Shelby Steele on Ivy League Admissions

Parents Forum
61

<p>^My goodness, Pizza. Such slavish defense of institutions you’ve never attended nor sent a child to attend. Curious.</p>

<p>It seems to offend you that I am not more grateful to have a kid accepted by one of these schools and that I have the temerity to question their admissions system.</p>

<p>I guess I just don’t know my place.</p>

<p>Having been thru the admissions scene with one kid and now immersed in it with another, I consider it to be rather crudely targeted toward fulfilling liberal ideals while still catering to the minimum acceptable level of extremely wealthy and forcing upon many gifted striver kids from Asian backgrounds an insanely high bar to clear. Is it better than the past? I guess. I wasn’t in that past. Is it perfect. Not by a lot, imo, and I think having sent a kid to one of them and paid quite a lot for that privilege that I am entitled to my opinions.</p>

<p>And please stop instructing me to not let my kids apply to these schools. My kids happen to be very much in the zone academically to attend them and do well at them and it is an opportunity that I believe they have very much earned. I do not dictate to my kids what schools they can attend. I support them as much as I can in setting their own course. Again, this doesn’t mean I don’t get to look critically at the institutions.</p>

62

<p>I’m questioning why, if you felt the “smart kids” weren’t getting into HYP because of the unqualified people darkening their doors, why you didn’t figure out where the smart kids were going and send your son there, instead. </p>

<p>No one seems to ever have an answer to “if the smart kids are getting rejected from HYP due to URM’s/legacies/athletes/whatever, where are they going?” They have to go SOMEWHERE. But funnily enough, the same people who complain that the smart kids are getting rejected from HYP never seem to want to chase down where the smart kids are going and redirect their kids there. Which tells me that they are prestige whores.</p>

63

<p>“It seems to offend you that I am not more grateful to have a kid accepted by one of these schools and that I have the temerity to question their admissions system.”</p>

<p>Im not PG, but personally I think is fine that people challenge institutions. But when the do so, they should do so based on facts. The notion that academic merit is not central to the Ivy admissions process, is laughable on its face.</p>

64

<p>“No one seems to ever have an answer to “if the smart kids are getting rejected from HYP due to URM’s/legacies/athletes/whatever, where are they going?” They have to go SOMEWHERE”</p>

<p>RPI. They are ALL at RPI. :wink: </p>

<p>Seriously A. the advantages for URMs and legacies and athletes are at the margins, and as has been pointed out, some of those categories overlap with each other, and all of them overlap to some degree with the smartest kids. So the number kept out is pretty small. They probably HAVE helped up the numbers at the next couple of dozen schools on down, but then those schools have their OWN legacies, Athletes, and URM preferences, mostly (we were suprised to see how many legacies RPI has) But certainly not enough to move any of those institutions numbers ABOVE the ivies. And probably less a factor in the rise of those institutions than the simple increase in the number of highly qualified applicants while the number of Ivy slots remains largely fixed. </p>

<p>This isnt like the era when the Jewish community of Boston could create a top notch U based essentially on the goal of getting around quotas :)</p>

65

<p>There’s nothing wrong with questioning admissions systems, but there is something wrong when you assert that Ivy League admissions no longer values merit and the competition for excellence like it did in the past and then ascribing that to some liberal agenda.</p>

<p>Yeah, I guess it’s some misguided liberal agenda that now many women get to attend Yale, and we should long for the good ole days when merit was more highly valued, and these institutions were exclusively male.</p>

66

<p>“I consider it to be rather crudely targeted toward fulfilling liberal ideals while still catering to the minimum acceptable level of extremely wealthy”</p>

<p>When I attended (and affirm action was already place) there were quite a number of kids who were not URM and not extremely wealthy. Like this Jewish kid from Brooklyn. I suspect that my admission also fulfilled liberal ideals - ideals of intellectual curiosity, mostly.</p>

67

<p>Pizza, you really couldn’t be further from the truth in accusing me of faulting Ivy schools for dumbing down in order to admit URMs. That is not at all my take. The URMs at my kid’s college were smart as the dickens. That is WHY I don’t think they should be practicing holistic admissions. They don’t need to.</p>

