I like the idea of the portfolio. I also like Trinity's idea of a checklist of different traits they are looking for beyond academic. It's a tough question and I don't think there is a right or wrong answer.

I think the debate over disadvantaged students getting priority is also interesting. On one hand, students who work hard, from a privileged background, deserve rewards for their efforts. On the other hand, I think people underestimate the compound effects of being born disadvantaged. Things like good schools, tutors, test prep services, extra curricular activities down to healthcare and good nutrition and having parents who care and prioritize education. It all adds up and it starts from infancy. Those kids didn't choose their circumstances and I also believe they should have a shot even if their credentials aren't as impressive.

Very few HS graduates (as a percentage and as absolute numbers) wind up attending a college or university that is very highly selective. Especially in our mutually shared state, recent immigrants, especially those from Asia, expect admission decisions to be more formulaic and quantitative, as it more typically is abroad.

Especially at the very selective schools, admission decisions are subjective, will always be subjective, and those expecting cookie-cutter, me-too apps to be successful will be often be disappointed. It's a difficult task all the same and I think the Admissions people at these colleges more or less get it right. Especially those schools who are applying their endowments to offer and fulfill needs-blind admissions with heavy financial support for those who need it. For the less selective colleges, and even for the very selective public ones like UC who struggle with how to get diversity without running afoul of all the court-imposed limitations, it ultimately doesn't matter that much.

High school counselors seem to get students to apply to many more schools these days than used to be the common practice. There are so many really outstanding colleges and universities in the US that well prepared, motivated, and hard working students can be successful almost anywhere they go. Remember that a high percentage of students from lower-socioeconomic families, except for the really outstanding ones, are never told that many of the select private colleges offer heavy financial aid and so many wind up going to whatever state school is closest to home.

Chi, I like the way the colleges are expanding the inputs they are considering when looking at an applicant. I wonder what the admissions officers think of such changes. As it is I know they work close to 24/7 from January through March reading the applications.

I am not sure I want preferential treatment for disadvantaged students as much as I want their applications read in context. I don't think admission to a university, elite or regular should only be a reward for previous achievements. There is a case to be made for admission reflecting potential to succeed at the university as well. So if a disadvantaged student's application is read with an eye toward future success as demonstrated within that student's context, that would satisfy my desire for fairness.

Elmer, With respect to Asian students, I don't think there is any question that they are at a disadvantage over Caucasian students. You can see this even at the private high school level where Asian children are clearly under-represented as a percentage of their population.

Students applying to a ridiculous number of schools have made a bad situation worse for the admissions process. It's a shame that this practice has not been curtailed.

Rita, I agree with most of what you said. I'm not sure what the right word is to use, I'll try "ironic". It's ironic that elite private colleges that for so long were the bastions of wealthy and privileged people, often overtly discriminatorily WASPish for those in the East and elsewhere, today lead the way in managing their student diversity in both racial and socio-economic measures. At the same time, public institutions like the great University of California system has student profiles that fail to come even close to matching the racial composition of the California population. They're struggling with how to do a better job but in doing so, are not serving the population that built and funds their very existence.

I agree that less quantitative and more holistic assessments of students is the way to go. Ultimately, it's subjective no matter what. It does make a difference for schools that are highly selective and hard to get into, like the elite private schools and the top public ones like U of Michigan and the UC system's favored campuses (UCLA and UC Berkeley). The vast majority of students wind up at schools that are not selective in their admission practices and whatever app screening philosophies are used, if any, don't much matter.

Yes, the NYTimes and other media focus on the really very small number of students who will be attending a highly selective university. The numbers look overwhelming until one realizes that it's the same 30,000 students apply to ALL of them! I'm not a fan of the Common App - I think it overwhelms admissions offices with applications from students who don't even know enough about the school to know whether or not they would want to matriculate. Applying to 5-6 schools is plenty. If one is focused on what one really wants, apply either ED or EA, whichever the school offers.

I have a longtime friend who many years ago said, "When the colleges started caring more about SAT's instead of ones pedigree, my girls were in big trouble!" Very true. It's been at least two generations since being a legacy was a shoe-in. Now, it only slightly improves ones chances, even though urban legends would have one think otherwise.

As the grandparent of a HS senior who is aiming high, I'm very familiar with all this. Adding videos/portfolios will only provide yet another group of "experts" with a terrific source of income as parents will quickly hire someone to produce such for their little snowflake. I'm very proud that my DGS has never had a tutor, never taken an expensive PSAT/SAT prep course (he took a free one online and worked his tail off with practice tests etc), nor did his parents hire an outside college advisor to find colleges for him and help with his essay. THEY did this, as parents should! Their role in the essay was to proof it and to make suggestions to do a better job of "tightening its up" - up to DGS to figure out how to do this. He always is attending a public magnet school.

We're all anxiously awaiting mid-Dec!

