Hacker News Reader

Comment by many_indicator | Hacker News Reader

You'd think a 1500+, 4.0+, 12+ AP course student coming from an elite magnet school, with a parental income of $250,000+ is smarter than the poor kid from rural Idaho that lacked such opportunities.

The poor rural kid from Idaho may not be admitted to MIT, Duke, Berkeley, ivies and may not look as good as that 1500+ kid, but you surely will miss kids like: https://www.uidaho.edu/engr/news/features/tom-mueller that would have been successful at an MIT or Caltech. While the 1500+ kid might have gotten that score due to SAT prep, they may not actually be that smart. The Idaho kid could be much more intelligent, but since they're coming in with fewer AP courses and fewer ECs, they wouldn't pass the sniff test.

View on HN

Oh lord, I wish I could find the article!

It was a while ago, but it was a study out of ... Michigan State (?) that looked at the bottom 10% of students that got into the elite colleges. Not the legacies and the athletes, they controlled for that. But, based on selection criteria like ACT, SAT, GPA, etc. Kids that got in, basically, on the strengths of their essays.

The press article talked about a kid that was in Stanford. He was from Arizona, and his grads were iffy and his scores were okay-ish.

But, the kid was SUPER passionate about the local state park that he hiked in all the time. He managed to raise a bunch of money for the park to keep it open through the 2008 downturn, he went to the state capital and lobbied legislators, all that jazz. The kid essentially applied to Stanford on a lark and wrote about his efforts with the park. He got in.

The conclusion of the study of these kinds of kids was that they were really spiky and not well rounded. And, they really didn't need Stanford and all the others, Stanford needed them.

Sorry for the years later recollections and likely misremembering. If anyone else knows the source for this, I'd love to know as well.

First, lots of kids get 1500+. Even the kids getting special consideration would have such an SAT score. So if you can't match that score, I'd strongly urge you to give serious consideration to some "safety" schools.

Second, kids from rural Idaho, (kids from rural anywhere really), are given special consideration at most elite schools. They're essentially given the same consideration as poor minorities. Most elite schools have a mandate that you must admit a certain number of males and females from every state in the union. Which means the easiest way into a lot of these schools is not a wicked three point shot, but rather to graduate high school in Wyoming.

Third, if you're from Idaho and are not admitted, it means there were better candidates that these schools selected in lieu of yourself. (Remember, a lot of schools have a mandate, so they definitely admitted someone.) So introspection is in order. What did the other Idaho candidates have that you did not?

>Second, kids from rural Idaho, (kids from rural anywhere really), are given special consideration at most elite schools. They're essentially given the same consideration as poor minorities. Most elite schools have a mandate that you must admit a certain number of males and females from every state in the union.

That may be true. But to tell a kid from rural Idaho she has a shot at MIT, when her parents never graduated from high school, may not be something she'd believe, even if she could get into MIT. Even if she'd get a full ride, her parents may encourage her not to apply, since they'd tell her it's too expensive, and she may believe that over reality. Just because a university tries to help such people, she may never get the message. It isn't like rural America is where Harvard is sending their representatives to educate poor rural kids their opportunities. A talented poor person may not realize they could actually get into Harvard, so why waste an application fee? Being poor effects you in ways most non-poor people cannot begin to understand. It effects your mindset, attitude and outlook on life. It can artificially lower your goals and scope.

But none of that is specific to being from Idaho. None of it is specific to being rural. And none of it is specific even to being poor.

There can be poor, minority kids in North Little Rock, Arkansas equally unaware of these opportunities. And believe it or not, even a middle class kid from Lincoln, Nebraska can be unaware of the fact that they can get into Harvard.

My point is, no one is really special in this regard.

So it’s not clear that the Idaho kid isn’t better than the average MIT admit, but it’s also not clear that he’d do better at MIT than going to his state or Montana state or something. (I mention this not to throw out state schools in the west but because one of the best texts on my area of research is by a guy from Montana State)

> 1500+, 4.0+, 12+ AP course student

What does that mean for people unfamiliar with US school system?

1500 (out of 1600) on the SAT, 4.0 out of 4.0 grade point average (GPA), took 12 Advanced Placement (AP) courses, akin to foundational college-level courses, while in high school. Generally just getting the highest possible marks on every typical academic metric.

1500: SAT Score of 1500 (of 1600, puts them in the 99%-ile)

4.0+: 4.0+ Grade Point Average (D=1 grade point A=4, Advanced Placement courses [AP] are +1 on the grade point so you can be over 4.0 on a 4 point scale.)

12+ AP: is they've taken 12 or more Advanced Placement courses, which are in theory equal in rigor and difficulty to college level courses.

Basically means they spent their entire high school taking as many of the hardest classes they can, and earning an A in all courses.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com