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

Maybe the problem is that Harvard exists

dynomight.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 386 posts

Re: Maybe the problem is that Harvard exists

#251

Post by monetus »

gonehome wrote: post #187
CrazyStat wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The averages at selective schools are a lot higher This is what I expected when I went from undergrad at a solid but not elite shool (top 100, ~50% admission rate) to grad school (top 10, single digit admission rate). It's not what I experienced. The undergrad students I taught and TA for at the elite school were no better, on average, than my peers at my undergrad school. They were more ambitious and entitled. The…

My observation from doing hundreds of interviews at career fairs was the fancy schools (Stanford) had students that were way better at basic questions. This isn’t a perfect metric, but it’s signal. If your peers in undergrad were your friends, you were probably selecting a non-representative group (smart people you liked) and your job as a TA shows you a more random sample (or even skewed negative, poor students grub…

Your reaction to the parent was wondering at selection bias in schools, which was a nice context to me wondering at the selection bias you have in interviews. Thanks.

Re: Maybe the problem is that Harvard exists

#252

Post by laidoffamazon »

whywhywouldyou wrote: post #243
laidoffamazon wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but I would be below average in the greater scheme of things. Which scheme of things is this? > Top 99% of SAT is nothing. I got 99pct on my SAT too (1500/1600). I didnt have a chance at a top school. What do you suggest people like me do now? I went to an undergrad with a 50% acceptance rate, not exactly UIUC CS. I can't sleep most days because I don't feel like I have anything to hope for.

Sounds like you need a serious adjustment on your world view if you currently believe you don't have anything to hope for simply because you and your 1500 SAT score didn't get into an elite school.

This isn't what the rest of these comments would indicate (which say that people that get into top schools are fundamentally more qualified and intelligent than people that do not)

Re: Maybe the problem is that Harvard exists

#253

Post by rayiner »

fnordpiglet wrote: post #8

I find the Harvard angst interesting. I’ve never once felt someone else going to Harvard impacted my life in any way whatsoever. I’ve advanced further than everyone I know that went to Harvard in my career and not once did someone wink at the Harvard guy and pass me over. I’m sure it happens, and I’m sure there are secret clubs I don’t get invited to (well the Harvard club is pretty nice and I was invited there by a…

Okay but the Supreme Court has just one person who didn’t not Harvard or Yale. The majority of Biden’s cabinet went to Harvard or Yale. You might not believe that Harvard acts as a gatekeeper in practice, but it does.

Re: Maybe the problem is that Harvard exists

#254

Post by blitzar »

earthboundkid wrote: post #222
samvher wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm from a non US country, so the concept of a Harvard is foreign to me as well. And yes, I've also worked for selective employers where maths degrees mattered a lot. It never bothered me. Not sure what you're trying to say. Hiring people based on individual merit and skills is not the same thing as hiring people based on an exclusive network. The Harvard employer favored Harvard folks over others who otherwise had t…

Don't worry, all your political leaders went to Harvard and the Kennedy School. :-)

I believe none of them have - they all went to Oxford / Cambridge, why would they step down to an inferior institution that would only hold them back in life?

Re: Maybe the problem is that Harvard exists

#255

Post by HPsquared »

komali2 wrote: post #113
karaterobot wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's a counter-example at a reasonable scale? By reasonable scale, I mean millions of people.

I never understood why the "at reasonable scale" is presumed. What happens if I reject that presumption? Why do we assume "millions of people" operating in the same social order is a good thing? Because iphones? Is that reason enough? Do we presume that having millions of people under the same social order is required to make advancements in medicine? It didn't take millions to build Linux or wikipedia, just a couple…

There are billions of people in the world and they can see each other, talk to each other, form groups, invade each other, etc. There's no escape.

Re: Maybe the problem is that Harvard exists

#256

Post by EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK »

jyscao wrote: post #121
glimshe wrote: post #39

This is a typical "let's be all equally poor/bad" argument. Harvard is simply a private institution with excellent reputation and not a single person is required to go there or hire someone from there. Why do Harvard people "drive 20% above the speed limit"? Because selecting good people in a sea of resumes is HARD. Degrees aren't amazing proxies for productivity, but they are decent proxies. I've seen dozens of theo…

>Having managed over 100+ people, I can say that on average the people from better institutions are better employees - even though I have managed amazing people without college degrees and bad people with amazing degrees. There is a better method for selecting candidates: IQ testing. For better or worse, that's illegal. In fact college degrees are merely proxies for the lack of IQ data.

SAT is an IQ test in disguise.

Re: Maybe the problem is that Harvard exists

#257

Post by okaram »

jyscao wrote: post #121
glimshe wrote: post #39

This is a typical "let's be all equally poor/bad" argument. Harvard is simply a private institution with excellent reputation and not a single person is required to go there or hire someone from there. Why do Harvard people "drive 20% above the speed limit"? Because selecting good people in a sea of resumes is HARD. Degrees aren't amazing proxies for productivity, but they are decent proxies. I've seen dozens of theo…

>Having managed over 100+ people, I can say that on average the people from better institutions are better employees - even though I have managed amazing people without college degrees and bad people with amazing degrees. There is a better method for selecting candidates: IQ testing. For better or worse, that's illegal. In fact college degrees are merely proxies for the lack of IQ data.

IQ testing is not illegal in the US ...

It may be easier to not use it than to produce evidence that it is relevant, but ...

Re: Maybe the problem is that Harvard exists

#259

Post by gwbas1c »

A few years ago I read a book called "Listen Liberal." It was a book written by liberals, for liberals.

One of the criticisms it made of the Obama Administration's cabinet was that it was far too heavy in choosing Ivy-League graduates. The book pointed out that the cabinet was racially / ethnically diverse, but because the vast majority of the cabinet was Ivy-League educated, it had all of the biases that come with an Ivy-League education.

I don't think Harvard is the problem: They are an organization that exists, and the selection criteria they use is to choose people who they believe will graduate. Granted, someone could argue that they should take more risks on applicants, but that's not my argument to make.

In part, the value of these institutions is that they are exclusive. Many people argue that the advantage of an Ivy League education, compared to an equivalent, less exclusive school, is the people you meet while on campus. This difference can only be maintained if the schools maintain their selection criteria.

I think the bigger problem is that far too many people / organizations put too much weight on an Ivy League education. It's generally unobtainable, even if you "check the boxes," because these schools get far more applicants than they can ever accept. Which is why I don't want to argue that they should change their selection criteria: Who is to say what is the best selection criteria? Everyone will try to argue that it should be changed in a way to benefit the person making the argument.

IMO: We need some new institutions to displace the Ivy League as the "best." Perhaps, if there are enough schools with differently selective admission criteria, everyone will be able to find a selective school that they can get into?

Re: Maybe the problem is that Harvard exists

#260

Post by dublinben »

8note wrote: post #192
Kon-Peki wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And, in addition, because at least presently, anyone who didn't do Ivy+ is essentially never going to be a SCOTUS judge. For your example, you need to do a post-graduate degree (law) from the Ivy+. This article is talking about the gating functions of the undergraduate admissions departments. The graduate school admissions officers are far more likely to consider strong candidates from "normal" universities than th…

> People shit on it constantly and call it the backdoor, not-so-honest way to get associated with Harvard. This sounds like it's not actually going to Harvard, and you'd only get the slimy Harvard benefits by pretending you did a different program at harvard

The Bachelors program via the extension school very much is "going to Harvard" college, and taking the same classes alongside students who were admitted the traditional way. What you're describing is a more appropriate critique of the 'professional certificates' that they sell people to brandish their resumes and LinkedIn profiles.
Post reply on HN