68

<p>"Is it better than the past? I guess. I wasn’t in that past. Is it perfect. "</p>

<p>but Mr Steele, whom we are discussing did not say its better than in the past, but not perfect. he said that competition of excellence is laughed at in admissions policies, and that this is a sign (somehow, dont ask me) of withdrawl from American exceptionalism (odd no, that this advocate of American exceptionalism prefers an approach to Univ admissions widespread in other developed countries, rather than our own homegrown approach) </p>

<p>We have had LOTS of discussions over the years of affirmative action. AFAIK we have not had many discussions of Mr Steele and his views of higher ed. Id much rather keep this to the latter.</p>

69

<p>"That is not at all my take. The URMs at my kid’s college were smart as the dickens. That is WHY I don’t think they should be practicing holistic admissions. "</p>

<p>You do realize holistic admissions is NOT mainly about URM’s, dont you?</p>

70

<p>Oh good lord, the Ivies (except for Cornell) were woefully late to the party in even admitting women. They were SO behind the eight-ball when it came to that one, and basically had to be kicked dragging and screaming to admit women when other elite colleges had done so since inception. Spare me the revisionist history that tries to pretend they weren’t male-white-WASP-bastions-of-elitism for most of their time.</p>

71

<p>

</p>

<p>^^I don’t want to be off-topic and mess up the thread, but is it permitted to ask who is being admitted under holistic admissions that Sewhappy objects to? an example?</p>

72

<p>“They were SO behind the eight-ball when it came to that one, and basically had to be kicked dragging and screaming to admit women when other elite colleges had done so since inception”</p>

<p>Radcliffe gave an essentially equal education to Havard, though at least in the later years before full coed the admissions numbers meant it was HARDER to get in to Radcliffe. Im not sure about Barnard and Pembroke, but the fact that Cornell was the only coed Ivy (aside from the more complex and later case of Penn) doesnt mean there was no attempt to offer Ivy educations to women.</p>

73

<p>Pizzagirl is right. Columbia is a great place but it didn’t admit a full class of women until the mid-1980s. And by the way, there are still some prominent Princeton male alumni who aren’t excited by co-education or the numbers of minorities on campus. I remember some of the old die-hards comming out of the woodwork when Justice Samuel Alito was nominated and when Michelle Obama’s background first began to receive some scrutiny.</p>

74

<p>"They were SO behind the eight-ball when it came to that one, and basically had to be kicked dragging and screaming to admit women when other elite colleges had done so since inception. Spare me the revisionist history that tries to pretend they weren’t male-white-WASP-bastions-of-elitism for most of their time. "</p>

<p>I continue to insist that the history of WASP exclusiveness pre 1940 didnt make affirmative action feel any better to folks who saw it reducing their chances post 1965, ESPECIALLY when said folks were in the same groups that had been excluded pre-1940.</p>

75

<p>It’s interesting to me how much more those who have not had kids go to these schools seem to fetishize it than those of us who have.</p>

<p>Pizzagirl, you seem to imagine that I think my kid complained about going to Harvard with lots of dummies. You couldn’t be further off base. He was very challenged there. All the students were smart, every single one he encountered. He did well, graduated in three years with honors but it was not as if he wasn’t extremely challenged. I’m not sure where you get that notion from my posts.</p>

<p>I still think the admissions process is imperfect. I think Asian students have a higher bar than other groups and that bothers me a lot. I think there are plenty of bright and high scoring URMs to populate these schools in a meaningful way. I also think the whole structure of the application – all the essays especially – are very prone to exploitation, ghostwriting, hired consultants and just plain prevaricating. </p>

<p>I’d be much happier if these highly selective schools instituted as objective a process as possible - tests much harder than the SAT to truly identify the most intellectually gifted. I would especially like to see a timed essay under controlled conditions vs what we have now. Ironically, I doubt my own kids would “get in” with such a system. But I would respect it more.</p>

76

<p>"And by the way, there are still some prominent Princeton male alumni who aren’t excited by co-education or the numbers of minorities on campus. "</p>

