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

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

triblive.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 815 posts

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

#311

Post by bumby »

ghaff wrote: post #283
bumby wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is at least one interesting study that tried to test this. They took students who were admitted to prestigious universities. They tracked those who attended as well as those who attended "lesser" schools instead. They found no real difference in success later in life, so it may be confusing cause and effect. People get into prestigious universities because they know how to be "successful" and are not necessaril…

>People get into prestigious universities because they know how to be "successful" and are not necessarily successful because they went to the prestigious school. It also depends on what the "lesser" schools are. I expect that if someone missed out on the significantly random admissions lottery to get into Harvard but were admitted to Dartmouth, Cornell, or Williams (or even UMass Amherst) instead, I expect that if t…

>I expect for the lower socio-economic students, the delta is probably related to being among fellow students who maybe set a bit higher bar than other schools would.

That's one explanation, but not the guess that the study's authors had:

>"One possible explanation for this pattern of results is that highly selective colleges provide access to networks for minority students and for students from disadvantaged family backgrounds that are otherwise not available to them."[1]

[1] Dale, S.B. and Krueger, A.B., 2014. Estimating the effects of college characteristics over the career using administrative earnings data. Journal of human resources, 49(2), pp.323-358.

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

#312

Post by networkchad »

IG_Semmelweiss wrote: post #294
julienchastang wrote: post #187

Good. With the end of affirmative action, legacy status in admissions becomes much harder to justify. [0] The number of kids entering elite universities via non-meritocratic avenues is incredible. > "[The researchers] examined four kinds of nonracial preferences—for recruited athletes, and for children of Harvard graduates, financial donors and members of faculty and staff. The researchers found that more than 43% of…

[flagged]

[dead]

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

#314

Post by ativzzz »

OO000oo wrote: post #309
ativzzz wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once they do that, they become the ruling class and the elites. Then their children are no longer working class, and are now the enemies.

In such a case, I won't feel better yet will I? So we'll try again...

Just like we've tried in the past again and again and again... and a few thousand years later here we are and we will keep trying :)

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

#315

Post by esotericimpl »

gizmo wrote: post #109

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. T…

[dead]

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

#316

Post by philwelch »

gizmo wrote: post #109

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. T…

The benefit of legacy admissions isn’t just that you can get into Harvard if your dad went to Harvard; it’s the promise that if you get into Harvard, your children will also have a better chance of getting into Harvard. If you’re not a legacy admit yourself, the practice of legacy admissions means that once your family has climbed high enough up the American class ladder to get you in, you’re going to be able to pass that down to your children. Which of course means that ending legacy admission sort of welches on the deal and takes us marginally closer to a low-trust society in which these sorts of implicit promises are worthless.

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

#317

Post by kelipso »

philwelch wrote: post #273
ARandumGuy wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most universities have really messy financials. A lot of money gets spent on projects and programs that don't directly benefit the education students receive, or the research output of the university. Things like sports investments, ballooning administration staff, or flashy construction projects. At the same time, TAs, grad students, adjunct professors, and other staff are frequently underpaid and overworked. There'…

> sports investments, ballooning administration staff, or flashy construction projects Construction projects are typically the result of specific earmarked donations and sports investments often create lots of income. NCAA Division I programs should be thought of as a side business that generates revenue for the university. Administrative staff is the major problem here. It’s also where most organizations tend to dum…

Universities shouldn't have side businesses, don't they have some non-profit status that's specific to education? They should be heavily restricted to education and research alone.

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

#318

Post by slackfan »

gizmo wrote: post #109

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. T…

> will it still be worth the price of admission? I'm not so sure. As an alum of the harvard-for-working-people extension school at the Ivy, I can say it already sure isn't. The education is mediocre, and the administration is more interested in growing admin budgets than any real education whatsoever.

Ve Ri Tas indeed.

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

#319

Post by AnnikaL »

The title on HN (currently "Children, alumni no longer have admissions edge at Carnegie Mellon, Pitt") is a little confusing; children and other relatives of alumni don't have an admissions edge. This isn't about some sort of early college program!

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

#320

Post by IG_Semmelweiss »

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.

Its a valid point, but its one the government does not care about.

If you are a public funded institution, you charge the same for admission to all students.

The moment the university stop taking public funds, you can have your wealthy students subsidize the less well off classmates.

Post reply on HN