Buying your way into a prestigious university...

I have worked with a few Harvard grads over the years and while they are obviously smart I have been extremely unimpressed by their ability to a) be practical and b) run a business. Just my limited sample study but very similar traits in several different individuals i saw.

I had lunch the other day with a retired VP of a state college. He came up through the admissions route but his responsibilities broadened as he got more senior. He seemed to think that Harvard is impossibly difficult to get into and therefore ends up with the cream of the crop. But once you're in, unless you're a science/engineering type, it's probably no more difficult than any other high quality college/university. I don't know if this is true or not but I though his perspective was interesting.

For the record, I never would have gotten into Harvard.
 
I had lunch the other day with a retired VP of a state college. He came up through the admissions route but his responsibilities broadened as he got more senior. He seemed to think that Harvard is impossibly difficult to get into and therefore ends up with the cream of the crop. But once you're in, unless you're a science/engineering type, it's probably no more difficult than any other high quality college/university. I don't know if this is true or not but I though his perspective was interesting.

For the record, I never would have gotten into Harvard.

I have heard that as well. No doubt there is a difference in expectations between the top schools and the average state school. However, I don't think there is significant difference between the average kid who is in the top 1% or the top 10% of their high school class. They are both smart, reasonably hard working, and could handle the work load at any of the top schools. I was a bottom of the class dummy so I perhaps could not have handled the rigors of a top college, and certainly didn't have that option, but I somehow went on to, and got through, law school and passed the California bar on my first attempt so anything is possible. A blind squirrel and all that.
 
As an Ivy League graduate, and also as someone who volunteered as an applicant interviewer (most of the Ivy League colleges have interviews by alumni as part of the application procedure) for close to 30 years, this scandal is sad but not too much of a surprise.

Admission to these schools is much more competitive than 40-50 years ago. When I applied, the acceptance rate at my school was just below 10% - they probably got about 12000 -14000 applications. Now the acceptance rate is in the 4-6 percent range. The number of applications has close to quadrupled while the number of slots has barely risen.

In terms of merit, I would say a lot of applicants would be successful at my alma mater. I interview over 100 students over those years. There were maybe 3 that I thought "no way". Otherwise almost all were in the top 10% of their school and perhaps a 3rd in the top 2 or 3 percent academically.

The school asks you to evaluate them no so much on their academic work but on other "criteria" - what are their interests, what type of personality do they exhibit, what type of "leadership" qualities can one discern (i.e., captain of a varsity team or created and managed a student club, vs being just a member). Essentially we report the "human" side of the student back. Generally speaking, the school leans towards those who want to come not just to study but to get involved in various extracurricular activities at the school and in the community.

Of course, what we write and rank is only one criteria. I probably ranked 20-30 applicants as "outstanding" and really wanted to see admitted. about 5 of them were admitted. another 2 I had not rated as highly, but they were admitted.

The name does make a difference. When my high school counselor first recommended I apply to Ivy League schools, my reaction was "I'll never get in, that school is just for rich white people". It took him a week to convince me that my academics and activities made me a competitive applicant. I applied to three and was accepted at 2 of them. Interestingly, the one that I thought I would get into, the one that seemed to express the most interest in me, was the one I was rejected from.

While I was a student, I saw very few people drop out of the school because they could not handle the academics. Frankly, the difficulty of getting in carries enough clout that as long as you pass and get enough credits to get your degree, what your grades were are not considered as much as they would be from other schools. Most dropped out because they chose to ignore the academics, or could not deal with the social situations, or violated one of the academic rules (like plagiarism or the test honor system) that usually meant an automatic expulsion/suspension. Those who were like me, minorities and/or first generation college students from their families and/or coming from underprivileged backgrounds were so worried about flunking out that maybe we spent too much time at the library, labs, and computer centers.

The name made a difference then, and it still does. Megacorp was specifically targeting my school for hires. I have been in social situations where people who acted cold towards me, once they found out the school I went to, suddenly treated me quite differently, particularly if they also graduated from that school. Your network becomes much wider - I have friends I made there who are now corporate executives, well known celebrities, well known politicians, whom I still hear from and exchange information on how we and our families are doing, and we get together around our reunions.

Since almost all applicants would qualify academically, the school does consider many other criteria that might give certain groups an advantage. Groups that might be accepted at a higher rate are children of alumni (this is the highest rate from what I can tell), athletes, performing arts, certain (not all) minority/social "diversity" groups.

