The simple answer (previously captured) is because they have the means to make decisions divorced from economic concerns. That’s neither good nor bad, it simply is. Some of them may concentrate their efforts on certain “elite” schools for the perceived name value, but many more (IMO) simply make what they feel is the best decision for their kid using the criteria most valuable to them.
Nope. That is not what I’m talking about. You can do anything out of a “normal” school ,but by definition most are not. At an elite school most kids are doing these things and they SUPPORT EACH OTHER IN THE PROCESS which makes it feel normal. That is the point.
Actually those “cheerleaders and athetes” are biophysics, chemistry and engineering majors who yes , do it all and ask serious questions at poster presentations. Which, unless something has dratically changed in the last 25 years is not something that happened at my normal school.
@RW1 I see. You didn’t get the memo. Things have changed. At a lot of normal school students support each other in their academic endeavors. (Although I doubt this was limited to elite schools even 25 years ago). If you’re paying $70k a year because you think this is an exclusive benefit of a few schools, you got cheated because you didn’t educate yourself, but instead relied on myth. You prove the point that myth sells though.
I guess I didn’t get the memo but i DO get the math. 82 % acceptance to med school of students who complete program vs national average 45% and D has a med school interview to program that accepts sophomores (several of her peers do as well.
Regardless of a family’s net worth, many people believe that getting an education at an elite school will provide them with a great foundation for a prosperous career. In some regards there is truth to that - there are alumni connections that can’t be ignored. Some companies specifically target particular universities for future employees. Graduating from Duke, for example, can open doors that may otherwise not be opened for someone who went to a local state university. That’s just reality.
However, a degree from an elite university does not guarantee a long successful career anymore than a degree from a local state college “dooms” us less lucrative careers. It’s all about what you DO with the degree, how hard you work, and what opportunities you pursue.
My friend’s son graduated from UVA with a business degree about 12 years ago. She thought that would be his golden ticket. And it was at first. He got hired right after graduation by a large financial firm in Washington DC and had an excellent starting salary. However, he didn’t do well. He was not aggressive enough. He wasn’t a go-getter, and ultimately left the company after two years. He got another chance at another firm but had the same problem. He now works for a non-profit making $45,000/year, which isn’t bad but he’s certainly not doing as well as he thought he would be.
I agree. And it’s just a myth. Nearly all of these colleges reserve only a small percentage (perhaps only 10% or so) of seats for unhooked students who deserve the label of being “the very smartest”. The rest is filled with admits in various preference categories. Some of these hooked students also happen to deserve the label, but many of them don’t. These preference admits help lower the rigor of courses so everyone can blend in and look smart. Perhaps other than Caltech (even MIT considers athletic and other preferences), there’s no true meritocracy left.
@RW1 Gotcha. Well good luck to your D on the interview. It is great that despite the different paths taken, and money spent, our kids can both be in such great positions at this point in their college careers. To your point, I guess one has had to work for it more (having had less support), which may show well in interviews and on CVs.
Be very careful with such self-selected stats. Kinda like saying 82% of premed who score a 3.8 GPA get into med school. Don’t need no stinkin’ program…but do need a high GPA & high MCAT score.
btw: what kinda ‘med’ school? Allopathic only? Also+Osteo? US only? Guadalajara? What about alums?
Those are real stats… Im primary care MD, D wants to be primary care…so really doesn’t matter… even Guadalajara will work…hahaha, but at school shes at 80% of students who get in go MD 20 % DO.
Agree though, no matter what undergrad school you attend need 3.65 plus/3.5 science plus 508 MCAT plus to feel like the odds are ok.
Since no one has suggested a desire for assortative mating, I’ll throw it in there.
Agree that expensive colleges are affordable for the wealthy.
“Perhaps other than Caltech (even MIT considers athletic and other preferences), there’s no true meritocracy left.”
If that’s what you want, apply to Oxbridge…
I always assumed medical school admission was numbers driven. I thought a student with a 4.0 from a state university and very high MCAT scores would have a very good shot over a student with a 3.6 average from an elite university. Is that not the case? (I did assume that if both students had 3.7 averages and same MCAT scores, than the name brand of the university would matter more.)
Now to be serious. The SATs, GPAs, and later achievements of kids at “elite” colleges are undeniable. So is the fact that some of them are not “up to snuff”. It is also true that there public colleges which are filled with just as many top students.
@1NJParent I disagree. In fact, Most of the students at “elite” colleges are very smart. There are perhaps 10% who aren’t excellent, a number which is much lower at MIT. It’s math. It’s true that about 20% of them are from the top 1%, however, only about 5% of the graduating kids from the top 1% actually get into the Ivy+ colleges, and another 15% get into other “elite” colleges. So we’re not talking about the bottom of the pile here.
On the other hand, UIUC has more undergraduates with SATs that are ABOVE Harvard’s average SAT score than there are undergraduates at Harvard. These are evenly proportionally distributed across all colleges, not just engineering.
