world-class pianist, who would you take? When applying to Harvard grades and test scores aren’t even worth mentioning. If you’re counting on those to get you in then you’ve got almost no shot.

opportune 7y ago
Sure, but there are at least 4 other colleges that are about as prestigious and selective as Harvard for STEM. Back in my day I think it was something like 1000 kids a year got perfect scores between the two standardized tests, and the class sizes at all of these places is about 1600 (except Caltech which was like 250). I agree it is about more than grades and test scores, and I did have other stuff too, but that's beside the point. Arguing about that is missing the point of what I intended - what I meant is that if you are one of the better applicants, which I do think I was quantitatively (obviously not good enough lol), you don't need to go to Harvard. Whereas for some of the people getting in who might not have without affirmative action, getting into Harvard is actually life changing.
jessriedel 7y ago
Sort of. They certainly could take a class that had only perfect scores, and they also certainly select based on other criteria, but selecting on these other criteria seriously impact the typical scores of admits. I think Caltech students do noticeably better on every quantitative metric, both in terms of means and medians.
bsder 7y ago
> If you have the choice between a 4.0/1600 kid and a 4.0/1600/world-class pianist, who would you take? Which would be fine. Unfortunately, they take the 3.4/1420/Tennis Player instead. All of these schools have been proven over and over to reduce their standards when an athlete is involved.

munchbunny 7y ago

In general I think the community I grew up in (a fairly large community of Asian immigrants) over-emphasizes the role that "getting into Harvard" plays in the trajectory of your life. For most people, the thing that determines long term success isn't getting into Harvard, it's having the internal drive to work hard for it over the course of years. The latter translates into sustained career momentum. Also, some number of years out of college, I think the test scores aren't actually worth much except as a broad way of bucketing applicants. They are a poor proxy of key qualities like resilience and self-awareness, which, in my experience as both a job interviewer and alumni interviewer, show up much more in the work history/extracurriculars and the way they write/talk.