In sum, the school gets so many qualified applicants that merit based admission alone is not enough, there have to be other factors... and that sadly is where situations like the current scandal can come about.

This 1000x.

The reality is once you're in, the typical 'above average' student can get by enough to get a degree. And that degree opens doors, establishes networks and in general gives you a leg up that you'll never get from 90% of schools.
 
IMO, the ivy leagues are way over-rated. A talented student that applies themselves going to a decent state school is going to succeed in life far beyond a lackluster student from parents of means that passes through an Ivy League. See Gallop Purdue study which contains some very counterintuitive points.

The study found that the college a student attends does not determine success in life. Rather, it is the experiences a student has that makes a difference. They highlight these experiences:
- having professors that really care and encourage them to pursue their dreams
- having a multi-semester experience such as being involved in a research project
- internships where they apply their learnings in the real world
- being actively involved in extracurricular activities

Parents and counselors should focus on finding the right fit for their student rather than thinking a “top” school will solve their problems.

The report is an interesting read.

https://news.gallup.com/reports/197...nk_wwwv9&g_campaign=item_243443&g_medium=copy
 
IMO, the ivy leagues are way over-rated. A talented student that applies themselves going to a decent state school is going to succeed in life far beyond a lackluster student from parents of means that passes through an Ivy League.

That may be true to a certain extent, but I think it is the contacts and network you build at an Ivy League school that will open doors for you throughout the rest of your life. In so many ways it truly is about who you know.

As I noted earlier, when the Chairman of the Board calls you personally and 'suggests' that you interview the young son of one of his old Harvard buddies, I'm not going to be the one to [-]reject his application for employment[/-] put a limit on my own career.

After he's hired and the Chairman shows up on the kid's first day of work to personally welcome him, (and thank you for your help) well....you know you made the right hire!

I've just seen it so many times in my life where some Harvard/Yale guy 'knows someone who knows someone' from school, now high up in a company who could solve an issue for us, get us in the door or get us in front of the right people.
 
Last edited:
That may be true to a certain extent, but I think it is the contacts and network you build at an Ivy League school that will open doors for you throughout the rest of your life. In so many ways it truly is about who you know..

Agree that “elitism” is practiced in certain settings - elites hiring perceived elites is an unconscious validation they (the Ivy League elites) are special. Would argue that the level of privilege you were born into has more impact on future financial success than attending an Ivy League. However, these are largely one-off situations (yet rightly still piss people off).

The Gallop Purdue report does not state that status of a school (Ivy League down to Community College) has no impact on average learnings of graduates. It’s just that for each type of school, the range of earning levels achieved by graduates greatly overlap the ranges found in all other types of schools. Put another way, An individuals future success is affected more by their experience in college than the type (status) of school they attended.
 
The names on my diplomas landed me interviews that I otherwise might not have landed. After that, it was all about my abilities (or lack thereof).
 
Put another way, An individuals future success is affected more by their experience in college than the type (status) of school they attended.

Sure, but if your "experience in college" consists of becoming friends with other future captains of industry (and their attendant broader family connections), it does open doors that otherwise would be closed; more accurately, doors you wouldn't even know existed.

It IS a vicious and self fulfilling cycle however and one can always debate the fairness of it but as is often noted, life isn't always fair.
 
This is just the tip of an iceberg, think about it, getting in to a top collage is just the start, wouldn’t a degree of something is the ultimate goal.
 
Definitely a first world problem. Its totally disgusting and as old as there have been entitled rich folks who are certain their financial situation means they get to play by rules they and their ilk write. I couldn't care less. Too bad for the deserving who won't get a chance because undeserving rich kid occupies a seat they probably didn't want anyway.
 
Well, it depends on what you consider currency...

Many less-than-stellar college students got in because they can run fast and jump high. Many got in because their parents donated to the library fund. Many got in because of their parents' name looked good in their PR releases. Different types of currency with the same result.
 
While the “side door” scandal is rightfully calling out inequities and unfairness, I think the perceived impact on honest students is being overblown in some ways. The number of “cheaters” are tiny compared to the 20 million college students in the USA (15M public, 5M Private). Would need to have 50,000 “cheaters” each year to get to the point where 1% of current college students got in by cheating. Looks like it’s a much smaller number than that....
 
