3 ms·

> it creates a caste system that gets locked in based on how you did on math tests when you were 14. I agree, but then again, if you look at areas like sports

> it creates a caste system that gets locked in based on how you did on math tests when you were 14. I agree, but then again, if you look at areas like sports and the arts, the vast majority of people who are stars were also standouts when they were 14 (or often younger). It doesn't do any good to pretend that someone who was coding since elementary school wouldn't have a huge (and warranted) advantage over someone who didn't pick it up until their 20s. I also agree people get into top colleges for lots of different reasons, but (at least in my experience), graduating from a top school just got your foot in the door, but you still had to go through the same judgement gauntlet as everyone else after that.

mikert89 1y ago
This isnt the correct comparison, since most people getting into the top schools are completely undifferentiated, all have maxed out GPAs and near perfect/perfect SATs. There are for more people with the profile to get into harvard, than there are admits. The breakdown is a composition of: 1. legacy admits 2. athletic admits 3. dei admits 4. actual brilliances admits but even in the 4th bucket, they are allocating those spots based on alot of non performative criteria. with sports, its more like, "who ran 40 meters the fastest" I live in NYC, I meet the ivy types all the time. I have gotten very cynical about it