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

L.A.’s Elite on Edge as Prosecutors Pursue More Parents in Admissions Scandal

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 294 posts

Re: L.A.’s Elite on Edge as Prosecutors Pursue More Parents in Admissions Scandal

#121

Post by akhilcacharya »

manfredo wrote: post #69
ForrestN wrote: post #40

I'm surprised that this scandal doesn't seem to be causing anyone to think one step further and realize that the entire premise of "elite" colleges with competitive admissions is a device for the perpetuation of inequality. We're devoting most of our advanced educational resources to helping people who would already be successful reap even more rewards. I understand the idea of meritocracy in fields with life or deat…

Many of these "elite" colleges are one of the best avenues to eliminate inequality. Many of them have significant (at least double digit) percentages of the student population that are first generation college students. Elite universities often have the greatest degree of racial diversity.

You shouldn’t be condemned for life for not being elite material when you were 18.

Disclaimer - I was not elite material when I was 18 and feel like I’m condemned for life when I read these posts.

Re: L.A.’s Elite on Edge as Prosecutors Pursue More Parents in Admissions Scandal

#122

Post by WillPostForFood »

dvt wrote: post #107
WillPostForFood wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These three are clearly at the same academic level. Way below Stanford and Caltech though. 19: UCLA 22: Berkeley (tie) 22: USC (tie) https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-unive...

Just so you know, no one takes USNWR rankings seriously -- it's well-known that public schools are dinged due to lower endowments and higher student counts. To wit, the idea that Berkeley is academically comparable to USC is a joke.

Feel free to share whatever ranking validates you.

Re: L.A.’s Elite on Edge as Prosecutors Pursue More Parents in Admissions Scandal

#123

Post by stale2002 »

munk-a wrote: post #89
asdfasgasdgasdg wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a massive amount of daylight between wanting admissions to be completely oligarchic and recognizing that at some point a seat should have a price. For example, suppose it was worth it to Bezos to fund the entire Harvard class of '23, and the price is that his child ought to be a member of that class. It would be absurd for Harvard to turn this down. There is no victim of this trade, except perhaps Bezos' heir…

Why should Bezos, poor billionaire that he is, need to pay such a ridiculous price for his child's education. Wouldn't it make more sense to just publicly fund the creation of these seats and have people pay their fair share? I think the scenario you set up for Bezos is actually unjust against him - maybe people should pay admission costs to support the education of society's children in a manner that fairly spreads…

> Wouldn't it make more sense to just publicly fund the creation of these seats and have people pay their fair share?

Even if education is publicly funded, allowing these "bribes" would allow even more people into elite institutions.

So by all means, fund stuff. Unless you are willing to spend infinity dollars, it is all better to allow even more funding to come in, and pay for people who wouldn't have been able to attend those institutions otherwise.

Re: L.A.’s Elite on Edge as Prosecutors Pursue More Parents in Admissions Scandal

#124

Post by ajross »

mochomocha wrote: post #111
darawk wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No. No amount of money should get you a way to get into an "elite" school if you don't deserve it. Why? What's so precious about elite schooling that you're willing to sacrifice 10 kids getting a free education just to prevent one billionaire's kid from going to an elite school? > The issue with trying to solve every single problem with money is that capitalism isn't designed to solve problems where a moral compass…

In the country I come from (France), all the top schools are publicly funded and you get in by taking exams where the whole country students compete once a year. Based on how you rank, you get in or not. Most of them have really low annual tuitions. In some of them, you're even paid! Hard to imagine anything remotely close here when there's always a way to throw money at something (your congressman, dean...) to get t…

Go research financial aid programs and outcomes at elite US Universities. The fact that these schools are subject to financial pressure at the margins absolutely does not mean that they are closed to needy students. There are MANY unfair elements of the US educational system that disadvantage poor and minority students, but access to elite schools for the deserving fraction is just not one of them. We're doing fine here.

Re: L.A.’s Elite on Edge as Prosecutors Pursue More Parents in Admissions Scandal

#125

Post by akhilcacharya »

ForrestN wrote: post #40

I'm surprised that this scandal doesn't seem to be causing anyone to think one step further and realize that the entire premise of "elite" colleges with competitive admissions is a device for the perpetuation of inequality. We're devoting most of our advanced educational resources to helping people who would already be successful reap even more rewards. I understand the idea of meritocracy in fields with life or deat…

You’re correct. This country should work just as well for the hard working kids at UMass Boston as it does for kids at MIT.

