Summers manages to dodge most of the hard questions in this interview with "that's a question we should be asking." So much of the conversation around elite schools focuses on the top and the bottom but completely ignores the middle class who are sacrificing time, money, and emotional resources to provide opportunities like that archeolo…
Summers manages to dodge most of the hard questions in this interview with "that's a question we should be asking." So much of the conversation around elite schools focuses on the top and the bottom but completely ignores the middle class who are sacrificing time, money, and emotional resources to provide opportunities like that archeological dig or an SAT prep class or to live in a tiny home but send their kids to an excellent school or to have a parent stay home with children for much of their youth.
God help the middle class kid with married parents who work in mid level jobs. Woe betide kids who just worked their butt off in a public school to achieve straight As in AP classes, high SAT test scores, leadership in extra curriculars, service, etc. That's a kid who has shown they know how to hustle, how to manage time, and how to achieve what teachers ask of them across the board. I'm not sure why their lack of a dead sibling, a parent with cancer, a tragic divorce, or living in poverty makes them less qualified to attend an elite school and less worthy of financial support if they manage to get in.
But let us be sure to keep football and soccer programs, because that's how we show educational equity!
The elite schools are admitting the most kids in the top 0.1% (25% plus) and secondly, in the bottom 40%. Kids of parents in the 90-95% income band, the wealthy, but not the super rich, are punished the most. Kids who are admitted in the top 90% go. It’s the middle class who actually can’t attend because it is economically the most difficult. This data was all recently published by Harvard. I’m sharing the link below.
Mary, I had similar thoughts. The college “game” is very frustrating. My kids are the kind of kids and we are the kind of family you reference. All of the rhetoric on this focuses on two particular groups and leaves out the large swath of families and students who are too busy working their rears off to be a part of the conversation.
Mary, they don’t want your kids. All the hurdles they set up are just post facto obstacles to make it harder for your kids to get in. We figured that out a long time ago and when enough of our kids set their sights on other schools, these “elite” schools will be known for their toxic culture. Either way, employers are giving kids veiled IQ tests because they don’t trust the product as Summers alludes. He knows what’s up. He’s just a coward and can’t talk about the elephants in the room.
I’ve talked to a lot of employers across multiple disciplines who now WON’T hire from elite schools because the graduates are entitled grievance mongers who don’t know how to do actual work. They look for smart, motivated kids from so-called second tier schools.
I'm reaching the end of my working career, but for a few decades I was involved in recruiting for our firm. I avoided students from colleges such as Stanford like the plague. The kids were just looking for a resume start and would be gone in two years before they even learned how to be competent (let alone useful or profitable). We called them dilettante, because of their profound belief that they were destined for bigger and better things.
I went to Amherst and it’s spelled “dilettantes”. Hmph. 😆
I agree 100% though - building a resume instead of growing up and learning how to build oneself within an organization just screams narcissistic un-seriousness of purpose and speaks to the big problem, here: “what-can-you-do-for-me”, instead of “I’ll prove to you and myself what I can do and be an asset to society”.
Sorry - trying to be funny - more importantly though, your comment was, I thought, spot on.
I still don’t get how private education institutions get to amass a ridiculously huge fortune, tax-free, and then not be required to share that wealth in a way that benefits their local communities, the states they’re in, and America. I mean, in terms of cold, hard, CASH!
So was I. Anyway, I certainly agree with you that the free hand-outs to private universities need to stop. The biggest and far and away most damaging being guaranteed loans. You want the cost of college to dramatically decrease? Just stop the loans. The expensive colleges will quickly run out of customers or need to provide their own financing and risk non-payment instead of expecting the rest of us to pick up the tab for their grossly overpriced degree credentialing.
The top colleges would probably be able to fill their classes with upper class students, wouldn't they? They aren't very big schools, and a lot of Americans have enough money to pay their tuition. Harvard would probably like it if they could go back to rich people only in their student body.
No they thrive on number of apps received. Every year their admissions looks to see if they hit another record. A steep drop off of total number as well as best and brightest would send a signal.
The "top" colleges can charge whatever they want. But if they want to continue to virtue signal and allow kids who cannot afford it, they'll need to finance their own loans-scholarships and not expect the federal government to do so.
Higher Ed is all about telling kids that they are leaders and will change the world. Forget about competence in your field which in totality is a far greater good for society. We are selecting for selfish traits and the Harvards of the world must be called out for it.
Remember: in the world, the highest self-esteem is found in younger male Blacks. The lowest in younger female Asians. Fighting for the place that merit commands is harder under that circumstance.
Summers manages to dodge most of the hard questions in this interview with "that's a question we should be asking." So much of the conversation around elite schools focuses on the top and the bottom but completely ignores the middle class who are sacrificing time, money, and emotional resources to provide opportunities like that archeological dig or an SAT prep class or to live in a tiny home but send their kids to an excellent school or to have a parent stay home with children for much of their youth.