<p>If we are to judge an institution by what excites some alumni, than we would have to judge the Ivies for BOTH advocating Marxism, AND libertarianism, AND neo feudalism. I dont think thats really fair.</p>

77

<p>

</p>

<p>I agree with this (except I would rephrase it with “which include appreciating the value of admitting the extremely wealthy”), but I consider the approach a good thing and very logical.</p>

78

<p>

</p>

<p>Nobody said it proves anything, Schmaltz. I just think he writes badly.</p>

79

<p>Fair/shmair. Who knows what fair is anymore. I’ve not posted my story here before, because I feel its likely a lightening rod, but I’m doing it once to get it off my chest and out of my system.</p>

<p>Yes, my dream since birth was for son to attend Ivy league. This was known to him. He spent 12 years in a high end, college prep school. He was in the top 3-4 of his graduating class of 90 something graduates. He had the longest resume, and with largely the right activities. He scored 2380 on his SAT. 800 on 3 Subject Matter tests. Fluent in 2 foreign languages. national merit scholarship finalist. Cum laude. </p>

<p>He applied to Yale, Princeton, & BRown …and Stanford. And yes he then also applied to UNC, Boston U, Duke, Davidson, UT Plan II, and Pomona.</p>

<p>Denied Yale & Stanford. WL’d Prince & Brown. And accepted at all the others, including scholarship offers from more than one. He’s at Pomona this fall.</p>

<p>I was angry and frustrated. There is little this kid could have done better. What frustrated me? </p>

<p>I also know several kids who got into Harvard, Princeton, Yale & Brown. Notice I said AND…as in got in all 3 or 4 (depending on where they applied). Kids in his class that didn’t have his results (stil in top 10-15, but not in top 3) and didn’t have his resume extra curricular. Dont get me wrong–great kids, I love them, I love their families and they were deserving. They’ll do well there. I’m thrilled for them.</p>

<p>SO why them and not my kid? Well here’s the deal. My kid is an upper middle class white kid. Those I mentioned are not. They are all either kids of color, 2nd veneration of foreign born parents, or kids of the uber wealthy with names/pedigrees that are nationally recognized. Names that build buildings and endowments.</p>

<p>I’m still tearing apart everythign about “wny not MY kid?” </p>

<p>Oh hes happy at Pomona, he’ll do great, and he’ll bloom where ever planted. But if ANYONE thinks it is 100% based on merit, then they are off their rocker crazy. Merit is only one piece of a puzzle.</p>

<p>My kid was very very disappointed. He always assumed if he did what he should do, he’d be rewarded appropriately. He too wanted Ivy–it wasn’t Mom pushing. It was just part of the assumption his entire life, and he knew he’d have to perform. he DID perform–make no mistake.</p>

<p>So yes. My whole house was upset and disappointed. It drug on because we were hoping (praying) for the WL call from Brown or Pirnceton. And that didnt come either. So this drama drug on from April 1 through the end of June before final closure and acceptance. And feeling rejected drug on too.</p>

<p>Not a fun way to live. We slapped lipstick on it, spoke positively about the future but we were all ate up with frustration inside. We didn’t really discuss how we were feeling. We all just squished it. Put on the happy face, talked positively of the future, college, his choice of Pomona, etc. And I am happy with Pomona.</p>

<p>But the whole process really does show–no it isnt 100% merit, and no life isn’t fair. And when you know your kid is disappointed, and with the hard work and resume my kid had, its tough to not be bitter for them.</p>

<p>Sorry, its how I feel. So shoot at me, I don’t care.</p>

80

<p>

</p>

<p>Although the mission of these schools may have changed somewhat over time, it doesn’t seem to me, to have ever pretended to be, to educate only the “most intellectually gifted” - that somehow if you could measure who was smartest you would take those applicants? Why should that be the mission? But that doesn’t mean “that competition of excellence is laughed at in admissions policies.” </p>

<p>okay, I realize it’s all been said before :(</p>

<p>edit: ProudmomofS. I am very sorry for your pain. I am also very sorry for the pain of families I know who supported certain schools for generations, and more generations, and whose very well qualified kids didn’t get accepted. It is a very difficult thing.</p>