Re: L.A.’s Elite on Edge as Prosecutors Pursue More Parents in Admissions Scandal

#126

Post by munk-a »

stale2002 wrote: post #118
darpa_escapee wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Plenty of people make donations for reasons of prestige, legacy and even genuine care, which have nothing to do with making sure their kid gets into a certain school.

But there would still be less of those donations. There would be some, yes. But significantly less. And less money means that these school are unable to let in as many poor people as they did before.

In general terms regarding systems in our society - If the system is dependent on charity to support it... it isn't supported, if the system is valued by society then society should support it up to the cost of it's value.

Education is absolutely worth the cost and the need to charity is highlighting the underfunding here[1].

[1] Also, the inefficient use of money, higher education is absolutely guilty of inefficient operation with lots of cushy bureaucrat jobs, but imagine we could make higher education efficient and it still required an additional injection of cash via charitable donations.

Re: L.A.’s Elite on Edge as Prosecutors Pursue More Parents in Admissions Scandal

#127

Post by opportune »

leftyted wrote: post #116
darawk wrote: post #57

The actual problem here is not the bribery. The problem is that those bribes are being captured by random 3rd parties, rather than by the school itself. The correct way to implement college admissions is this: Charge a sliding scale fee based on application quality, and then use the excess revenue generated to subsidize poor kids tuition. Your kid has a 2.5 GPA and wants to go to Harvard? Great, that'll be a million…

I'd urge you to think more about this. You can imagine the same thing for murder trials: 10 million per victim or you go to jail. You can use the money to make the world better! I'm not so sure. These institutions have an embedded narrative. For universities it's that they are meritocracies, where class/race/gender/etc do not matter. For the justice system it's that everyone is equal before the law and the guilty wil…

I would really like universities to be meritocracies. However I went to a highly ranked school for undergrad and I can assure you it was nowhere close to a meritocracy, nor did it really try to pretend that it was.

That narrative may exist for you and others, but it's entirely accidental.

Re: L.A.’s Elite on Edge as Prosecutors Pursue More Parents in Admissions Scandal

#128

Post by HighValuation »

cycrutchfield wrote: post #112
HighValuation wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you aren’t familiar with the US education system, it’s a school ranked in the top 20 with an 11% acceptance rate, only twice as high as Stanford’s with a body 4x as large. It's a large school with a massively beneficial and incestuous network. Based on LinkedIn numbers, 1 out of 4 people in SV that didn't graduate from Stanford went to USC. Go around talking misinformation about that school in particular and see w…

Top 20 in letting applicants bribe coaches to get them in, maybe. Any rag with USC as a top 20 university isn't worth the paper it's printed on.

Well I went to Berkeley, it’s questionable why we’re even ranked in the top 25 with an acceptance rate 30-40% higher than UCLA or USC this year whom like you said, don’t deserve to be in the top 20. Imagine what it would be without EECS. Berkeley grads need to pay attention to what’s happening with the school, it may be the only college in Californi where applications have been going down for the past 3-4 years.

Re: L.A.’s Elite on Edge as Prosecutors Pursue More Parents in Admissions Scandal

#129

Post by [deleted] »

rhegart wrote: post #49

Affirmative action on one side, cheaters on the other. At least a dozen people cheated on the SAT in my school and had the audacity to brag about it. Financial aid if you poor, paid for if you rich. Middle class honest kids hurt the most. Had top 1% scores, no ivies or UCLA for me (got UCB at least) and I’m Asian. My little cousin, same scores and rejected from UCSC 10 years later...much worse now than before

[deleted]

Re: L.A.’s Elite on Edge as Prosecutors Pursue More Parents in Admissions Scandal

#130

Post by roenxi »

mochomocha wrote: post #86
darawk wrote: post #57

The actual problem here is not the bribery. The problem is that those bribes are being captured by random 3rd parties, rather than by the school itself. The correct way to implement college admissions is this: Charge a sliding scale fee based on application quality, and then use the excess revenue generated to subsidize poor kids tuition. Your kid has a 2.5 GPA and wants to go to Harvard? Great, that'll be a million…

No. No amount of money should get you a way to get into an "elite" school if you don't deserve it. Unless we're ready to admit that these schools aren't really elite if any billionaire's dumb dumb kid can get in with enough money thrown at the institution. The issue with trying to solve every single problem with money is that capitalism isn't designed to solve problems where a moral compass is needed.

There are many types of elites - financial elites, academic elites, social elites, etc, etc.

An elite school tries to cater to all of those. It would be better if they were more up-front about this rather than pretending they are all about academic achievement but they would still be elite schools. And they'd still have some exceptionally bright students in their classes.

Post reply on HN