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

311–320 of 334 posts

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

#311

Post by frognumber »

gnicholas wrote: post #79
frognumber wrote: post #34

Elite schools want people from the power class. A lot of this is explicitly baked into admissions. Over 40% of white students at Harvard are side-door admissions (legacy, donors, children of faculty, etc.). This is especially true for minority admissions. For the most part, Harvard won't admit lower-class African Americans; they'll select from a much smaller pool who have already moved into the power networks. That's…

I would agree that high-value donors definitely access a side-door. I know of one university that had an admissions officer who dealt with children of famous people and big donors. But I think that children of faculty and legacies are not as clear-cut a case. For example, it takes a lot of skill and hard work (and luck) to become a faculty member at Harvard. If you are still there when your kids are college-aged, you…

If it was merely higher rates, I'd agree.

However, Harvard admissions keeps a special list of ALDC students and admits from that list. It's not that there are no standards, but the standards are much, much lower.

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

#312

Post by systemBuilder »

ru kidding me I saw a top-10 school give a professor offer to a stanford grad. She did a shitty interview talk about a PhD topic that didn't matter. All the grad stuents who heard her talk agreed.

But as it was explained to me by a member of the faculty recruiting committee, "She's a woman and the bad PhD could have been the advisor's fault". She turned down the offer for something better.

Academic recruitment is a total crock of shit. You just need to tick the boxes, "woman, top-3 school" and THEY have to justify NOT hiring you ...

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

#313

Post by devilbunny »

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…

Also, as you point out, this is a very-low-paying field. Someone who isn't from a wealthy family will struggle to live on the kind of pay they will get, meaning that they are more likely to work in the field for a few years, then get married, have kids - and need a real income. And now the next hiree has to go to all the trouble of re-establishing relationships with donors.

I just read a reasonably interesting book (In the Garden of Beasts) about an academic who became FDR's ambassador to Nazi Germany. One of the points that the author repeatedly makes is that such positions were very much the preserve of the wealthy, who were expected to spend substantially from their own pockets for both official and unofficial events. Living on his salary alone was an unusual and unpopular move, even within the State Department.

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

#314

Post by systemBuilder »

This is one of the stupidest articles I have seen in a long time. I could just as easily write an article about "The number of professors today with US citizen parents is at an all-time low" based on Figure #1 of this article but it wouldn't be politically correct so it would never be published by the washington post.

https://www.aip.org/statistics/reports/trends-physics-phds-1...

Note that public funding for grad students really exploded in the 1960's so there are just a hell of a lot more PhDs running around today because their degrees were paid for by the US government. In the 1950's and earlier, PhDs were paid for with something called CASH (not credit), from the POCKET of the parents of the PhD - a concept that we just don't have any more today ...

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

#315

Post by meetingthrower »

lordnacho wrote: post #302
ProjectArcturis wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>This really separates the grinders vs the smart kids as the tests are based on what you intend to study, but most are more intelligence based and cannot necessarily be prepped for. Can you expand on that? I would be amazed to find tests that truly measure intelligence and where your score doesn't improve with practice.

Not sure I agree with it. I think you get a lot of Asian kids passing because they teach a lot of advanced things in their education system that are just beyond the curriculum in the West. Thus when it comes time to ask the clever questions, some kids already know the answer. I think in general people who know the answer to something misjudge how hard it is to figure out from first principles.

The grinds that can ace the test but can't speak are weeded out by the interview part.

Just look on oxfords website for the admissions test. The TSA test for example is required on top of the math test.

Of course you can train yourself to do these better, but because they are so specific to each major, there is not a test prep industry behind them. So it is a more natural test.

https://www.ox.ac.uk/admissions/undergraduate/applying-to-ox...

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

#316

Post by meetingthrower »

ProjectArcturis wrote: post #269
meetingthrower wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can confirm. Just went to open days at Oxford and Cambridge with my son. We are Americans. Both my wife and I are double ivy grads. Totally different than the US and much more meritocratic. Steps are: 1. Be qualified to apply. In UK this means at least AAA if not more. Varies by course. US equivalent is have at least three 5s on AP and above 1450 on SAT. This is roughly equivalent to top 10% of uk graduates. 2. Take…

>This really separates the grinders vs the smart kids as the tests are based on what you intend to study, but most are more intelligence based and cannot necessarily be prepped for. Can you expand on that? I would be amazed to find tests that truly measure intelligence and where your score doesn't improve with practice.

Sorry posted to the child comment below. It can certainly improve with practice but since these are so specific to each major, there is not a test prep industry geared up behind them. (you can do it on your own though, as they post the tests and most answer keys for prior years.)

https://www.ox.ac.uk/admissions/undergraduate/applying-to-ox...

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

#317

Post by lapcat »

slt2021 wrote: post #308
lapcat wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's just not right to ask low-income taxpayers (including those who didn't go to college) Low-income people don't actually pay much taxes. In fact their primary tax payment may be the fixed-rate Social Security FICA that you mention, not the progressive income taxes after deductions and credits. Moreover, what about the low-income student who have to go into debt to go to school, while the rich kids have their par…

this is not true. PhD coursework qualifies for Masters degree. Almost all PhD dropouts (on 1-2 year) - dropout with masters degree and a very nice industry job offer in hand.

Which industry? The English literature industry? The history industry? The philosophy industry?

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

#318

Post by armenarmen »

John Adams, the 2nd President of the United States, once said

"I must study politics and war that my sons may have liberty to study mathematics and philosophy. My sons ought to study mathematics and philosophy, geography, natural history, naval architecture, navigation, commerce and agriculture in order to give their children a right to study painting, poetry, music, architecture, statuary, tapestry, and porcelain."

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

#319

Post by gnicholas »

frognumber wrote: post #311
gnicholas wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would agree that high-value donors definitely access a side-door. I know of one university that had an admissions officer who dealt with children of famous people and big donors. But I think that children of faculty and legacies are not as clear-cut a case. For example, it takes a lot of skill and hard work (and luck) to become a faculty member at Harvard. If you are still there when your kids are college-aged, you…

If it was merely higher rates, I'd agree. However, Harvard admissions keeps a special list of ALDC students and admits from that list. It's not that there are no standards, but the standards are much, much lower.

> the standards are much, much lower.

Is this true for children of faculty? I realize it is certainly true for the A (athletes) and D (donors' kids). Are there any sources that break the standards/cutoffs out by subgroup? These are very different groups of applicants, and I would be surprised if they were all subject to the same processes.

Post reply on HN