We Need Our Elite Universities. But We’ve Destroyed Them.

 

The SAT has allowed students from all different backgrounds to compete for spots in our elite schools.  And as Charles Murray documented in “Coming Apart” and other works, when we send the brightest 0.01% to a few elite schools for their late teens and early 20s, many of them marry and produce really smart kids.  So when it seems that the students at places like Princeton and Yale seem to be getting smarter, it’s true.  And every generation it gets better and better.  Or worse and worse, depending on how you look at it.  The SAT hasn’t leveled the playing field the way we had hoped.  It’s actually increased the divisions in society.

Then again, at the same time, we’ve been increasing the impact of affirmative action on admission policies.  When you combine that with athletes, around a quarter to a third of an incoming class at a place like Duke or Stanford is made up of people who wouldn’t have qualified for admission, if they had been competing with everyone else.

So these extremely selective schools now have a significant percentage of students in each class who have no hope of passing the classes at that school.  So the elite colleges had to start offering classes and majors that affirmative action students and athletes could pass, so they wouldn’t all flunk out (which would not have been their fault – they shouldn’t have been there to begin with).

Then guess what happened:  The valedictorians at elite colleges tended to be black women who majored in Afro-Feminist Sexuality or something.  And all those brilliant kids in the chemistry and math classes didn’t win any awards, because they were getting B’s and C’s in impossibly difficult classes.  That didn’t seem right.  For those and many other reasons, the grading at elite schools became less stringent.

As college administrations made their student bodies more ethnically diverse, they made them much less diverse ideologically.  And the incoming students were children of the intolerance of social media and left-wing indoctrination of our secondary schools – they were happy to enforce strict speech codes, etc., via shaming and canceling.  Independent thought at our universities became verboten.  Which made teaching and learning nearly impossible.  Which changed our universities from institutions of higher learning into, well, into something else.

And then, at the same time, we started sending everybody to college.  Everybody.  High school guidance counselors instructed the vast majority of their students to apply to college, telling them that a college degree was their best chance at a good life.

Once everybody started going to college, obviously a college degree became less rare and less special.  Then, obviously, it started to matter even more where you got that degree from.  At one time, college graduates were a select group.  Now that they’re not, that made the elite schools much more desirable.

Our government has been pouring more and more money into higher education, ostensibly to fund the dreams of millions of young people.  Or perhaps to fund the indoctrination of a new generation of Democrat voters.  Whatever, I suppose.

But the result of all that government money flowing in has been that higher education has gotten much, much more expensive.  At the same time, the quality of that education has gotten much, much worse.  Which would be the end of the road, if this were a free market system.  Which, of course, it is not.  Monopolies are less subject to things like market pressures, innovation, and reality.

My youngest goes to Georgetown (on an athletic scholarship, thank God), which if you include all the fees, etc., it’s $85k per year.  That’s $340k for four years.  For an undergraduate degree.  Imagine starting out your life at age 22, with a debt of $340k and a B.A. in Psychology.  What if your wife has college debt, too?  How does that even work?  How do you buy a house and start a family?

Anyway, for various reasons, men started leaving the college track.  Now, most colleges are between 60-70% women.  This has changed the culture of collegiate life in many ways.  Some of them good.  Some of them less good.

So now our elite colleges are attended by the very bright and the very aggrieved.  Once there, we teach the bright to also be aggrieved.  We do not teach the aggrieved to be bright.  Then we teach them all to think the same way.  Then all these people spend hundreds of thousands of dollars of real money to get fake degrees in fake majors with fake grades, having wasted four of the most important years of their lives.

So our geniuses are no longer graduating with degrees in chemical engineering.  They’re graduating with degrees in, well, nothing at all.  But with higher GPAs, more emotional problems, and much more debt.

We’ve destroyed our higher education system.  It no longer exists.  And that’s a shame.  It was once a source of tremendous growth and innovation in our country.  Now it enforces conformity and discourages achievement.

I was once jealous of Ivy League graduates.  I went to Denison, which was an above-average school, but it did not have the reputation of Harvard.  I viewed Ivy League graduates as smarter and better educated than me.  And in the 1990s, they probably were.  So I got used to the fact that there were people better than me, and I did the best I could with what I had.  In fact, it motivated me to work harder, knowing that I was competing with people smarter and better educated than me.  I had enormous respect for the elite colleges.

Now, I’m not sure what to advise my kids.

