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

People from elite backgrounds increasingly dominate academia, data shows

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 334 posts

Re: People from elite backgrounds increasingly dominate academia, data shows

#281

Post by ls612 »

lapcat wrote: post #191

The article totally fails to mention the elephant in the room: graduate school costs! Moreover, the public debate over student loan forgiveness typically fails to mention that graduate students owe 50% of all student loan debt, despite being only 25% of all student loan debtors. Getting a PhD often takes many years, and the PhD completion rate for incoming graduate students is very low. Even after you get a PhD, it c…

This isn’t due to Economics Phds. In my program (and in every other top program) we get full funding plus a stipend so we don’t need to go into debt. And completion rates are very high, out of a cohort of 20 usually only 1 or 2 a year can’t pass their prelims. The filter is at the admissions stage, which is nearly as bad as for the ivies. For comparison, at the University of Minnesota (a state school with a top 15 Econ department) we get 400 applications to the PhD program a year and admit 50, of which 20 are expected to actually come.

Re: People from elite backgrounds increasingly dominate academia, data shows

#282

Post by marcinzm »

SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #238
marcinzm wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>best bet for your future The best bet for the future is to pick a career path that is not massively over supplied with candidates. Once you get to that situation there's no system that will not cause most everyone to be unhappy.

That game will get worse over time as people optimize for it too. It'll be a matter of trying to guess what's going to be in demand but not so in demand that people are training for it because they are also trying to choose a career that's in demand. And as usual, those with the better information and means to switch paths or take multiple shots will be the ones who can come out ahead.

There's a difference between picking the optimal career and not picking a career with the worst prospects.

>And as usual, those with the better information and means to switch paths or take multiple shots will be the ones who can come out ahead.

I feel a person should care more about their own happiness than how other people are doing.

Re: People from elite backgrounds increasingly dominate academia, data shows

#283

Post by Bostonian »

3pt14159 wrote: post #263
alexpotato wrote: post #213

This story is decidedly anecdata, even personal, but I think it's illustrative of what's going on in certain fields. - Had a friend who has multiple graduate level degrees in architecture related sub-specialties e.g. architecture criticism etc - HN being what it is, I will mention that the pay for most of the jobs you would get with the above is zero or near zero. - There is also a dramatic oversupply of candidates f…

This is a decidedly personal, anecdotal story too, but I think it's illustrative of some of the reasons to hope for the world. I was dating someone that was a civil engineer and she absolutely hated the constant sexual harassment that happens on construction sites in Canada. She came from a poor family that fled Russia as the Soviet Union was collapsing. I told her I could teach her tech in one month. Whatever she wa…

Thanks for the neat story, and kudos to you for helping her.

Re: People from elite backgrounds increasingly dominate academia, data shows

#284

Post by ptudan »

zzbzq wrote: post #228
RickJWagner wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nepotism today is probably most notable in politicians and Hollywood. (Hollywood is especially fascinating. Royalty runs rampant there.)

Those are both the cases where there is a public demand for nepotism, though. People want to see the next generation of the royalty, perhaps more than the kingmakers want to supply it. For that matter, sports is similar but slightly more meritocratic; lots of "Known Athlete Jr." out there in most sports, all of whom are at least good enough to play, but some of them only barely.

You're not giving professional sports enough credit. On the player picking side, it's arguably the last true meritocracy in the US. Teams are willing to take fliers on fringe Jrs because of genetics and maybe the media attention that will come to their team. Otherwise, they always pick the players with the best combination of potential and immediate talent, regardless of background.

Coaching on the other hand, that's as nepotistic as any political field.

Re: People from elite backgrounds increasingly dominate academia, data shows

#285

Post by xhkkffbf »

matthewdgreen wrote: post #267
Mezzie wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Academia just isn't WORTH it for talented peasants (speaking as one). I had people encouraging me to go into academia since I was 4-5 years old, had a desire to go be a professor, etc. But things have changed a lot since I was a child 30 years ago. Now, if I were to go into academia without family or other connections, I'm looking at: - Unstable employment and a serious amount of overwork. At the end of this I may ge…

> Restrictions on what I can say Academia isn't perfect and it sure isn't what it once was. But go ahead and talk crap about your corporate employer for the next six months and see what happens to you.

It all depends what kind of crap you talk. There are plenty of things you just can't say and tenure won't protect you when they come for you. Ask Joshua Katz, formerly of Princeton. He complained very publicly and they dug up an old crime and tried him again. Suddenly the old crime that was punishable with a suspension before is now bad enough to merit firing.

Note: I'm not speaking to the merits of how Princeton or Katz behaved. Only that tenure is not the license to speak that some people imagine. And if you criticize your own institution, you're bound to upset people and maybe they'll be the ones with control over the punishment process.

Re: People from elite backgrounds increasingly dominate academia, data shows

#286

Post by nonameiguess »

marcinzm wrote: post #223
hourago wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why? The thought is that a museum hires the child of a hedge fund manager, there is a non-zero chance the wealthy parent will give or leave money to the institution when they die Another way that inequality damages society. When your best bet for your future is to appeal to the super rich instead of serving society and getting money from the government society losses its power. As you say, it is rational to work fo…

>best bet for your future The best bet for the future is to pick a career path that is not massively over supplied with candidates. Once you get to that situation there's no system that will not cause most everyone to be unhappy.

I think you're misinterpreting the parent comment. The best bet for the future of the museum is to appeal to the rich. The child of the hedge fund manager will be fine no matter what they do.

Re: People from elite backgrounds increasingly dominate academia, data shows

#288

Post by xdavidliu »

marcinzm wrote: post #223
hourago wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why? The thought is that a museum hires the child of a hedge fund manager, there is a non-zero chance the wealthy parent will give or leave money to the institution when they die Another way that inequality damages society. When your best bet for your future is to appeal to the super rich instead of serving society and getting money from the government society losses its power. As you say, it is rational to work fo…

>best bet for your future The best bet for the future is to pick a career path that is not massively over supplied with candidates. Once you get to that situation there's no system that will not cause most everyone to be unhappy.

> Once you get to that situation there's no system that will not cause most everyone to be unhappy.

There are three negatives in this sentence, and I'm having a very difficult time telling what it is saying (and I tried several times to track through the parity flips required). Anyone mind translating it for me?

Re: People from elite backgrounds increasingly dominate academia, data shows

#289

Post by parineum »

xdavidliu wrote: post #288
marcinzm wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>best bet for your future The best bet for the future is to pick a career path that is not massively over supplied with candidates. Once you get to that situation there's no system that will not cause most everyone to be unhappy.

> Once you get to that situation there's no system that will not cause most everyone to be unhappy. There are three negatives in this sentence, and I'm having a very difficult time telling what it is saying (and I tried several times to track through the parity flips required). Anyone mind translating it for me?

If you're field is overpopulated the people in the field won't be happy.

It's not that difficult and using the three negatives makes sense.

Re: People from elite backgrounds increasingly dominate academia, data shows

#290

Post by sicp-enjoyer »

SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #278
sicp-enjoyer wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually I think those who come out the most ahead are those interested in the field, even when nobody else is. It seems a better strategy than trend hoping is to find something you like, that can plausibly be useful and invest in that.

That's not what GP is saying though: > The best bet for the future is to pick a career path that is not massively over supplied with candidates.

I agree, avoiding the worst career choices is easier than trying to find the good ones. Sorry if there was a confusion about context.
Post reply on HN