That only used to be the case at the uni level. Cambridge oxford lse. Didn’t happen for u nottingham based on my experience.
And in the USA the numbers of students is mind boggling in comparison. It’s just not a realistic solution. And with thousands and thousands of international applicants as well. Who pays for the lower ses student to make the trip. In the USA you can’t always just drive to the interview. It’s a really big place.
And don’t you think that Eton and others of ilk, better prepare for this process than the average.
Things are embedded and difficult to remove. That’s why the college boards came about originally. For a fair, unified and consistent measure of one’s college preparedness and skill. It might not be completely fair but it is fair-er.
Perhaps in some social groups, being well connected may be more socially desirable (or useful to associate with) than being seen as having the highest personal merit.
But note that revealing that status is typically optional for those who got in through the development or legacy preference. It is somewhat less optional for athletes and URMs, both of whom will be easily identifiable as such and presumed to have gotten preferences in admissions (regardless of whether they would have been admitted without such).
@privatebanker I guess it’s perceived as some kind of evidence of family prestige and/or wealth so “good”.
Me, I’d want to get in on my own merits rather than family coattails, but maybe if I’d grown up in a famous wealthy family I’d think differently …?
There was a story about Harvard a while back where everyone felt inferior (a legacy, an athlete and a URM among others were interviewed and all said they felt a bit of impostor syndrome being there because of their hooks).
I’m of the opinion that difficult does not equal impossible. Lots of different kinds of changes, not all requiring the same level of effort, can combine to make a quantum level difference in the way college admissions operates. Yes, people resist change. They will always resist change until they become aware that the change is worth it.
There are limits on attorneys splitting fees, and normally it can’t be done with clients.In class action cases, the judge specifically sets the award to be split by the plaintiffs and the attorney fees.
Stanford made no promises when the applicants sent in their $80. Stanford could give every single seat to people named Joe, or to athletes, or to students with perfect scores but not admit anyone who ever had a B in math. Stanford can do whatever it wants to do. It never guaranteed NOT to take developmental admits or not to take athletes over YOU.
And it would still have a line of people willing to pay $1000 just to apply.
It is quite ironic that the standardized tests are now one of the prime areas where the priveleged focus effort and investment (usually legal but sometimes not) in order to add to their other existing advantages their kids have.
The original purpose of the SAT was to cut through all the class bias, connections, hooks and similar BS. It was supposed to be the tool that the Harvards could use in order to identify the truly meritorious kids who should be admitted to Harvard. Even if the kids attended Wichita Central High School. The idea was that by using the scientific test, you could find those kids and that the smart Wichita kids would replace the meh hooked kids from Exeter that were so numerous at Harvard back in the day.
It did accomplish that goal to some extent. But like any utopian experiments, it didn’t quite work out exactly as planned.
twoinanddone Stanford had a duty of fulfilling precedent impied in the Common App user agreement...if it decided to suddenly to radically change its admission policies this would not stand up as a reasonable defense. Although dramatic, it CANNOT do whatever it wants like a rabid dog, it must be relatively consistent in its admission policies year to year.
So, @privatebanker
When you click the @ and then type in ephi instead of epi, you get a range of other incorrect names as well.
However, I’m flattered that a few others on CC liked my name and told me about it, and therefore tried to copy it, misspelled or not.
Epiphany: a moment of sudden revelation or insight.
Ephiphany (sorry to the user) = not a word in the English language, or probably Greek, from which it originates. i*
@thumper1@jym626 I don’t know about high school grades but years ago I adjuncted at two MA community colleges. I was told by the dean that my average grade was too low. A few months later I requested and received a printout of the grades I submitted for that semester. The dean had selectively raised the letter grades for several students.
It should not be surprising that when the way merit is measured is changed in a way that reduces high SES advantage, high SES parents will redeploy money to give their kids an advantage over others in earning the new measure of merit.
“But note that revealing that status is typically optional for those who got in through the development or legacy preference. It is somewhat less optional for athletes and URMs, both of whom will be easily identifiable as such and presumed to have gotten preferences in admissions (regardless of whether they would have been admitted without such)”.
@ucbalumnus I really think students admitted to the most selective schools are gifted in some compacity, except for those who cheated, and are probably fully aware of that. I think this notion that any student gives a second thought to anyone scrutinizing or questioning the legitimacy of their matriculation is fantasy. I think people who are overly invested in these institutions and feel entitled to these spots for themselves or progeny belabor this point and want to question other’s credentials. I believe the cream rises to the top, and most receive what they’ve earned. The Universities are aware they attract the best talent in the country. Believe me, they aren’t watering down the quality of their graduating classes just to spite any particular demographic. That being said talented students don’t need a specific school to pursue their passions and live a rewarding enriched life. I think parents need to stop placing these wants onto their children. The entitlement and sour grapes needs to stop IMO.
With sending a lot of kids to college and in the window of all this, I cannot see myself thinking for one second that they didn’t get into any of the schools that rejected them because this handful of people took their spot (statistically speaking, the cheaters are teeny tiny compared to all the great honest ones out there). I think of admissions numbers as fluid rather set in stone, for the most part I figured the schools made space for these few rather than they took a spot. It’s often not like kindergarten where there are literally 20 chairs.
Someone said to me, “If one of the younger Kardashians ended up at an elite college, everyone would know they had bought their way in, but not give it any thought.” No real comment on this, I just thought it interesting.
Lastly, really enjoy how civil this conversation is. @privatebanker you always present very level minded. Even sometimes disagreeing with an earlier post you made yourself. I like that people are working through this versus the initial emotional reactions that start a crazy dialogue on the internet. Testament to CC and I guess the mods are doing a great job. Sorry if this sounds like a big suck up.