God help the middle class kid with married parents who work in mid level jobs. Woe betide kids who just worked their butt off in a public school to achieve straight As in AP classes, high SAT test scores, leadership in extra curriculars, service, etc. That's a kid who has shown they know how to hustle, how to manage time, and how to achieve what teachers ask of them across the board. I'm not sure why their lack of a dead sibling, a parent with cancer, a tragic divorce, or living in poverty makes them less qualified to attend an elite school and less worthy of financial support if they manage to get in.
But let us be sure to keep football and soccer programs, because that's how we show educational equity!
The elite schools are admitting the most kids in the top 0.1% (25% plus) and secondly, in the bottom 40%. Kids of parents in the 90-95% income band, the wealthy, but not the super rich, are punished the most. Kids who are admitted in the top 90% go. It’s the middle class who actually can’t attend because it is economically the most difficult. This data was all recently published by Harvard. I’m sharing the link below.
https://opportunityinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/CollegeAdmissions_Nontech.pdf?campaign_id=9&emc=edit_nn_20230724&instance_id=98292&nl=the-morning®i_id=152348616&segment_id=140117&te=1&user_id=b36690bcbc34a99f5ac3366f7ba45e4d
Mary, I had similar thoughts. The college “game” is very frustrating. My kids are the kind of kids and we are the kind of family you reference. All of the rhetoric on this focuses on two particular groups and leaves out the large swath of families and students who are too busy working their rears off to be a part of the conversation.
It’s a blessing in disguise. Google Stanford president. Google HBS Gino. Just for starters.
Mary, they don’t want your kids. All the hurdles they set up are just post facto obstacles to make it harder for your kids to get in. We figured that out a long time ago and when enough of our kids set their sights on other schools, these “elite” schools will be known for their toxic culture. Either way, employers are giving kids veiled IQ tests because they don’t trust the product as Summers alludes. He knows what’s up. He’s just a coward and can’t talk about the elephants in the room.
I’ve talked to a lot of employers across multiple disciplines who now WON’T hire from elite schools because the graduates are entitled grievance mongers who don’t know how to do actual work. They look for smart, motivated kids from so-called second tier schools.
Those “entitled grievance mongers” Tawanda, make great Community Activists! (Sarcasm)
You mean like the Messiah, Barak Obama?
I'm reaching the end of my working career, but for a few decades I was involved in recruiting for our firm. I avoided students from colleges such as Stanford like the plague. The kids were just looking for a resume start and would be gone in two years before they even learned how to be competent (let alone useful or profitable). We called them dilettante, because of their profound belief that they were destined for bigger and better things.
I went to Amherst and it’s spelled “dilettantes”. Hmph. 😆
I agree 100% though - building a resume instead of growing up and learning how to build oneself within an organization just screams narcissistic un-seriousness of purpose and speaks to the big problem, here: “what-can-you-do-for-me”, instead of “I’ll prove to you and myself what I can do and be an asset to society”.
Yes. I misspelled dilettante. I guess I should have gone to Amherst. (or used the edit function ...)
Sorry - trying to be funny - more importantly though, your comment was, I thought, spot on.
I still don’t get how private education institutions get to amass a ridiculously huge fortune, tax-free, and then not be required to share that wealth in a way that benefits their local communities, the states they’re in, and America. I mean, in terms of cold, hard, CASH!
Not very funny.
So was I. Anyway, I certainly agree with you that the free hand-outs to private universities need to stop. The biggest and far and away most damaging being guaranteed loans. You want the cost of college to dramatically decrease? Just stop the loans. The expensive colleges will quickly run out of customers or need to provide their own financing and risk non-payment instead of expecting the rest of us to pick up the tab for their grossly overpriced degree credentialing.
The top colleges would probably be able to fill their classes with upper class students, wouldn't they? They aren't very big schools, and a lot of Americans have enough money to pay their tuition. Harvard would probably like it if they could go back to rich people only in their student body.
No they thrive on number of apps received. Every year their admissions looks to see if they hit another record. A steep drop off of total number as well as best and brightest would send a signal.
The "top" colleges can charge whatever they want. But if they want to continue to virtue signal and allow kids who cannot afford it, they'll need to finance their own loans-scholarships and not expect the federal government to do so.
Higher Ed is all about telling kids that they are leaders and will change the world. Forget about competence in your field which in totality is a far greater good for society. We are selecting for selfish traits and the Harvards of the world must be called out for it.
Remember: in the world, the highest self-esteem is found in younger male Blacks. The lowest in younger female Asians. Fighting for the place that merit commands is harder under that circumstance.