Two of my daughters are world-class athletes and got athletic scholarships to Georgetown and Duke.  My other daughter was a good athlete, but not on that level.  So she went to Clemson, because Daddy wasn’t convinced that a degree from Georgetown was worth $300k more than a degree from Clemson.

Of the three schools, my wife and I are most impressed with Clemson.  Outstanding professors, eager to teach, and eager to get to know their students.  Practical subject matter.  Good mix of kids – about half-and-half women and men, and about half-and-half conservative and liberal.  Independent thought is permitted.  Very little COVID silliness.  The kids goof off from time to time, but are clearly there to work.  We’ve been so, so impressed.

We were much less impressed with Duke and Georgetown.  And remember, we weren’t paying for those.  Even for free, they seemed like a rip-off.

Except for the name on the diploma, of course.  When my oldest graduated from Duke, she got job offers that she would not have gotten out of a state school.  Many of these companies only send recruiters to MIT, Duke, Princeton, Stanford, and so on.  They don’t even bother to recruit elsewhere.  So she’s got a great job.  So Duke was worth it.  Which I guess is the whole point.

If our elite colleges are so screwed up, why do these companies continue to recruit there?  Because they know how hard it is to get into those schools.  It saves their personnel department time – if you got into Harvard, you’re probably extremely smart and hard-working.  They’re not sure if you learned anything in college, but they’ll teach you what they want you to know on the job.  They recruit brains and teach skills.  No problem.

The destruction of America’s higher education system is tragic, and will have catastrophic consequences for decades to come.

I don’t think this can be fixed.  There are too many things wrong, as I listed above.  I think we have to start over.  Perhaps we could simply divide the colleges into two separate institutions:  Real colleges with real students studying real topics, and have a sister institution for affirmative action students and athletes to study whatever they want.  I’m not sure.

But what we’re doing is not sustainable.  This is bonkers.  I pray that it implodes quickly now, so we can get to work building something great in its place.

Because we need our elite schools to turn out elite graduates.  We need people like that.  We need to encourage those people.  Not destroy them.

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 81 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Saint Augustine Member
    Saint Augustine
    @SaintAugustine

    Internet's Hank (View Comment):

    When the Devonian rocks were aborning they promised inclusion for all
    By fudging the metrics of entry for street kids who play basketball
    Till our colleges taught only grievance, and tutored nothing but fools
    And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said “Wisdom is worth more than jewels.”

    Amen!

    • #31
  2. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    Dr. Bastiat: I viewed Ivy League graduates as smarter and better educated than me. And in the 1990’s, they probably were.

    Hmm . . . in the 1930s maybe. I think by the 1990s they had already become leftist indoctrination centers, but their graduates hadn’t yet gained the power that they have today to destroy the country.

    If our elite colleges are so screwed up, why do these companies continue to recruit there? Because they know how hard it is to get into those schools. It saves their personnel department time – if you got into Harvard, you’re probably extremely smart and hard working.

    These days, it’s because other family members went there and are donating to the endowment fund. And you’re a stupid idiot, but here, we’ll give you the credentials and you can go work in Washington DC with other stupid idiots.

    This is not correct. The elite schools admit students with very high SAT scores, with a few exceptions for race preference, athletics, and legacies.

    I think it’s more than a few.

    (EDIT: Ah, I see others have already weighed in agreeing with me.

    I also admit that I think more highly of a guy who went to the tech college, learned a valuable trade, and is now out there providing a needed service. These seem to be the happiest people I know with large, happy families.

     

    • #32
  3. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    Internet's Hank (View Comment):

    When the Devonian rocks were aborning they promised inclusion for all
    By fudging the metrics of entry for street kids who play basketball
    Till our colleges taught only grievance, and tutored nothing but fools
    And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said “Wisdom is worth more than jewels.”

    Is that original, Hank?

    • #33
  4. Internet's Hank Contributor
    Internet's Hank
    @HankRhody

    Percival (View Comment):

    Internet’s Hank (View Comment):

    When the Devonian rocks were aborning they promised inclusion for all
    By fudging the metrics of entry for street kids who play basketball
    Till our colleges taught only grievance, and tutored nothing but fools
    And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said “Wisdom is worth more than jewels.”

    Is that original, Hank?

    Yeah.

    • #34
  5. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    Internet's Hank (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):

    Internet’s Hank (View Comment):

    When the Devonian rocks were aborning they promised inclusion for all
    By fudging the metrics of entry for street kids who play basketball
    Till our colleges taught only grievance, and tutored nothing but fools
    And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said “Wisdom is worth more than jewels.”

