Children of alumni no longer have admissions edge at Carnegie Mellon, Pitt • Hacker News Board

Re: Children of alumni no longer have admissions edge at Carnegie Mellon, Pitt

#101

Post by nradov » Wed, Jul 19, 2023, 4:36 PM UTC

lisper wrote: post #76

boeingUH60 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s as if you’re trying to make perfect the enemy of good. Standardized tests aren’t perfect but they give less privileged kids the best choice at attending a good college. The kids of the upper class and the rich will always have an upper hand compared to the poor. However, standardized tests limit how wide the upper hand is. An upper class kid still has to study and pass the test, and the poor kid can also do that…

I think you are underestimating the extent to which standardized tests can be (and have been) biased. https://www.nea.org/advocating-for-change/new-from-nea/racis...

Everyone understands that standardized tests are biased. They are still the least bad way to identify students from underprivileged backgrounds who have high potential to succeed in college.

Re: Children of alumni no longer have admissions edge at Carnegie Mellon, Pitt

#102

Post by dotancohen » Wed, Jul 19, 2023, 4:36 PM UTC

abirch wrote: post #27

nancyhn wrote: post #4

The end of both legacy admissions and race-based admissions makes me feel hopeful that we're finally pivoting to a productive, merit-based approach.

You're assuming that everyone is on an equal starting point. Wealthy people will be able to favor their kids.

That is exactly my motivation to become wealthy. I don't need a nice number with lots of zeros. I need to secure my children's future, including their prospects for higher education.

I see no problem with those who have amassed significant resources, being afforded use of those resources to their childrens' advantage.

Re: Children of alumni no longer have admissions edge at Carnegie Mellon, Pitt

#103

Post by zenbane » Wed, Jul 19, 2023, 4:36 PM UTC

drewcoo wrote: post #31

causi wrote: post #3

I'm amazed it was ever legal in the first place. It's open nepotism.

If nepotism were illegal, we would have a 100% inheritance tax across the board. There tend to be more laws pro-family than anti- for some reason . . .

Why would "anti-family" laws make sense? People who come from stable families are statistically much much more likely to be happy, successful and contribute to society.

Re: Children of alumni no longer have admissions edge at Carnegie Mellon, Pitt

#104

Post by renewiltord » Wed, Jul 19, 2023, 4:36 PM UTC

reaperducer wrote: post #6

pitaj wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nepotism has never been illegal.

In the private sector. In many governments, it is quite illegal.

Sure, but it's legal in many governments too. The classic example is the Office of the First Lady: an institutionalized nepotistic government position for which one qualifies solely by being married to the highest elected position in the US, the President.

Re: Children of alumni no longer have admissions edge at Carnegie Mellon, Pitt

#105

Post by dfadsadsf » Wed, Jul 19, 2023, 4:37 PM UTC

lisper wrote: post #32

nancyhn wrote: post #4

The end of both legacy admissions and race-based admissions makes me feel hopeful that we're finally pivoting to a productive, merit-based approach.

I hate to burst your bubble but unfortunately this just kicks the can down the road. How do you measure merit? Because [EDIT] many measures of "merit" (was: standardized testing) can be (and often are) biased by race, cultural background, and economic status. For example: Student 1 has built a fully automated chip manufacturing line in his basement. Student 2 has build a robot that solves a maze in fifteen minutes (a…

Magic that happens in top universities in US is combining money (kids of billionaires) with smarts (kids with 1600 SAT) in one place. Both bring different skills to the table and result is disproportionate share of top scientist, business and political leaders produced by those universities (from both classes of people). Removing either group from university will just lead to university stopping being elite. Considering that number of billionaires is measured in hundreds (so only a dozen or so kids of billionaires enter universities every year), university may just admit that one kid.

On Student 2 who build something in Sudan from stick and rocks. Unless he is from elite family he most likely did not get proper school education and won't be able to keep up with rigors of studying in top university even if he is very smart. Harvard is not really in a business of providing remedial education. With that if he is really smart and resourceful, he had a very good chance of doing very well for himself in Sudan (becoming entrepreneour, building soemthing local, become warlord, etc) and then his kids will be fully equipped to go to top university.

