<p>What? In the Ivy League? Shelby Steele and you must be talking about some other Ivy League that exists in a bizzaro alternate universe. To the Ivy League we have here in this universe things like test scores, being academically exceptional, and intellectual curiosity matter enormously when it comes to admissions.</p>
<p>Scroll through this thread and take a look at the stats and achievements of the kids who got accepted. You’ll see what I’m talking about:</p>
<p>Every elite school? Entirely impossible. You’d have an extremely hard time to accomplish this for a handful of elite schools. </p>
<p>This would require a rather unusual or incomplete definition of … stats. Or a loose and accepting definition of what an elite school really is. </p>
<p>If you refer to the “stats” commonly used in admissions for the most selective schools in our country, your statement is easily debunked by evidence. For instance, take a closer look at the distribution of the verbal scores on the SAT, and you will find how hard it would be to validate your claim. An ever so slightly better performance on one component of the SAT or ACT only goes that far. And so do the mechamisms to obtain those scores in Asia.</p>
<p>"Every elite school? Entirely impossible. You’d have an extremely hard time to accomplish this for a handful of elite schools. "</p>
<p>^^rubbish. </p>
<p>for Gods sake Xiggi! There are HOW many BILLIONS of people in China and India alone? 2? 3? how many are probably in the top 1/2 of 1% IQ wise? That comes to 15,000,000 really smart people. If even 1% of them apply to US college each year, that comes to 150,000 applicants. EACH year. And yes, their ENGLISH VERBAL SAT scores may not be as high as those who have spoken English ALL THEIR LIVES- is that a surprise??</p>
<p>Read the statement I quoted again. It read “Every elite could probably fill its seats with kids from india and china that have better stats than us kids.”</p>
<p>The large size of the population is not relevant to the statement above. </p>
<p>The only relevance is the number of students who DO HAVE better stats. This number is not as large as some love to throw around.</p>
<p>OK! Let’s now assume that stats did not mean admission statistics nor … test scores. If there were possible advantages for students of China or India in non-verbal test scores, it just evaporated if you consider an entire profile. </p>
<p>Do you really believe that foreigners present better profiles for holistic undergraduate admissions? EC activities? Well-roundedness? Essays? Weighted GPAs? </p>
<p>The biggest criticism of US admissions at elite schools hurled by foreign students is the precise lack of the sole reliance on test scores, especially non-verbal scores.</p>
<p>Did you, perhaps mean non-elite schools that are casting wider and wider nets for full-paying customers? This will increasingly become a solid attribute in a student profile at schools with revenue issues.</p>
<p>Tavis Smiley visited China recently and one segment included a visit to a school for the best students and an interview with a class. It is interesting to hear their comments about their education - they think it isn’t good.</p>
Not only the mythical past, the the actual past. I was one of those kids from a public school, and I don’t think I’d get in today, at least without achieving a lot more outside the classroom than I did. That’s something I hear all the time from other Ivy grads.</p>
<p>Regarding Steele’s piece – we read it in our house the other morning and thought, as we think of all his writings we have come across, that it was quite insightful. Of course many here are bristling, and there’s nothing more offensive than a very educated black intellectual voicing these opinions to stir up the spider’s nest.</p>
<p>The bit about merit in Ivy admissions is obviously about how the selection process is very much influenced by political agenda, advantaging certain special populations and disadvantaging others.</p>
<p>Well, then if it bothers you so much, you shouldn’t have your kid apply there / go there. If the true “smart, deserving kids” are being shut out of HYP, then it should be a simple matter to figure out where they are going and apply there instead. but it seems rather silly to decry how the country club chooses its members yet still desire with every fiber of one’s being to get in. </p>
<p>The Ivies only have the power you ascribe to them, you know. 95% of people in this country have never spent one iota of brain cells thinking about them, much less fretting over them, and many go on to lead happy, productive – even well to do! – lives.</p>
<p>Most elite schools will tell you these 3 admissions criteria remain key.</p>
<p>It’s just that there are so many exceptional, curious and high scoring students who are rejected from these schools. Unfortunately, the explanation of “building a class” and statistics (too many applicants for very few spots) are too subjective and too simple for many posters on CC (and Shelby Steele.)</p>
<p>I have some understanding of this point of view from parents whose kids have worked very hard in High School, and they believe that their child was shut out of admissions to an elite school by someone in their high school who they perceive was less intellectually curious, less academically exceptional and had lower GPA/Test scores. While I may understand why this point of view exists, I am satisfied with the “building a class” and “too many qualified applicants for too few spots” explanations.</p>
<p>What I find interesting in Steele’s comments is that it is becoming pretty common knowledge what is really going on in Ivy admission offices, and the fact that he calls out Ivy admission to make his greater point really says something.
I would also mention that while the Wall street Journal does clearly have a conservative editorial viewpoint it is by far the largest circulation paper in this Country-more than double that of the NY Times so while it appears posters on cc don’t seem to give it much credibility it certainly resonates elsewhere.</p>
<p>Steele is merely mentioning that what passes for a meritocracy today is in fact a club with a slew of back and side entrances for those who are not top shelf (athletes, URMs, donors’ kids, movie stars, celebs’ kids, legacies, geographic diversity, etc.). He’s not saying that no smart kids get in–he’s just saying that a lot of not-so-smart ones also get in. The fact that they do so under the self-righteous banner of holistic admissions takes it from deceptive to hilarious.</p>
<p>“Why, are Ivy admission policies all that important in the scheme of things, sm74?”</p>
<p>I don’t think the OP is dwelling on Ivy admissions…they are just one example of the way things are working. Three of our last 4 presidents got into Ivies for reasons other than merit, so it’s not like it doesn’t have an effect on all of us.</p>