    Is that original, Hank?

    Yeah.

    It’s excellent.

    • #35
  6. navyjag Coolidge
    navyjag
    @navyjag

    Another good thread Dr. B.  Funny how the kids experience today may be different than ours 50 years ago and the next generation twenty five years ago.  Daughter a Duke grad and workaholic making it big in private equity M&A. But no family.  Her two younger brothers, bright but too lazy to even think about private colleges, doing just fine. One an accountant in San Fran engaged to a Chinese girl who does video game graphics and is raking it in.  Youngest married.  Screwed around at Evergreen state but then found out he was not allergic to lawyers and doing well as a paralegal at a firm in Denver.  I was just a state college grad, as was the wife, state law school and maybe sometime in the next 2 years can retire. Even we ever have a grandchild will pay bucko bucks if he or she promises to be an electrician. 

    • #36
  7. genferei Member
    genferei
    @genferei

    We do not need our elite schools to turn out elite graduates. We do not need people like that. I don’t think “we” need elite schools at all.

    We live in a bureaucracy. The top prizes are awarded by bureaucrats to bureaucrats who show excellence in being bureaucrats. Obviously if you have a measure of being able to navigate and manipulate bureaucratic things then that measure is going to correlate with success in being a bureaucrat. But it is a closed system. The measure wouldn’t relate to being able to increase knowledge, or happiness, or beauty, or wisdom, or piety.

    Now, if there was some other mechanism aligning the bureaucracy with real human needs then the system might work. But, I put it to you, simple observation demonstrates that there is no such mechanism- at least, not one that is allowed to function. So we have more and more of society’s resources being commandeered by the bureaucracy for the glory of bureaucrats (public and private).

    That grand-daughter of four Ivy grandparents with sky high grades would do more for society cleaning pools than joining McKinsey, clerking for a Supreme Court Justice or trading on Wall St. 

    • #37
  8. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    genferei (View Comment):

    We do not need our elite schools to turn out elite graduates. We do not need people like that. I don’t think “we” need elite schools at all.

    We live in a bureaucracy. The top prizes are awarded by bureaucrats to bureaucrats who show excellence in being bureaucrats. Obviously if you have a measure of being able to navigate and manipulate bureaucratic things then that measure is going to correlate with success in being a bureaucrat. But it is a closed system. The measure wouldn’t relate to being able to increase knowledge, or happiness, or beauty, or wisdom, or piety.

    Now, if there was some other mechanism aligning the bureaucracy with real human needs then the system might work. But, I put it to you, simple observation demonstrates that there is no such mechanism- at least, not one that is allowed to function. So we have more and more of society’s resources being commandeered by the bureaucracy for the glory of bureaucrats (public and private).

    That grand-daughter of four Ivy grandparents with sky high grades would do more for society cleaning pools than joining McKinsey, clerking for a Supreme Court Justice or trading on Wall St.

    Fortunately not very many people are actually needed for those elite positions, so a lot of high-end graduates end up cleaning pools anyway, or something else besides joining McKinsey, clerking for a Supreme Court Justice, or trading on Wall St.

    • #38
  9. iWe Coolidge
    iWe
    @iWe

    genferei (View Comment):
    That grand-daughter of four Ivy grandparents with sky high grades would do more for society cleaning pools than joining McKinsey, clerking for a Supreme Court Justice or trading on Wall St. 

    We need all kinds. I went to school with a lot of ambitious people. After stints at McKinsey or Goldman, they ended up founding and running hugely transformative companies. 

    One example of a pair of friends who were roommates and business partners: Joe, and Randy. Joe’s brother, Matt, is no slouch, either. High powered guys from distinctly middle-class backgrounds. They had ambition, and a Princeton education. And they have leveraged those advantages. The world is better for it.

    • #39
  10. MarciN Member
    MarciN
    @MarciN

    iWe (View Comment):

    genferei (View Comment):
    That grand-daughter of four Ivy grandparents with sky high grades would do more for society cleaning pools than joining McKinsey, clerking for a Supreme Court Justice or trading on Wall St.

    We need all kinds. I went to school with a lot of ambitious people. After stints at McKinsey or Goldman, they ended up founding and running hugely transformative companies.

    One example of a pair of friends who were roommates and business partners: Joe, and Randy. Joe’s brother, Matt, is no slouch, either. High powered guys from distinctly middle-class backgrounds. They had ambition, and a Princeton education. And they have leveraged those advantages. The world is better for it.

