What did SFFA vs. Harvard reveal about admissions?

(sorting-machine.pages.dev)

16 points | by StrageMusik 1 hour ago

4 comments

  • chasd00 30 minutes ago
    The price portion of this hits hard. My oldest starts college in 2 year and then his younger brother follows 2 years later. We make enough to not qualify for need based aid but not enough to just write a check, merit based aid + a meager 529 and our savings is their only hope besides debt.

    Further, both are male, hetero, only 1/4 hispanic, and my wife and I are not drug addicts or alcoholics so they'll get nothing from the "whole student" review. There's a huge swath of the population in this boat. The middle/upper-middle class pays for everyone else as always.

    • StrageMusik 19 minutes ago
      Thats why its called price discrimination: you are trying to get as much money as possible from each buyer without regard to fairness. Heroin dealers at least set a fixed $/oz because they know that word getting around that someone gets it cheaper would get them shot.
    • rationalist 22 minutes ago
      > only 1/4 hispanic

      If you mean only one grandparent is born in a Latin American country, then according to the U.S. Census Bureau, you are Hispanic.

      • steveBK123 8 minutes ago
        Exactly.

        All this stuff is self identifying too, so there are far more dishonest applicants than someone with a single LatAm grandparent marking themselves hispanic.

    • blackoil 27 minutes ago
      > my wife and I are not drug addicts or alcoholics

      Yet, you still have two years.

      • chasd00 7 minutes ago
        no.freaking.kidding
  • rayiner 43 minutes ago
    It would have been helpful to model the effect of legacy status while accounting for academic indices.
    • StrageMusik 20 minutes ago
      conflates a couple of things: the legacy tip itself and the fact that legacies tend to have stronger academic profiles to begin with (they come from advantaged households). A skeptic can fairly say "of course legacy admits do well, they're better applicants"
      • rayiner 14 minutes ago
        > they come from advantaged households

        They also tend to be smarter because smarter people have smarter kids.

        • steveBK123 5 minutes ago
          Sure, but not at the admittance rate that legacies get. There's been stats & studies showing for example some Ivys with ~3% admit rates having something closer to ~12% for legacy applicants.

          Most people applying to an Ivy are already self-selecting as pretty exceptional applicants (putting aside the delusional) and the legacy admits had same/worse SATs, etc.

          edit: just looked it up, Harvard is at ~34% legacy admit rate versus regular 6% admit rate..

  • gscott 44 minutes ago
    It feels like with fewer foreign students college's will have to open more slots to those who can be reasonable ready to be successful and also pay full rate.
  • avs733 43 minutes ago
    Looking at this without consideration for two factors (number of applicants and the number of applications per applicant) is borderline malpractice.

    I can’t pull older numbers on my phone at the moment but in the last 12 years the number of applications to colleges (applicants*applications) has risen 50%.

    So correct for the reality that…

    1) that immediately skews your denominator and changes your percentages.

    2) the upper middle class students are the most likely to apply to the most schools (because they can and don’t have the other paths)

    3) more and more marginal students who previously would not have gone to college are getting encouraged to apply.

    And their model is just breaking.

    • avs733 39 minutes ago
      So with some searching…

      In the UK you can apply to upto five colleges.

      In the US the recommendation seems to be between 5-8