I am one of a team teaching a record number of freshmen. From what I gather, at my university, the admissions office was looking at high school GPAs more than the test scores. Several of my students have been struggling because high school honors or advanced placement is not necessarily a precursor to college-level work.

adella, may I sign my name to your entire post? Well stated (and ditto! down to the I have a senior who scored well without tutoring and him being happy, not just with scholastic endeavors)

My husband and I both attended top 10 schools and we both feel we could have achieved a similar (if not better, in my case) education in a variety of different schools. We definitely won't be pushing our kids for the Ivy's unless they really want to.

I never had help when I applied to college in 2000. My mom wouldn't help me with anything or even look at the applications. I remember being totally clueless and filling out the FAFSA the best I could even though I didn't know what it all meant.

Anglo, I get the feeling the selective schools are absolutely thirsting for students who are indeed excellent and demonstrate a high degree of authenticity. There needs to be some corrective for all the hot housing we have seen for the last decade or so. I am sure your grandson will be very pleased with his results this December. It's so nice to have those applications out and off the to-do list.

Scott, the mind boggles at what you write. Honors and advanced students who flounder in frosh rhetoric- how can that be? I can't imagine how you catch students up at that point.

Adellabedella, you identify the most crucial issue for disadvantaged students, having the support and guidance they need. The more prestigious schools provide a great deal of excellent support for first generation students. It is quite impressive. Ironic, as Elmer said, that these were the most WASPY, exclusive schools, and they are now the ones who do the best job of bringing in disadvantaged students and getting them to graduate.

I loved the way that engineering school in the article brought students in to be evaluated. Oxford and Cambridge also have an interview process and major specific testing that brings to light the applicant's actual abilities and does not rely only on past performance and standardized test scores. I think this approach makes a great deal of sense.

Chi, your position makes a lot of sense. I agree, school pedigree is not nearly as important as a student's abilities and drive. A top school confers some advantages, especially to people who come from low social capital families though. There is always a question of how much money and debt such a school is worth to a middle class student who does not qualify for much financial aid.

Rita, I do think there are some advantages to the very top tier schools. Certain fields, like banking or tech, have firms recruit heavily from graduating classes of top schools. Networking is also a benefit. In my personal circumstances, I found that my school did not really help my career in any way.

As Elmer touched on earlier, a lot of these schools will pay full tuition for middle class students. Stanford students with annual family incomes of less than $125,000 will have free tuition, while families making less than $65,000 will have free tuition and free room and board. It doesn't seem as if many people know about these policies. They just assume they can't afford those schools.

The cachet attached to a degree from a highly selective (or elite, use what word you prefer) university is not to be underestimated for grad and professional school applications and job searches. No one knows better than other educators and professional college recruiters at companies that there are capable students from all undergraduate programs. But, for when looking for those with the ability to go to the next level in demanding and difficult programs, nothing speaks to the potential for success more than having attained prior success at schools where the peer group was a notch above and the competition intense.

Chi, in the SF Bay area, and other HCOL areas, $125k per year is not exactly a middle class income for a family. You could not afford to own a ouse on that income and rent costs easily 3k per month. After taxes, transportation, medical, food and clothing, what is left for a middle class life? How much money can you save on that income? How could you afford to live in a good enough school district so that your child could possibly go to Stanford.

Stanford extends scholarships to 58 percent of its freshmen, with the average award being around 49k in scholarships and grants. Current tuition/room&board at Stanford is around 65k.

Rita, you developing a Cockney accent already - can't own a ouse? Or Canadian, oose?

(Just teasing you)

I'm sure they calculated an average to determine the thresholds for the scholarships. $125k in many parts of the country would be very comfortable. It's never going to be entirely fair because, as you said, a high income in a high cost of living area can be misleading in terms of the funds available for college. It may be possible that they take cost of living into account when determining financial aid packages - I really don't know. When I went to college, our household income was less than half of that, and they were very generous with me. It wasn't free, though - that was a trend I missed out on. :)

Elmer, insert big, laughing with tears pouring down emoji, here.

I very much like the Oxbridge method of admissions. But even it is being challenged as being too "elitist",

At DGS's HS, there are about 150 Valedictorians each year - so many very high performing students that it's impossible to select just one.

Yes, many children have been working toward admission to an elite school since elementary school. DGS realized in 3rd grade, he was one of the smartest in his class and chose the other 3 boys as friends (not much mingling of the sexes at that age). He worked very hard to get into a highly competitive MST magnet middle school, and when there to get into the even more competitive MST magnet in the best HS in the state. There, he's worked very hard in hopes of going to an elite university. This is all HIM pushing himself, not his parents! That's exactly what the top students do - it all comes from within. And he loves a challenge!

There is something enormously gratifying in watching a child become who he or she was intended to be. You clearly have such a lovely relationship with your grandsons- what a tremendous gift for them and you.

Well I feel very passionately anti all the process-probably because of being not from here, not receiving my high education here, not spending here my childhood, youth, etc..I'm used to other things, I was taught certain things, some, are cultural- to me, and many people of the same origin(and I mean now not even ethnicity but a very big, diverse country) an essay or a statement about yourself where you clearly try to write something that will picture you in an honorable light, as honestly as you might do that -is something that completely contradicts all my upbringing:) So my struggle is with the concept itself. The more it will be asking "how you helped people"-the more anti I'll become. To me it will inevitably feel like bragging. Logical, or not-that's how it will feel to me.