    A million likes. :) 

    • #40
  11. Hoyacon Member
    Hoyacon
    @Hoyacon

    Let’s also mention acceptance rates— the percentage of those who are accepted for admission v. the number of students who apply. Now, as one might expect, the “better” academic schools generally have lower acceptance rates.  However, when you factor in that some of those accepted should not have been admitted based on merit, the corresponding number of “qualified” students accepted is even lower.

    • #41
  12. iWe Coolidge
    iWe
    @iWe

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    Let’s also mention acceptance rates— the percentage of those who are accepted for admission v. the number of students who apply. Now, as one might expect, the “better” academic schools generally have lower acceptance rates. However, when you factor in that some of those accepted should not have been admitted based on merit, the corresponding number of “qualified” students accepted is even lower.

    Yes. The schools are too easy. They should admit every qualified applicant, which means the education needs to get tougher.

    Today’s system, where 70% of the rejected could cut the mustard, is morally unconscionable.

    • #42
  13. Stad Coolidge
    Stad
    @Stad

    Dr. Bastiat: if you got into Harvard, you’re probably extremely smart and hard working.

    Unless your name is David Hogg.

    But seriously, there are some schools that reek of brains – MIT for one.  I went to NC State, a good school in the middle of the pack (no pun intended) when it comes to science and engineering.  The bottom line is that a degree from an elite school may get you into doors that aren’t open for most graduates, but you still have to deliver real-world performance once on the payroll.  For example, two of my closest friends got their law degrees from NC Central and Nova Southeastern.  Another close friend’s daughter got her law degree from NC Central.  All became successful, but without the notoriety of an F. Lee Bailey or Gerry Spence (I guess I’ve dated myself) . . .

    • #43
  14. Full Size Tabby Member
    Full Size Tabby
    @FullSizeTabby

    Dr. Bastiat (View Comment):

    iWe (View Comment):
    What surprises me the most is that the professors have put up with the enormous drop in talent with nary a peep.

    I stopped teaching at medical schools because I got frustrated with the decreasing quality of their students.

    Of course, I’ve got a day job. I was just part time – I practice medicine for a living.

    But I can only imagine how frustrated the full time professors must be. Privately.

    Publicly, it would be very difficult for them to stand up to all this. Imagine a Princeton professor complaining that affirmative action had led to an enormous drop in talent. Oh my goodness…

    A few years ago a law professor brought up the the subject, leading to an extensive effort to get her fired and silenced.  I think she was in Pennsylvania. 

    • #44
  15. Chuck Coolidge
    Chuck
    @Chuckles

    Full Size Tabby (View Comment):

    Dr. Bastiat (View Comment):

    iWe (View Comment):
    What surprises me the most is that the professors have put up with the enormous drop in talent with nary a peep.

    I stopped teaching at medical schools because I got frustrated with the decreasing quality of their students.

    Of course, I’ve got a day job. I was just part time – I practice medicine for a living.

    But I can only imagine how frustrated the full time professors must be. Privately.

    Publicly, it would be very difficult for them to stand up to all this. Imagine a Princeton professor complaining that affirmative action had led to an enormous drop in talent. Oh my goodness…

    A few years ago a law professor brought up the the subject, leading to an extensive effort to get her fired and silenced. I think she was in Pennsylvania.

    Seems to me I read something similar about every year.  So it may be rare, but not unheard of. And I have to wonder how many don’t make the news.  We’ll never know.

    • #45
  16. Dr. Bastiat Member
    Dr. Bastiat
    @drbastiat

    iWe (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    Let’s also mention acceptance rates— the percentage of those who are accepted for admission v. the number of students who apply. Now, as one might expect, the “better” academic schools generally have lower acceptance rates. However, when you factor in that some of those accepted should not have been admitted based on merit, the corresponding number of “qualified” students accepted is even lower.

    Yes. The schools are too easy. They should admit every qualified applicant, which means the education needs to get tougher.

    Today’s system, where 70% of the rejected could cut the mustard, is morally unconscionable.

    But that’s impossible, right?  You can’t send 50,000 kids to Princeton.  There are practical limitations to space etc.

    Plus, if you want to keep demand up, you have to keep supply down.

    • #46
  17. DrewInWisconsin, Oik Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oik
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Internet's Hank (View Comment):

    When the Devonian rocks were aborning they promised inclusion for all
    By fudging the metrics of entry for street kids who play basketball
    Till our colleges taught only grievance, and tutored nothing but fools
    And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said “Wisdom is worth more than jewels.”

