You're correct, DEI is a scapegoat. I think the real answer is that it's just a bad value proposition at this point in time and those with high IQ's recognize this. The cost of attending vs. what the degree guarantees have never had a less favorable relationship in history. It just isn't worth it anymore.
Because of the interest groups you mention, I think the only solution is to massively increase spending on universities. I would rather ensure that we have space for every smart person, at the expense of wasting money on dumb people, than shut out both. It looks bad, but this is only because people have difficulty visualizing the opportunity cost of excluding smart people. Where do they go? What do they do? It's hard to see the wealth that ends up not being generated as a result of exclusion.
This assumes that smart people WANT to go to these universities, which I'm not sure if they really do anymore. The value proposition that elite universities offer is admittedly a poor one at current and doesn't seem to be getting much better.
In my experience cost is the most common reason. Students who can get into an elite school are also in the zone of being able to score really good scholarships with state schools. Not just mediocre schools, but upper level state schools with SAT averages above 1300 and sometimes above 1400. The second most common reason is that they weren’t academic tryhards (no offense to the academic tryhards). The average 125 IQ person is gonna get below a 1500 on the SAT but the average 125 IQ school is gonna demand above a 1500 on the SAT. And even if you score well on the SAT, that doesn’t mean your GPA is perfect. You can ace every test and get points deducted from late assignments, missing HW, group projects etc
If I'm a reasonably intelligent person with or without a developmental disability, what would be the most beneficial thing that person can do for him or herself?
It is really a huge loss if a 125+ iq individual attends a less prestigious university? I vaguely remember some journal articles saying that it is was better to be the big fish in a small pond than a regular one in a big one. Basically that it was better to be the one of the best student in a smaller university than a regular one in Harvard.
(I know, they probably cited « stoodies » instead of real science)
We rely heavily upon the major state universities for our scientific and engineering talent - and always have: UC Berkeley, University of Michigan, University of Washington, ... In many cases departments at these schools are higher rated than corresponding departments at most private Universities. The students are as smart and the education and research programs can be as good or better then the private universities. The second tier universities can and do feed their best students to graduate programs in the 1st tier and private universities. I sent my two younger kids to the University of Washington. Smart and disciplined students can do Running Start and enter the university as Juniors, cutting their undergraduate costs in half. They can reduce the costs even more if they can live at home and commute to the university.
It is bad that these universities are able to suck up even that much natural talent. 20% is huge amount of the total national pool, just place within a few places. We need smart people distributed into diverse areas and not pooled tightly together into a monoculture.
Counterintuitively, this could be excellent news for the future of our nation. At least a decent fraction of the cognitive elite are not getting sucked into the graduate school track, getting saddled with enormous debt, and finally failing to reproduce. However, the other implication of this is that scientific research is probably losing some of the best minds to investment banking and other less valuable pursuits. To solve this problem, it would be very advantageous to make science something that could be pursued as a part-time endeavor, and a socially desirable pastime of the intelligent.
I would also predict that some of these high-IQ individuals did not attend any college whatsoever. The IQ distribution of college students no longer differs significantly from that of the general population.
There have been a lot of studies of average IQ by field of study. Some of the STEM fields routinely test with averages in the high one teens to mid 120's, putting students in those fields rougly on par with the students at elite universities.
What is sad about this is that one point in time University was truly a academic institution. It was where bright men had honest intellectual discussions and where you could research openly. But for decades we have been devaluing education by lowering standard. Russell Kirk in 1947 quit his job at the faculty of Columbia University Booksy disagree with them lower in standards. In his words this would slowly turn the university into a "diploma mill" and nearly 80 years on I can say without a doubt that Kirk was absolutely right. As he usually is
Elite university sucks. It destroys your soul, ruins your health, messes up your internal reward systems.
The only redeeming feature is being able to meet other cool, interesting, weird (but often broken) people.
But that gets old quickly and doesn't lead to a great life on its own.
You're correct, DEI is a scapegoat. I think the real answer is that it's just a bad value proposition at this point in time and those with high IQ's recognize this. The cost of attending vs. what the degree guarantees have never had a less favorable relationship in history. It just isn't worth it anymore.
Because of the interest groups you mention, I think the only solution is to massively increase spending on universities. I would rather ensure that we have space for every smart person, at the expense of wasting money on dumb people, than shut out both. It looks bad, but this is only because people have difficulty visualizing the opportunity cost of excluding smart people. Where do they go? What do they do? It's hard to see the wealth that ends up not being generated as a result of exclusion.
This assumes that smart people WANT to go to these universities, which I'm not sure if they really do anymore. The value proposition that elite universities offer is admittedly a poor one at current and doesn't seem to be getting much better.
