4 ms·

These people have no idea what they're talking about. They think the UK and France are meritocracies when it comes to attending Oxbridge or the Grande Ecoles?

These people have no idea what they're talking about. They think the UK and France are meritocracies when it comes to attending Oxbridge or the Grande Ecoles? This doesn't stand up to even the most basic scrutiny. Cambridge doesn't even keep data on its students by income group. That's how embarrassing the numbers are. (Cambridge even actively punishes poor students by forbidding them to work at all while enrolled.) All Oxford will admit to is that 90% of the students come from above the UK's median income. The Grand Ecoles in France are far worse. People talk about the opening of the Grand Ecoles to other social classes, but this is barely happening. They only started to open up in the 2000s and the opening has been extremely underwhelming. https://shs.hal.science/halshs-03119054/document https://shs.hal.science/halshs-03119054/document If Harvard, Princeton, MIT, Stanford were as unequal as the schools this article is promoting people would lose their minds! The only difference between the US and Europe: in the US people were upfront about the system. You got extra points for being a legacy. In Europe, they discriminate in exactly the same way but they don't make it so overt. I'd rather have a transparent system that we can understand and where we can set clear goals, instead of an opaque system that fights even the most basic data collection and reforms.

karaterobot 3y ago
Thank you, this article had me thinking I'd gone insane. The idea that elite universities anywhere are a meritocracy is a pretty silly idea on its face. And sure enough, there is nothing presented in this article which supports the claim that this practice had stopped in Europe, which means it's either so obvious that everyone with half a brain knows it already, or it's just a spurious claim they threw in there without anything to back it up.
jltsiren 3y ago
I'm not familiar with the system in the UK, but most countries in the Continental Europe practice meritocratic discrimination. Admissions are primarily based on academic achievements, which correlate highly with family background. The same meritocratic discrimination also exists in the US. Legacy admissions do not replace it but add another layer of inequality on top of that. Meritocracy is fundamentally unfair, especially for young people. Success largely depends on things beyond your control, such as talent, personality, and interests; genetics, family background and random chance. I was somewhat involved in educational policy in Finland in the 2000s. Back then, one of the major issues was that meritocratic practices had started to decrease social mobility instead of increasing it. When higher education was expanding rapidly, most admissions were from working class / rural families. But once that generation started having children, their kids had a significant advantage in meritocratic admissions over those from less educated families. The culture had also changed to make the meritocratic discrimination worse. Old-school socialists and rural liberals strongly believed that education was the key to success, both for the individual and the society. But over the decades, the working class started rejecting education. Their children, who were already academically disadvantaged, became less interested in higher education.
bjourne 3y ago
While that is true, European universities are generally not dependent on bribes from rich families so they are not incentivized to prioritize rich kids. Rich kids still have an easier path but the discrimination happens at an earlier level than university admission.

karaterobot 3y ago

Thank you, this article had me thinking I'd gone insane. The idea that elite universities anywhere are a meritocracy is a pretty silly idea on its face. And sure enough, there is nothing presented in this article which supports the claim that this practice had stopped in Europe, which means it's either so obvious that everyone with half a brain knows it already, or it's just a spurious claim they threw in there without anything to back it up.

jltsiren 3y ago

I'm not familiar with the system in the UK, but most countries in the Continental Europe practice meritocratic discrimination. Admissions are primarily based on academic achievements, which correlate highly with family background. The same meritocratic discrimination also exists in the US. Legacy admissions do not replace it but add another layer of inequality on top of that. Meritocracy is fundamentally unfair, especially for young people. Success largely depends on things beyond your control, such as talent, personality, and interests; genetics, family background and random chance. I was somewhat involved in educational policy in Finland in the 2000s. Back then, one of the major issues was that meritocratic practices had started to decrease social mobility instead of increasing it. When higher education was expanding rapidly, most admissions were from working class / rural families. But once that generation started having children, their kids had a significant advantage in meritocratic admissions over those from less educated families. The culture had also changed to make the meritocratic discrimination worse. Old-school socialists and rural liberals strongly believed that education was the key to success, both for the individual and the society. But over the decades, the working class started rejecting education. Their children, who were already academically disadvantaged, became less interested in higher education.

bjourne 3y ago

While that is true, European universities are generally not dependent on bribes from rich families so they are not incentivized to prioritize rich kids. Rich kids still have an easier path but the discrimination happens at an earlier level than university admission.