    Well Done Clapping GIF by MOODMAN - Find & Share on GIPHY

    • #47
  18. DrewInWisconsin, Oik Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oik
    @DrewInWisconsin

    genferei (View Comment):

    We do not need our elite schools to turn out elite graduates. We do not need people like that. I don’t think “we” need elite schools at all.

    We live in a bureaucracy. The top prizes are awarded by bureaucrats to bureaucrats who show excellence in being bureaucrats. Obviously if you have a measure of being able to navigate and manipulate bureaucratic things then that measure is going to correlate with success in being a bureaucrat. But it is a closed system. The measure wouldn’t relate to being able to increase knowledge, or happiness, or beauty, or wisdom, or piety.

    Now, if there was some other mechanism aligning the bureaucracy with real human needs then the system might work. But, I put it to you, simple observation demonstrates that there is no such mechanism- at least, not one that is allowed to function. So we have more and more of society’s resources being commandeered by the bureaucracy for the glory of bureaucrats (public and private).

    That grand-daughter of four Ivy grandparents with sky high grades would do more for society cleaning pools than joining McKinsey, clerking for a Supreme Court Justice or trading on Wall St.

    I admit my instant reaction to “We need our elite universities” was “No, we don’t.” But I think I understand where Dr. B is coming from.

    We don’t need the elite universities, but we do need really smart people. Smart people who can build things, run things, create things, invent things. And yes, people who are versed in the classics — a classical education. I’m not sure that the Ivies are necessary for producing these really smart people, though.

    • #48
  19. Dr. Bastiat Member
    Dr. Bastiat
    @drbastiat

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    I admit my instant reaction to “We need our elite universities” was “No, we don’t.” But I think I understand where Dr. B is coming from.

    We don’t need the elite universities, but we do need really smart people. Smart people who can build things, run things, create things, invent things. And yes, people who are versed in the classics — a classical education. I’m not sure that the Ivies are necessary for producing these really smart people, though.

    You’re right – it doesn’t have to be the Ivies.  And they appear to be declining the job.  Which is fine.

    But we need elite schools somewhere.  Whatever.

    Where there is a need, the market will usually fill that need.  If the free market is permitted to function.

    But with our government viewing meritocracy as racist and free markets as repressive, this may be difficult.

    • #49
  20. iWe Coolidge
    iWe
    @iWe

    Dr. Bastiat (View Comment):

    Yes. The schools are too easy. They should admit every qualified applicant, which means the education needs to get tougher.

    Today’s system, where 70% of the rejected could cut the mustard, is morally unconscionable.

    But that’s impossible, right?  You can’t send 50,000 kids to Princeton.  There are practical limitations to space etc.

    Not if the school is hard enough that only a few can cut the mustard.

    • #50
  21. Hoyacon Member
    Hoyacon
    @Hoyacon

    Unless things have changed recently, it’s very, very difficult to flunk out of Harvard.  I would assume that this applies to other Ivies as well.  They will expend extra resources paid for by tuition to keep someone there whom they’ve admitted, so long as there is some effort by the student.  Can’t have the graduation rate too low to reflect on admissions policies.

    • #51
  22. iWe Coolidge
    iWe
    @iWe

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    Unless things have changed recently, it’s very, very difficult to flunk out of Harvard. I would assume that this applies to other Ivies as well. They will expend extra resources paid for by tuition to keep someone there whom they’ve admitted, so long as there is some effort by the student. Can’t have the graduation rate too low to reflect on admissions policies.

    Yup. Once in, they will carry you across the line if they have to.

    • #52
  23. Henry Castaigne Member
    Henry Castaigne
    @HenryCastaigne

    Look guys, this is a business with all the corruption that businesses have when they aren’t connected to free-market competition. We shouldn’t buy into the fiction that colleges were ever these holy places filled with philosopher Kings.

    • #53
  24. Vance Richards Inactive
    Vance Richards
    @VanceRichards

    Dr. Bastiat: Because they know how hard it is to get into those schools.  It saves their personnel department time – if you got into Harvard, you’re probably extremely smart and hard-working.  They’re not sure if you learned anything in college, but they’ll teach you what they want you to know on the job.  They recruit brains and teach skills.  No problem.

    Yes, schools are judged by how hard they are to get into, not how hard it is to graduate. Where will you get the best education? Who knows. Most students aren’t even looking for an education but just want the credentials. 