Re: Children of alumni no longer have admissions edge at Carnegie Mellon, Pitt

#106

Post by OO000oo » Wed, Jul 19, 2023, 4:37 PM UTC

boeingUH60 wrote: post #61

lisper wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hate to burst your bubble but unfortunately this just kicks the can down the road. How do you measure merit? Because [EDIT] many measures of "merit" (was: standardized testing) can be (and often are) biased by race, cultural background, and economic status. For example: Student 1 has built a fully automated chip manufacturing line in his basement. Student 2 has build a robot that solves a maze in fifteen minutes (a…

It’s as if you’re trying to make perfect the enemy of good. Standardized tests aren’t perfect but they give less privileged kids the best choice at attending a good college. The kids of the upper class and the rich will always have an upper hand compared to the poor. However, standardized tests limit how wide the upper hand is. An upper class kid still has to study and pass the test, and the poor kid can also do that…

This is so naive. Poor kids do worse in school because their lives lack the material and parental support necessary for quality education.

Re: Children of alumni no longer have admissions edge at Carnegie Mellon, Pitt

#107

Post by nerdo » Wed, Jul 19, 2023, 4:37 PM UTC

pessimizer wrote: post #72

nerdo wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nepotism is how groups function everywhere. The race-based admissions was a weird new thing, from a hyper-focused conspiracy that appears to be losing its grip.

Race-based admissions was a pretend way to remediate slavery and Jim Crow without spending any money or focusing on the harms done to the descendants of slaves. Almost everybody who thinks that the racism of Affirmative Action was a terrible thing also thinks compensating the descendants of slaves for the unpaid work and legal segregation that their parents, grandparents, and great-grandparents (and so on, 10-20 time…

So.. file a claim against the southern plantation owners who benefited in excess of the compensation paid? What's the relevance of any of this to anything?

Re: Children of alumni no longer have admissions edge at Carnegie Mellon, Pitt

#108

Post by LanceH » Wed, Jul 19, 2023, 4:37 PM UTC

haroldp wrote: post #83

CSMastermind wrote: post #16

Don't legacy admissions often mean that their parents have donated significantly to the University? In a sense wouldn't that just mean that those students are essentially paying a very high premium to attend there and subsidizing the education of all the other students? I'm not against abolishing them but I do wonder if this will have any impact on alumni donations.

This is the way many public universities without legacy admissions actually function as well. They have a high published tuition, but if you are a half decent student, there are many discounts and scholarships that can reduce it significantly. Only less qualified students pay full price.

They love to tell this story. It's absolutely laughable how limited scholarships are for actual academic performance.

Re: Children of alumni no longer have admissions edge at Carnegie Mellon, Pitt

#109

Post by gizmo » Wed, Jul 19, 2023, 4:38 PM UTC

I recently came across a somewhat provocative defense of legacy admissions. The argument is that the iveys are great because they bring together the children of the rich and powerful (legacy admissions with connections) with really smart and hungry students (children of the middle class, mostly).

It's arguably a good deal for both. Smart kids get access to wealth and power and they get to learn how the world works. This is the one thing they can't get anywhere else. And the legacy students get the prestige and credibility of having gone to a top school, as well as access to hungry students who are eager to take advantage of the opportunities that come their way.

When Harvard becomes an institution of merit will it still be worth the price of admission? I'm not so sure.

Re: Children of alumni no longer have admissions edge at Carnegie Mellon, Pitt

#110

Post by Brusco_RF » Wed, Jul 19, 2023, 4:38 PM UTC

lisper wrote: post #32

nancyhn wrote: post #4

The end of both legacy admissions and race-based admissions makes me feel hopeful that we're finally pivoting to a productive, merit-based approach.

I hate to burst your bubble but unfortunately this just kicks the can down the road. How do you measure merit? Because [EDIT] many measures of "merit" (was: standardized testing) can be (and often are) biased by race, cultural background, and economic status. For example: Student 1 has built a fully automated chip manufacturing line in his basement. Student 2 has build a robot that solves a maze in fifteen minutes (a…

Yeah I see this take all the time. Admissions offices are allowed to take a student's means into account! So in deciding between two students with equal SAT scores, one from a Greenwich private school and one from South Tucson, the one from Tucson is the more impressive student.

Affirmative action was misguided because it assumed that because one student was Korean and the other Mexican, the Mexican kid must be disadvantaged. Besides the fact that there's an inherently racist worldview baked into that, Newsflash! There are tons of poor Korean kids and rich Mexicans!