While the “side door” scandal is rightfully calling out inequities and unfairness, I think the perceived impact on honest students is being overblown in some ways. The number of “cheaters” are tiny compared to the 20 million college students in the USA (15M public, 5M Private). Would need to have 50,000 “cheaters” each year to get to the point where 1% of current college students got in by cheating. Looks like it’s a much smaller number than that....

What percent is acceptable? It's not like these people are getting in by slipping through the cracks...they got in because someone (or more than one person) made a deliberate decision to reject a more qualified applicant for one with connections, family money, famous parents, etc.
 
IMO, the ivy leagues are way over-rated. A talented student that applies themselves going to a decent state school is going to succeed in life far beyond a lackluster student from parents of means that passes through an Ivy League. See Gallop Purdue study which contains some very counterintuitive points.

The study found that the college a student attends does not determine success in life. Rather, it is the experiences a student has that makes a difference. They highlight these experiences:
- having professors that really care and encourage them to pursue their dreams
- having a multi-semester experience such as being involved in a research project
- internships where they apply their learnings in the real world
- being actively involved in extracurricular activities

Parents and counselors should focus on finding the right fit for their student rather than thinking a “top” school will solve their problems.

The report is an interesting read.

https://news.gallup.com/reports/197...nk_wwwv9&g_campaign=item_243443&g_medium=copy

I agree that experiences do make the difference. However, in many cases the Ivy Leagues schools make achieving those experiences much easier once you get in. For example, when I was in school, if you went out for the football team, you likely would make it. You might never get to play in a game, or you might not travel to away games, but if you could practice, you could suit up on Sunday. There were a ton of extracurricular activities, some of which were actual businesses that the school sponsored. Some of the varsity sports were fully funded by alumni, not the school, so there were a lot of them. Class sizes tended to be smaller than at other schools, giving you more opportunity to interact with professors. Access to professors was very easy beyond office hours, for example many professors would eat in the same dining rooms as the students, lived walking distance from school (the school would provide a housing benefit so that professors could better afford to live close by). These are just a few of the examples, I could go on.

One of the big "screening" criteria we, as "applicant interviewers", were told to look for were students with personalities that had proven they had an interest in things beyond the classroom, as they would more likely to pursue those items mentioned above. So the student who had a straight A high school average, perfect SATs, but no activities outside of school was much less likely to get in that someone with a B+ average very good SATs, but involved in sports, community, and musical/artistic activities, and could articulate their involvements very well.
 
The names on my diplomas landed me interviews that I otherwise might not have landed. After that, it was all about my abilities (or lack thereof).
+1, definitely true in my case too. I wouldn’t have had the 50+ interviews I had if I’d graduated from no-name U.
 
While the “side door” scandal is rightfully calling out inequities and unfairness, I think the perceived impact on honest students is being overblown in some ways. The number of “cheaters” are tiny compared to the 20 million college students in the USA (15M public, 5M Private). Would need to have 50,000 “cheaters” each year to get to the point where 1% of current college students got in by cheating. Looks like it’s a much smaller number than that....

Those cheaters are typically only aiming for the top % of schools though, so not really relevant to the 20mm college students.
 
It will surprise me if Lori Loughlin goes to jail. They are rich and will get off but shouldn't. IMO
Just because people been doing this for years doesn't make it right. If caught they should get what the law says they should get.
 
It will surprise me if Lori Loughlin goes to jail. They are rich and will get off but shouldn't. IMO
.

I wouldn't bet on that. IIRC, even the plea deal includes some jail time. Assuming she's found guilty she will likely do some time but more than if she plead outright
 
Last edited:
I think the use of minor sports (and the coaches) to get in is uniquely American since we are the most sports-crazy country. I should stop it at that but just can't. I don't think educational opportunity in this country is equal access and I think that is a serious problem for the long run. Didn't I recently read in this forum that in some state with low property taxes everyone who is middle class just sends their kids to private schools of some sort. I doubt the public schools there are as good so no equal opportunity starting before first grade (smacks of my cynicism but I have a close friend who has been grading national standards tests for a number of years and his take after grading those and seeing results for various groups backs me up).
 
As Thurston sez FB_IMG_1552921407136.jpeg
 
Back
Top Bottom