    • #54
  25. Henry Castaigne Member
    Henry Castaigne
    @HenryCastaigne

    Vance Richards (View Comment):

    Dr. Bastiat: Because they know how hard it is to get into those schools. It saves their personnel department time – if you got into Harvard, you’re probably extremely smart and hard-working. They’re not sure if you learned anything in college, but they’ll teach you what they want you to know on the job. They recruit brains and teach skills. No problem.

    Yes, schools are judged by how hard they are to get into, not how hard it is to graduate. Where will you get the best education? Who knows. Most students aren’t even looking for an education but just want the credentials.

    Why should they want an education when credentials serve them better?

    • #55
  26. Chuck Coolidge
    Chuck
    @Chuckles

    Vance Richards (View Comment):

    Dr. Bastiat: Because they know how hard it is to get into those schools. It saves their personnel department time – if you got into Harvard, you’re probably extremely smart and hard-working. They’re not sure if you learned anything in college, but they’ll teach you what they want you to know on the job. They recruit brains and teach skills. No problem.

    Yes, schools are judged by how hard they are to get into, not how hard it is to graduate. Where will you get the best education? Who knows. Most students aren’t even looking for an education but just want the credentials.

    When I was interviewing (mid-’70s) I asked candidates to explain how different circuits functioned based on a drawing:  Which is similar to what, as a candidate myself, I was asked to do in the early ’80s. And which I discussed with some engineering students about the same time.  

    Have things really changed that much?

    • #56
  27. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Chuck (View Comment):

    Vance Richards (View Comment):

    Dr. Bastiat: Because they know how hard it is to get into those schools. It saves their personnel department time – if you got into Harvard, you’re probably extremely smart and hard-working. They’re not sure if you learned anything in college, but they’ll teach you what they want you to know on the job. They recruit brains and teach skills. No problem.

    Yes, schools are judged by how hard they are to get into, not how hard it is to graduate. Where will you get the best education? Who knows. Most students aren’t even looking for an education but just want the credentials.

    When I was interviewing (mid-’70s) I asked candidates to explain how different circuits functioned based on a drawing: Which is similar to what, as a candidate myself, I was asked to do in the early ’80s. And which I discussed with some engineering students about the same time.

    Have things really changed that much?

    Probably not so much in engineering.  Although if you ask a POC/female/etc applicant and they get the wrong answers, you better hire them anyway if you know what’s good for you.

    • #57
  28. Lilly B Coolidge
    Lilly B
    @LillyB

    Full Size Tabby (View Comment):

    Dr. Bastiat (View Comment):

    iWe (View Comment):
    What surprises me the most is that the professors have put up with the enormous drop in talent with nary a peep.

    I stopped teaching at medical schools because I got frustrated with the decreasing quality of their students.

    Of course, I’ve got a day job. I was just part time – I practice medicine for a living.

    But I can only imagine how frustrated the full time professors must be. Privately.

    Publicly, it would be very difficult for them to stand up to all this. Imagine a Princeton professor complaining that affirmative action had led to an enormous drop in talent. Oh my goodness…

    A few years ago a law professor brought up the the subject, leading to an extensive effort to get her fired and silenced. I think she was in Pennsylvania.

    It was Georgetown, in case no one else has yet mentioned it:

    https://www.nbcnews.com/news/education/georgetown-law-professor-under-fire-comments-about-black-students-performance-n1260559

    • #58
  29. Lilly B Coolidge
    Lilly B
    @LillyB

    As we are among friends here, I would like to point out to some in the comments that students at elite universities are very often smart and knowledgeable. And that matters for society. In my own experience, I got to know many students at Duke University when I was a grad student there. I knew  students in the law school, med school, business school and school of the environment, as well as some undergrads. Those various schools definitely attracted students with different interests and backgrounds, but it was obvious to me that my med school friends were intellectually superior. Impressive. They had better vocabularies and were better read than my fellow environmental classmates. Among those, the ones who were accepted to get joint degrees in law and environment were noticeably more capable. My law school friends had studied harder in college and were worse at holding their liquor. People make trade-offs. Sometimes the SAT scores don’t just reflect innate ability, but also time spent reading and studying and practicing the SATs. For athletes and affirmative action students, they are actually making smart decisions about how to spend their time. Why study more when it’s not necessary? If you can get in as an athlete, you have spent more time playing sports and conditioning. You might be smart, but you can’t do everything. 

    • #59
  30. DrewInWisconsin, Oik Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oik
    @DrewInWisconsin

    How can you people bear to be around a guy like me who just went to a state college?

    • #60
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.