There are just slots at “elite” colleges for about 5% of all graduating HS students. Elite colleges typically admit kids from the top 25% of the graduating HS population, though this is heavily tilted towards the top 10%. So there are not enough slots at “elite” colleges for a majority of top students. Moreover, top students do not only apply to “elite” colleges, nor do they apply to very many. So a top students who did not apply to an elite college or was rejected from their two reaches is just as likely to end up in one of the excellent state flagships which do not make “elite” label, like UIUC. That is how UIUC ends up with more top students than Harvard has.
I should not actually use the term “top” students. The term is “students with very high academic achievements”.
Private colleges have a lot more money, and can therefore often offer more opportunities than many public colleges, and they are generally smaller. That, and their reputation as being the place where the rich and powerful educate their kids, which provides other advantages. However, these advantages are only a small addition onto the much larger advantages provided by any undergraduate degree. As @privatebanker has repeated many a time, the large majority of our 2,000 non profit 4 year colleges can provide a high quality degree, i.e., a degree which represents a good education. The match between a college and a students has a lot more to do with the quality of a student’s education than the rank of a college.
So to summarize:
- Are "elite" colleges excellent? Yes, they are.
- Are "elite" colleges the only excellent colleges? No, they're not.
- Are "elite" colleges the best colleges? For some kids they are, but not for others.
- Are the smartest kids only at "elite" colleges? No, just as many are not. Some do not even go to college at all.
- Do you need to go to an "elite" college to get the best education available? No.
- Is there an objective measure of what makes a college "excellent"? That would be another no.
- It it worthwhile to go to an "elite" college? Only if it is a great match, and can be afforded.
- Are "elite" colleges overrated? Some are, and some are not. IMO, Harvard* is, while MIT is, if anything, underrated, but, of course, YMMV.
- Harvard is an amazing college, but hardly the beacon of civilization that people make it out to be, especially Harvard employees and alumni...
@mwolf. Game set and match.
Here’s a real-life example of that. A kid named Eddie Lampert, whose father died when he was 14 and whose mother worked as a salesclerk, attended Yale in the 1980s, with the support of financial aid and student loans. There, he met Steven Mnuchin, son of a senior partner at Goldman Sachs. They became friends and roomed together. Lampert got a summer internship at Goldman Sachs and was tapped by Skull and Bones. He joined Goldman full-time after graduation. At 25, he founded his own hedge fund; today, he’s a billionaire (much richer than Mnuchin, in fact).
I think one reason middle-class kids choose places like Yale is that they’re much more likely to befriend a Mnuchin there than at a state school (because there are far more Mnuchins as a percent of the population).
I just read the entire thread and agree with @privatebanker that @MWolf nailed it. Perhaps the thread should now die a natural death.
But I feel compelled to add one more observation.
- Are graduates of “elite” colleges sometimes afforded employment opportunities unavailable to other highly qualified college graduates? Yes
“I think one reason middle-class kids choose places like Yale is that they’re much more likely to befriend a Mnuchin there than at a state school (because there are far more Mnuchins as a percent of the population).”
Well, I’m going to venture a guess that a lot of middle class students who choose Yale aren’t going because they hope rubbing shoulders with students with very rich parents will help them get their first job. I assume that the admissions process weeds out students just there to make connections.
Instead, my guess is that Lampert could have done just as well in the job market without rubbing shoulders with Mnuchin. Presumably he was smart enough to get a job at Goldman on his own. It really denigrates the accomplishments of Lampert when you credit his friendship with a rich kid for most of his success. Is that really a reason to go for Yale versus state college? Because you don’t think you are good enough to be successful unless you befriend a rich kid whose parents’ connections will help you?
But this post was not about why a middle class kid would choose Yale versus state college (in fact, with financial aid Yale might even be cheaper). It is why rich people prefer them. Maybe being in a school with brilliant middle class and poor kids makes them feel smarter.
We’re going to have to agree to disagree on multiple counts, @observer12, and I’m speaking from extensive, first-hand experience:
On the contrary, rubbing shoulders with rich kids (and, potentially their parents) is a key element of the brand of these places. You expect to meet the children of doctors and lawyers at certain schools, and the children of oligarchs and presidents mixed in with a lot of doctors’ and lawyers’ kids (with a suitable leavening of hyper-intellectuals, super-talents at something, and other institutional priorities - including, to be clear, a lot of first-gens and really bright/talented kids on fin aid) at Harvard and its peers.
LOL. The most dangerous place in the world is between many kids at elites and their perceived connections. These places actively select for kids who they believe are going to achieve big things, as evidenced by these kids being smart go-getters at a whole other level. Ask a kid who’s a would-be i-banker, big-time consultant, etc., at one of these places what they’d do to get the right internship - the answer may surprise you.
He literally lived with and was the friend of the son of a Goldman partner and got an internship, which led to his full-time employment there with Robert Freeman, who led arguably the most elite department of the most elite firm on Wall Street at that time. That was the springboard to him founding a hedge fund at age 25. I don’t doubt he was more than “smart enough to get a job at Goldman on his own”, as were hundreds of other kids who applied to Goldman, didn’t get a job there and would’ve killed for the access he had.
I’m highly confident that Eddie Lampert views his Yale tuition as among the best investments he’s ever made, given what it led to.