<p>They create a society without equal opportunity</p>
<p>[How</a> elite universities are killing the American dream ? Quartz](<a href=“http://qz.com/95845/how-elite-universities-are-killing-the-american-dream/]How”>How elite universities are killing the American dream)</p>
<p>And where there are snobs gathered at parties with plentiful of good food and drink…there will be those who crash parties for the sake of sustenance and amusement in the form of tossing snobs like pizza pies:</p>
<p>[Horrible</a> Histories - Literally: The Viking Song - YouTube](<a href=“Horrible Histories - Literally: The Viking Song - YouTube”>Horrible Histories - Literally: The Viking Song - YouTube)</p>
<p>:D 
:D</p>
<p>“Literally!”</p>
<p>Ahh…more Ivy (and Ivy-like school) bashing…</p>
<p>There’s a line in the article (after I scrolled down and down and down to find it) that says </p>
<p>“Like it or not, the Ivies and other top schools are our conduit to the top”</p>
<p>But for many here on CC, the conventional wisdom is that statements like this simply are not true–that, for the most part, opportunities for high achieving students are the same no matter where you go. </p>
<p>As evidence, see the article on 'The End of the Ivy League as We know it"</p>
<p>So either we bash the Ivies because (1) they are not all that we think they are, and students at other schools have similar opportunites or (2) they really are what they say they are, and they don’t attract enough high achieving low SES to help with social mobility.</p>
<p>So what is it? Are they the conduits to the top or not?</p>
<p>Or is this just all about anti-elitism in general, and finding all sorts of angles to push that position?</p>
<p>Has there ever been a society with true equal opportunity?</p>
<p>The thread title brings to mind this especially deathless CC thread from way back when: <a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/parent-cafe/688821-should-princeton-dd-choice-if-i-want-her-hobnob-snob-kids.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/parent-cafe/688821-should-princeton-dd-choice-if-i-want-her-hobnob-snob-kids.html</a> </p>
<p>Not exactly on-topic - but it’s a great read. The more things change …</p>
<p>Actually, the linked article seemed to focus more on the role of inadequate primary education and unstable family structures in contributing to inequality, not the inability to go to Harvard and the like. The race for opportunity is lost much, much earlier than college.</p>
<p>The article talks about high achieving lower SES students lack of attendance at the top 236 colleges - that’s a far cry from “Ivy” bashing.</p>
<p>Yes, because when we hear ‘elite univeristies’ and ‘Ivies and other top schools’ we think a school ranked number 230…</p>
<p>The report cited may not have singled out Ivy League (and Ivy-like) schools, but there’s enough language in the article that points in that direction. When it talks about financial aid policies, it mentions specifically Harvard and other most selective schools.</p>
<p>Interesting book by sociologist comparing students of Yale and Southern Connecticut State University–both located in New Haven. </p>
<p>[The</a> Class Divide between Yale and Southern Connecticut - Innovations - The Chronicle of Higher Education](<a href=“http://chronicle.com/blogs/innovations/the-class-divide-between-yale-and-southern-connecticut/28992]The”>Innovations: The Class Divide between Yale and Southern Connecticut)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Of course, I borrowed the concept from that thread (my favorite in all CC history).</p>
<p>So the author thinks it’s a social problem that successful people marry other successful people and work hard together to raise successful children? Why would it be a good idea for a high-achieving individual to marry a dysfunctional individual or a lazy person? How would they even be compatible partners? And wealthy people not only have to subsidize those who don’t work, but now they should be called upon to help society by entering into marriage contracts with poor people in order to raise the standard of living of lower class individuals? Wow. Yup, I’m going to tell my daughter right now, “Honey, don’t marry Preston. He’s too rich and successful. You should help society by marrying that slacker druggie that hangs out by the convenience store downtown.”</p>
<p>And how is it any institution’s fault, or the fault of the upper class, if poor students just “don’t remember” they can apply to top colleges or think other things are more important than doing so? The fact is, smart but poor students can and do get admitted to top schools. It just doesn’t happen if they don’t apply. In the age of the internet where information is abundant and easily accessible, ignorance or “no one telling them” is not an excuse.</p>
<p>And by the way, I am not even remotely upper class. But I believe in personal responsibility and a society free of social engineering.</p>
<p>@sorghum: and let’s see…the article was written by professors at Stanford and Harvard…two of the most elite institutions in the world…ironic.</p>
<p>That other “hobnob with the snobs” thread was one of my most UNfavorite threads!</p>
<p>^^^ I will try to give a brief take on the left’s position here. The assumption is that those with money and sophistication and the advantages that come with that (the “WS” for wealthy and sophisticated) can easily make more money and give themselves more advantages in their interactions with the rest, the non-WS. In every transaction between the WS and the non-WS, the WS can press their advantages to obtain a better deal, in a sense imposing a WS tax on the non-WS at every opportunity. According to the left, one of the functions of government is to afford the non-WS the opportunity to band together to gain the power necessary to oppose what amounts to bullying by the WS, and redistribute back to the non-WS what was taken from them through that bullying. Something that frustrates the left is that the WS often do capture government officials and agencies, at least in part through campaign financing, and get the government to act as their agent rather than as an agent of the non-WS, who expect control because of their greater numbers in a system which provides voting processes. Without a government intervening on the side of the non-WS, those on the left believe (based on a fair amount of evidence) that the wealth will likely snowball, polarizing society, which will make maintaining a decent standard of living for most unsustainable. Providing equal opportunity in education is seen as a very effective and efficient means for preventing the snowballing and polarization, and those on the left expect the government to work towards that goal.</p>
<p>That article comparing Yale and Southern Connecticut is really silly. It doesn’t have a single surprising thing in it, and all the “disturbing” elements it uncovers would have been significantly more disturbing if you had done the comparison twenty, or fifty, years ago. Well, there was one surprising fact–that 20% of Yale students come from families in which the parents don’t have a BA.</p>
<p>How about this…we know more than several couples who met in New Haven…one spouse a Yale grad and the other a SCSU grad. I guess it’s not an issue for the students for the most part.</p>
<p>I wonder why the authors didn’t compare Yale to Quinnipiac (whose price tag is about the same as Yale and where many rich parents send their not so smart kids) or Quinnipiac to Southern.</p>
<p>The authors seem to ignore the UC system, six of the campuses of which rank in the top 50 in the country. Systemwide, the UCs educate 40% Pell grant recipients (39% and 35% at UCLA and UCB, two of the top unis in the country/world).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What is one’s definition of “the top”? The vast majority of people in this country are not going to become Fortune 50 CEO’s or Supreme Court justices anyway, no matter where they go. Personally, I think a nice, pleasant upper middle class existence is perfectly satisfying and plenty, and while I love elite schools myself, it’s kind of hard not to argue that the vast majority of people living pleasant upper middle class lives had to have gone to Ivy League and similar schools to get there. Drive down the road of ANY nice upper middle class suburb of any decent-sized city in the US and the vast majority of people who got there went to their state’s flagship and just worked hard.</p>