I am pretty sure they do. Seb actually has a good article on why you should go to Harvard:
https://www.sebjenseb.net/p/send-your-kid-to-harvard
In my experience cost is the most common reason. Students who can get into an elite school are also in the zone of being able to score really good scholarships with state schools. Not just mediocre schools, but upper level state schools with SAT averages above 1300 and sometimes above 1400. The second most common reason is that they weren’t academic tryhards (no offense to the academic tryhards). The average 125 IQ person is gonna get below a 1500 on the SAT but the average 125 IQ school is gonna demand above a 1500 on the SAT. And even if you score well on the SAT, that doesn’t mean your GPA is perfect. You can ace every test and get points deducted from late assignments, missing HW, group projects etc
There is no proof that going to an "elite" university has any benefits besides bragging rights. Especially for undergrad.
Plus, being the best student in a Gaulish village is more fun than being lost in a mass of strivers.
Maybe >125 IQ Americans are too smart to go to an elite university.
>There is no proof that going to an "elite" university has any benefits besides bragging rights. Especially for undergrad.
Not exactly.
https://opportunityinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/CollegeAdmissions_Paper.pdf
If I'm a reasonably intelligent person with or without a developmental disability, what would be the most beneficial thing that person can do for him or herself?
Thanks.
It is really a huge loss if a 125+ iq individual attends a less prestigious university? I vaguely remember some journal articles saying that it is was better to be the big fish in a small pond than a regular one in a big one. Basically that it was better to be the one of the best student in a smaller university than a regular one in Harvard.
(I know, they probably cited « stoodies » instead of real science)
>It is really a huge loss if a 125+ iq individual attends a less prestigious university?
Not a huge loss. But they miss out on network effects + signalling.
https://opportunityinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/CollegeAdmissions_Paper.pdf
Name checks out
We rely heavily upon the major state universities for our scientific and engineering talent - and always have: UC Berkeley, University of Michigan, University of Washington, ... In many cases departments at these schools are higher rated than corresponding departments at most private Universities. The students are as smart and the education and research programs can be as good or better then the private universities. The second tier universities can and do feed their best students to graduate programs in the 1st tier and private universities. I sent my two younger kids to the University of Washington. Smart and disciplined students can do Running Start and enter the university as Juniors, cutting their undergraduate costs in half. They can reduce the costs even more if they can live at home and commute to the university.
University is for complex linguistic abbreviations those on either end of the intellectual spectrum don't need.
It is bad that these universities are able to suck up even that much natural talent. 20% is huge amount of the total national pool, just place within a few places. We need smart people distributed into diverse areas and not pooled tightly together into a monoculture.
“most black/hispanic students who get into elite universities have SAT/ACT scores comparable to white/asian students”
What public data exist that suggests this is true?
Average for whites/asians at Harvard is ~1500
Average for blacks/hispanics is ~1450
Difference of .25 SD, not negligible but still comparable.
Your claim was about 'most black/hispanic students', i.e. the majority, i.e. more than half.
To answer this question, we would need to know the *median* score.
The mean (which is what I assume you mean by 'average') doesn't answer the question.
The only thing so called Elite Universities teach these days is that it’s ok for a man to put his dick in another man’s ass.
Counterintuitively, this could be excellent news for the future of our nation. At least a decent fraction of the cognitive elite are not getting sucked into the graduate school track, getting saddled with enormous debt, and finally failing to reproduce. However, the other implication of this is that scientific research is probably losing some of the best minds to investment banking and other less valuable pursuits. To solve this problem, it would be very advantageous to make science something that could be pursued as a part-time endeavor, and a socially desirable pastime of the intelligent.
I would also predict that some of these high-IQ individuals did not attend any college whatsoever. The IQ distribution of college students no longer differs significantly from that of the general population.
Here is the original paper:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/378173544_Meta-analysis_On_average_undergraduate_students%27_intelligence_is_merely_average
I have a hard time believing that the average IQ in a "Theories of Personality psychology course", even at Harvard, is around 129 IQ.
I would expect this to be more like the average IQ at MIT or Caltech but not at an Ivy.
There have been a lot of studies of average IQ by field of study. Some of the STEM fields routinely test with averages in the high one teens to mid 120's, putting students in those fields rougly on par with the students at elite universities.
What is sad about this is that one point in time University was truly a academic institution. It was where bright men had honest intellectual discussions and where you could research openly. But for decades we have been devaluing education by lowering standard. Russell Kirk in 1947 quit his job at the faculty of Columbia University Booksy disagree with them lower in standards. In his words this would slowly turn the university into a "diploma mill" and nearly 80 years on I can say without a doubt that Kirk was absolutely right. As he usually is
What was your list of 25 elite universities?