3 ms·

> This is about gunning for the elite/upper echelons of society. Is that what it’s about? Keep in that the University of Michigan is a public university, expli

by raddan 2mo ago

> This is about gunning for the elite/upper echelons of society. Is that what it’s about? Keep in that the University of Michigan is a public university, explicitly founded to “provide the inhabitants of this state with the means of acquiring a thorough knowledge of the various branches of literature, science, and the arts.” There’s nothing about being elite in there at all. This is an institution that serves the public. I’m no stranger to long hours to achieve high status—I’m a professor. But I also started my journey at a public school and a public undergraduate institution. Many of my friends—all good and smart people but in many cases decidedly NOT elite-have leveraged their public education into satisfying careers. I, and my friends, would not have had our opportunities otherwise. I simply could not afford top private school. I don’t know what to think about this change exactly, but it’s worth pointing out that MIT has had this policy for first year students since 1968. MIT! Seems like UM can make this work if they are thoughtful about it.

estearum 2mo ago
All universities are for the elites. I would love for that not to be the case, but the only reason admissions are this competitive is because there's competition for limited slots. And yes, certainly a (traditional) university education should not be required for having good career opportunities. IMO there's a need for a type of education that's vastly more scalable and still equips people with the beyond-secondary education they need to be productive in today's economy.
- raddan 2mo ago
  I’m not sure where you get the idea that all universities are competitive because that is simply untrue. Many public universities are required by state legislatures to broadly admit students from their own state. California is a good example. You can see incoming class statistics here: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/entering-class-statistics https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/entering-class-... Competitive universities are competitive. Sometimes that competiton is justified and sometimes it is unjustifiably based on pedigree. The program I attended before getting my PhD at a public university was at a well-known private university. But in terms of research productivity and impact, the public university was a MUCH better place to go to school. The PhD program was exceptionally competitive but its undergrad program was not. As a result, many undergrads who wandered through our lab door got a first-class research experience. I’m not going to pretend that pedigree doesn’t matter (to some people), but it is emphatically not the same thing as “a good preparation.” I took a couple math classes one summer at a low-tier state college. They were just as good as any math classes I took at any of the other places I went to school, public or private.
  - estearum 2mo ago
    The ones that aren't competitive don't have the ultra-competitive dynamics described above. Not sure what your point is. That still doesn't mean they're not "for the elites." Universities are for people striving for upward mobility, i.e. to get into or maintain membership in the elite tiers of society. Also there is (obviously) significant variation in the upper end of the elite and the lower end.
    - raddan 2mo ago
      More than a third of the US population has a college degree. [1] When you consider the fact that 20% of the US population are children [2] that means that roughly half of the eligible US population has a college degree. If “half” is elite, then I’m not sure what “elite” means, because it’s not very exclusive. > Not sure what your point is. Well, you said > All universities are for the elites. And then I countered that, actually, many are not selective. I am asking you to reconsider your statement. In reality, many college programs confer _skills_, not _status_. This narrative that colleges are for the elites is demonstrably untrue, runs counter to the founding mission of many of them, and strikes me as sour grapes. I know because I was one of the kids who struggled to afford college, went to a public one where I learned _skills_, which I then leveraged into a satisfying career. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Educational_attainment_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Educational_attainment_in_the_... [2] https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/visualizations/2024/comm/under-18-population.pdf https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/visualizat...
      - estearum 2mo ago
        [flagged]
        neuroticnews25 2mo ago
        > All universities are for the elites. I would love for that not to be the case What would have to change for you to declare it's not the case?
- vel0city 2mo ago
  Isn't that need of post-secondary education "solved" by community colleges? Extremely cheap for locals, usually offering degree/certification programs especially relevant to employers in the area, extremely lax requirements, etc?
  - estearum 2mo ago
    In theory yes, in practice it seems empirically like the answer is no. I'm not sure if it's just a vibes/branding problem or what. But yeah I think much larger and more capable community colleges and smaller universities is probably closer to ideal.

by raddan 2mo ago

estearum 2mo ago

All universities are for the elites. I would love for that not to be the case, but the only reason admissions are this competitive is because there's competition for limited slots. And yes, certainly a (traditional) university education should not be required for having good career opportunities. IMO there's a need for a type of education that's vastly more scalable and still equips people with the beyond-secondary education they need to be productive in today's economy.

raddan 2mo ago
I’m not sure where you get the idea that all universities are competitive because that is simply untrue. Many public universities are required by state legislatures to broadly admit students from their own state. California is a good example. You can see incoming class statistics here: https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/entering-class-statistics https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/entering-class-... Competitive universities are competitive. Sometimes that competiton is justified and sometimes it is unjustifiably based on pedigree. The program I attended before getting my PhD at a public university was at a well-known private university. But in terms of research productivity and impact, the public university was a MUCH better place to go to school. The PhD program was exceptionally competitive but its undergrad program was not. As a result, many undergrads who wandered through our lab door got a first-class research experience. I’m not going to pretend that pedigree doesn’t matter (to some people), but it is emphatically not the same thing as “a good preparation.” I took a couple math classes one summer at a low-tier state college. They were just as good as any math classes I took at any of the other places I went to school, public or private.
- estearum 2mo ago
  The ones that aren't competitive don't have the ultra-competitive dynamics described above. Not sure what your point is. That still doesn't mean they're not "for the elites." Universities are for people striving for upward mobility, i.e. to get into or maintain membership in the elite tiers of society. Also there is (obviously) significant variation in the upper end of the elite and the lower end.
  - raddan 2mo ago
    More than a third of the US population has a college degree. [1] When you consider the fact that 20% of the US population are children [2] that means that roughly half of the eligible US population has a college degree. If “half” is elite, then I’m not sure what “elite” means, because it’s not very exclusive. > Not sure what your point is. Well, you said > All universities are for the elites. And then I countered that, actually, many are not selective. I am asking you to reconsider your statement. In reality, many college programs confer _skills_, not _status_. This narrative that colleges are for the elites is demonstrably untrue, runs counter to the founding mission of many of them, and strikes me as sour grapes. I know because I was one of the kids who struggled to afford college, went to a public one where I learned _skills_, which I then leveraged into a satisfying career. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Educational_attainment_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Educational_attainment_in_the_... [2] https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/visualizations/2024/comm/under-18-population.pdf https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/visualizat...
    - estearum 2mo ago
      [flagged]
      - neuroticnews25 2mo ago
        > All universities are for the elites. I would love for that not to be the case What would have to change for you to declare it's not the case?
vel0city 2mo ago
Isn't that need of post-secondary education "solved" by community colleges? Extremely cheap for locals, usually offering degree/certification programs especially relevant to employers in the area, extremely lax requirements, etc?
- estearum 2mo ago
  In theory yes, in practice it seems empirically like the answer is no. I'm not sure if it's just a vibes/branding problem or what. But yeah I think much larger and more capable community colleges and smaller universities is probably closer to ideal.