Earlier quoted context omitted.
This just ain't reality. Most kids don't get in because they took a trip to Africa. Parents that pay a ton of money on making their kids the perfect college applicant generally get a bad deal and are a small minority.
It's not about paying to pad the application. There are legit methods of expanding your kid's world/mind. Those method generally cost more money than sitting in the house all summer watching tv.
YC at Columbia, Harvard, MIT, Stanford, UPenn
81–90 of 98 posts
Re: YC at Columbia, Harvard, MIT, Stanford, UPenn
#82Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, but what do you want them to do? Nationwide tour of schools? Why only American schools? Why not highschools? Why schools at all; why not start hosting events in libraries? But they're not. They're showing up at a few places, then doing other things. Fair enough, I think. It's not their job to do otherwise and you don't own their time.
Why does this have to be taken to an extreme? People are (rightfully) pointing out that if you go to a the same 10 schools, you will by definition lack a diversity of thoughts and perspectives. Anyway this has already been argued above. They did announce it last time.
I agree. I'm pointing out that YC can't be everything to everyone (that would be extreme) and elite colleges are kind of their thing (for worse, I think). It just strikes me as a whiny thing to complain about.
Re: YC at Columbia, Harvard, MIT, Stanford, UPenn
#83Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was just going to ask this. Silicon valley would be better served (and better serve others) when they stop giving hand service to the same schools they they went to and the people who think and act exactly like them.
We try to mix it up. Here's where we went last winter: https://blog.ycombinator.com/winter-2016-college-tour/ . And last fall: https://blog.ycombinator.com/yc-office-hours-in-11-countries...
Re: YC at Columbia, Harvard, MIT, Stanford, UPenn
#84What about the other 99% of talented students that couldn't afford these schools?
Re: YC at Columbia, Harvard, MIT, Stanford, UPenn
#85Earlier quoted context omitted.
Columbia has 8,410 undergraduates University of Illinois has 32,878 undergraduates the 75% SAT score for the college of engineering at University of Illinois was 1530 (no writing, so out of 1600) https://admissions.illinois.edu/Apply/Freshman/profile the 75% SAT score at Columbia was 2330 (including writing so 2330 * 2/3 = 1553.33333333 https://undergrad.admissions.columbia.edu/classprofile/2019 ----------------- the…
> University of Illinois has 32,878 undergraduates That's a fair point. It'd be interesting if YC could do some sort of data analysis on attendance for their events at a big state school vs. an elite school. > Illinois students aren't filtered by exactly how generous a discount the financial aid office Most elite universities are need-blind. Spreading these myths does a disservice to smart, poor kids. Thinking they c…
At every state school whose scholarship packages I'm familiar with (granted sample size of 3, plus antedotally maybe 5 or so more), an applicant with your SAT scores would have almost certainly been offered a full ride, probably with a stipend as well
Re: YC at Columbia, Harvard, MIT, Stanford, UPenn
#86Entirely anecdotal, maybe obvious to some, but here's what I have experienced (I'll focus on STEM students):
TL; DR I have had to visit and do on-campus recruiting. The top of top talented, skilled, smart student could be at any school. Every school has dumb as fuck kids too. But there is higher % chance the valedictorian at Stanford is smarter than the valedictorian at San Jose State. But who cares, when a cream of the crop student ends up at non-target school for whatever, they know how to work with those circumstances and get to where they want to go. I think if you know how to "disrupt" or "hack" or whatever stupid word we are using these days, it is easier to stand out as applicant from a no-name school. Good luck
1. The practical stuff: The "budget" of time and people and money to do recruiting and campus outreach is not unlimited. There are only so many hours in a day, you can't visit every school and meet every kid.
2. School visits are worth doing, for the students to learn about a company and for a company to get to know a few of the students better. Companies that do visit schools can attract more applicants and higher quality applicants.
