Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Stanford University data glitch exposes truth about scholarships

sfchronicle.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 187 posts

Re: Stanford University data glitch exposes truth about scholarships

#151

Post by briandear »

CapacitorSet wrote: post #137
TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, no. This reveals the extent to which the US financial industry operates with similar quasi-aristocratic political dynamics - especially covert privilege based on perceived conformity and career potential - as the old Soviet Communist Party.

Aristocracy and privilege are about as far from communism as it gets.

Then why were there special stores for Soviet leadership where they could buy products the rest of the population couldn’t?

Is that not privilege? Why could a government official get a car while a normal person would have to wait years?

Children of government officials got preference at the best universities and jobs. Is that not aristocracy?

Communism is all about privilege — everyone is equal but some people are more equal than others.

Re: Stanford University data glitch exposes truth about scholarships

#152

Post by ramzyo »

bradleyjg wrote: post #134
jknz wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, lies are unacceptable. To play devil's advocate here: the press and the public do not want to hear that tech companies pay 7 digits of monthly salary to attract some talent. Nor do they want to hear that Universities have to offer merit based scholarships to attract top students, otherwise these students will go elsewhere. Companies advertise their diversity efforts but not the salaries of their executives. Stanf…

> Stanford said what the public wanted to hear. There's a bait and switch that colleges do. Also hospitals, but mostly colleges. On the one hand they go out and tell people what a value driven organization it is, how their passion is making the world a better place -- when they are asking for money from people almost of whom have far less in the bank than they already do and when they are defending things like very a…

I agree. I think universities can be both, but they should just be honest about it! There’s nothing wrong with being both a for profit institution that needs to turn a profit and a value driven organization. Be up front though, and don’t make outsiders feel in the wrong when they call you out for mixed messaging.

Re: Stanford University data glitch exposes truth about scholarships

#153

Post by mathattack »

saas_co_de wrote: post #9

It is somewhat amusing that they give scholarships to people with financial industry background, who are the least in need, and who will receive the highest salaries on exit - and then claim that their scholarships are need based. At least they are teaching their students the ethics they need to succeed in the financial industry.

Business schools use financial aid to bring in students that help their ratings. This can be through tangible #s like GMATs and SATs, to people who will command high salaries (finance background) to students who are likely to make them look good (serial entrepreneurs).

Re: Stanford University data glitch exposes truth about scholarships

#155

Post by baybal2 »

And this is not much different from pretty much all other business schools with any much big name. I'm Russian, from a top 1% family in Russia. I studied in an average college in Canada on my own volition, against wishes of my clueless parents who wanted to bang big money away on a business school. It took a lot of efforts for me to convince them that "big name business school" is a waste of money if you go there for actual skills and knowledge in the best case, and a disaster when you simply gave money away to small time fraudsters in the worst.

I personally know two other Russians few years older than me who went for Harvard MBA, and now spill bitter tears for spending a big portion of their family fortune for, at best, laughably mediocre education for such price.

And even in the mid-tier college I was going to, I saw that very few people who were getting not even a scholarship, but a "income supplement stipend," usually given to low income students, being given to another Russian guy who was always dressed expensively and casually wore $2000 watch and few other surprisingly well off people.

I instantly understood that they do it in anticipation that if this guy will work in his father's company and earn big buck, they can proudly put his testament and his salary on their graduate outcomes statistics.

Re: Stanford University data glitch exposes truth about scholarships

#156

Post by volgo »

saas_co_de wrote: post #9

It is somewhat amusing that they give scholarships to people with financial industry background, who are the least in need, and who will receive the highest salaries on exit - and then claim that their scholarships are need based. At least they are teaching their students the ethics they need to succeed in the financial industry.

Need base depends on your parent's income and their ability to pay tuition. It has nothing to do with future income

Re: Stanford University data glitch exposes truth about scholarships

#157

Post by akhilcacharya »

rifung wrote: post #112
akhilcacharya wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In fairness that’s basically what FB/Google pays new grad SWEs with competing offers.

Not if you only consider salary though right? I assume MBAs also get bonuses and the such?

That's fair but obviously they also have to deal with MBA school tuition.

I'm surprised that it's not as significant of a difference as I thought initially.

Re: Stanford University data glitch exposes truth about scholarships

#158

Post by watwut »

ZeroGravitas wrote: post #68
plandis wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah but gender and race diversity (the qualifications mentioned in the article) still discriminate against poor white males. I am fairly certain that a poor white guy would have a very different perspective from one who grew up in a life of privilege but that socioeconomic diversity doesn’t look as good I guess.

> Yeah but gender and race diversity (the qualifications mentioned in the article) still discriminate against poor white males. Am I the only one to notice that HN goes full communist when, and only when, affirmative action for minorities and women is the topic. Those poor white men don't really get mentioned much otherwise.

I observed the same. When women and blacks are topic, white poor men are consideration and victim or huge unfairness. Any other time, they are suckers, lazy, should have learn coding, don't have merit, yadda yadda.

Kinda like gentrification is good thing and people pushed away got what they deserve and no one is entitled to live there. Untill it is tech workers who can't afford live in SV and suddenly it is all about egoism and YIMBY etc.

Re: Stanford University data glitch exposes truth about scholarships

#159

Post by CapacitorSet »

jack9 wrote: post #138
CapacitorSet wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aristocracy and privilege are about as far from communism as it gets.

> Aristocracy and privilege are about as far from communism as it gets. In theory. In practice (history is full of it), the castes develop overnight. A group of individuals has to make decisions and manage the oversight and record keeping, etc. This leads to corruption and a de-facto aristocracy.

Castes are about as far from communism as it gets.

Re: Stanford University data glitch exposes truth about scholarships

#160

Post by thaumasiotes »

matt4077 wrote: post #77
wenc wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Instead of need-based aid, try need-blind colleges. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Need-blind_admission

That's... the same concept? Need-blind admission requires need-based aid. Stanford is on Wikipedia's list, by the way.

> Need-blind admission requires need-based aid.

What are you talking about here?

Need-blind admission would be "we'll make the decision of whether to admit you without considering whether you can afford to come". It's analogous to an iPhone offered for sale at $1000, even if you can't afford to pay $1000 for an iPhone.

Need-based aid means charging less money to people who, in your judgment, can't afford more. It's analogous to finding scruffy people on the street and giving them 70% off coupons for iPhones.

There is no logical dependence from one to the other. An Apple store does practice need-blind admission, and definitely does not practice the "required" need-based aid.

Post reply on HN