3. The school someone went to tells you ZERO about how talented or skilled that individual is as an engineer or potential founder or employee. Zero. The best person for a job or to fund could have studied at Stanford or San Jose State or Joe Bummwarts University. There are plenty of kids at no-name schools that crush the skills of kids at top-ranked schools. (Also the whole "but the department's reputation is good" doesn't matter nor do grades tell you very much either - I don't even care if someone has a degree to be honest - but that's another story).
4. If a top company or VC or Grad school is looking for those best of the best young people; they often seem to be the type of student that can self-teach and have done so. They are frequently miles ahead of their classmates at their school and any school in terms of knowledge. They know things the schools don't even teach.
5. Unfortunately where someone went to school still matters for several reasons. I'm sorry if this offends. There are many reasons your schools makes a difference. I won't go into things like PR pedigree and friendships and alumni networks. And just to be clear there are a shitload of dumb people at every school, tons and tons of dumb people at the top ranked-schools. Spot them a mile away. But: when you are looking for the one or two or three students who are miles ahead of other people their same age, the % chance that person is going to be at a top-ranked school is slightly higher. i.e. if you are looking for the smartest kid in the sandbox, the odds the valedictorian at Stanford is smarter than the valedictorian at San Jose State is higher on average, not guarantee, but enough to say it's more likely.
6. Lastly, I'll just say in my experience when legit talented students ends up at a non-target school for whatever reason (family, cost, bad luck, whatever) they are mature and they know why they are there and they know what it means and they know what they need to do to succeed at their goal under these circumstances - these are not the students you see complaining about school recruiting being unfair. It's the idiots and the average people who complain the loudest about this :( Those talented students at no-name school are aware of how the world works and that life's not fair. They know how much better they are than their peers and they know the school they went to will not matter. They also know they will have to take a couple different steps to get where they want to go vs. target-schools kids. (it's a known secret it's actually much easier for a no-name school students to stand out). They seem to know what to do: they just keep quiet about it, they network with the people who get it and they find the other doors. Sorry. Look around. Students from no-name non-target schools get top jobs right out of school and they get funded and they get into a top grad schools all the time, every year. If you don't understand how they did what they did, that's the point. Seriously, no offense some people are more skilled and talented than others. But if you are so smart and happened to have gone to a crap school, but want to get in somewhere difficult, then figure it out, many others have before you. If you feel you need someone to come visit your school to get something you are missing the point of how this works. Good luck YC SUMMA CLASS
Re: YC at Columbia, Harvard, MIT, Stanford, UPenn
#87Earlier quoted context omitted.
>These schools are actually some of the most affordable in the country due to their extremely generous financial aid. Poor families pay nothing and even middle class families have minimal contributions. Except they do not lower the admissions requirements for poor kid that attended sub-par secondary schools. These are the exact kids that would be excluded admissions (in most cases) because third rate secondary school…
I don't know if we should advocate lowering standards of admissions.
Re: YC at Columbia, Harvard, MIT, Stanford, UPenn
#88Earlier quoted context omitted.
Through need based financial aid, these schools are very affordable for many of those students.
The marketing departments at these schools have done wonders. People whose families have modest incomes of 100-150k annually are going to pay a very large sum of money to attend these schools. It is only the very poor and very wealthy who do not have issues funding their education at one of these schools.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income_in_the_United...
Re: YC at Columbia, Harvard, MIT, Stanford, UPenn
#89Earlier quoted context omitted.
It would help if they also considered whether that income was from one or two people, and divided it by the number of kids so larger families with parents working multiple jobs aren't penalized.
assets and income are two different things.
Re: YC at Columbia, Harvard, MIT, Stanford, UPenn
#90Earlier quoted context omitted.
assets and income are two different things.
But correlated. A two-parent, four-income, six-child family in a house just big enough to hold everyone might have $125k in assets, but in no way would they be able to help their kids pay for school, especially the older kids.
I assume GGP was posting the "at no cost" threshold and that doesn't mean that $125,001 in assets and you get no help.
It's been a long time since I appli d for financial aid, but I do recall that other kids in college (though perhaps not college-bound) was definitely a factor in financial aid calculations.