(and yes..work interviews, didn't like these too. LOL. But they at least were real, mostly very personal, sometimes there were steps of interviews-and had a point.)

Can understand interviews for a medical school for example..wherever it makes sense. When it's really getting to know someone much better)

I understand my kids live here now and we went through that once and go through that right now, and I experience all sort of emotions about admissions process-but I can't name one positive one.

I'm sceptical of how an university really wants to "know student better" as it claims. With 20 000 applications..

If they want to see whether a person can write a decent essay-isn't an essay part of SATs? or they could make an essay part of a process. As an exam, a subject test. Doesn't have to be about a student. Let them discuss a topic, or analyze literature. That's what we had btw. And wasn't easier too.

I don't see why it so important to predict so many things about a student that frankly are very hard to predict-aside grades, to some degree. Accept a student-and you won't have to predict. You'll see for yourself. And decide. Or don't accept-but don't make it about some holistic approach that doesn't impress me as authentic one bit. Sorry. I feel it's a whole industry already(which is good I guess in some sense..many jobs created around that, etc..families fed..), and it's a lot of emptiness beyond that facade of sincere interest of "we want to know you better"

No, I'm not that worried about my own kids(time invested in the process that I consider mostly useless and question of money aside of course..lol)..I put huge emphasis on education as my parents did too and their grandparents and so on and so forth...and the schools they went/go to here while in US are truly great..private schools too..because it was crucially important to me for them not only to get good education but to know their language, traditions, etc. And we spent tons of money on that too since scholarships got smaller and smaller until we were left with none.. ))

And as Rita says-where we live, with all our nice financial circumstances, we fall in that unfortunate middle. So question of costs will drive it too, very much so. I do feel, with many great schools, why to try at all? Okay, they're private and will get impressed(lets say) and cover (one can dream) even half of tuition. But another half is what?

And yes, universities try to accept geographically diverse(c) students..I highly suspect since out of state students pay more..

Signature: a grumpy cynical foreigner April:)

and btw..about disadvantaged students..you know how I was able to afford university at all?

Because State of Israel where I came when I was eighteen covered first three years of college education absolutely free for absolutely everybody new who arrived and wanted to study and got accepted-on basis of his grades-and kept decent grades throuhout these first three years

and wasn't very fair toward many kids who grew up there-but it was the smartest investment a country could make in its future.

because nobody of us had any money, none at all. And we all worked -who more, who less-during studies too, since one must eat as well.

But with that move, they got hundreds of thousands of young people who found themselves a way, a skill, a profession -and could feel part of, and become useful. Instead of hundreds of thousands of young people with no clear purpose, and not much prospects in life. That usually doesn't turn out that great

Education and medicine should be made available first of all.

Then it's also less need to ask embarrassing questions "whom you helped and whether you had to take care of your family"-yes some do, and it's no heroism since no choice. and to ask this question is like to take this person's dignity..because you don't just ask in this situation..there is certain idleness in that very private question. Same about medical conditions and such. It doesn't help. It embarrasses.

It helps in real authentic conversations. Not when put in between thousands files.

My children go to school with lots and lots of foreigners and their perspective on the US college admissions situation is always insightful. It's much easier to see clearly from a healthy distance, isn't it?

The humble brag that is required in all private school admissions packages, from middle school forward is astounding. Tell us about and honors or prizes you have won, they asked my fifth grader on his middle school application. Really?

And of course you are not worried about your own children, April. They learned to study hard and care deeply about their work. They will succeed no matter what. Keeping your children tethered to their language and culture is essential as well- deep roots like those bear beautiful fruit.

And sadly, no, financial aid formulas do not include a cost of living adjustment. You look very well off on paper and very often the sacrifices you as a foreigner make do not match up with the sacrifices Americans expect.

So decent savings and low debt is a very poor look for the FAFSA.

Then it's also less need to ask embarrassing questions "whom you helped and whether you had to take care of your family"-yes some do, and it's no heroism since no choice. and to ask this question is like to take this person's dignity..because you don't just ask in this situation..there is certain idleness in that very private question. Same about medical conditions and such. It doesn't help. It embarrasses.

There is a big difference between depth and marketing. The application asks for the marketing, not the depth. You, april, are all about depth. I am so grateful you choose to share your thinking and experiences with is here.

To be clear, I am not saying the successful applicants are shallow and lack depth. The trouble is designing an application to screen out tens of thousands of students is no simple task. Questions that appear to solicit the softer, less tangible qualities in the applicant, can be patronizing and elicit questionable answers- the answers the student thinks the admissions officers want to hear. (Honestly, how self aware can an 18 year old be? And when the interlocutor is as powerful as a member of the college admissions committee, the answer is going to be drafted with thought to pleasing him more than honest reflection.)

I'm grateful you don't kick me out of here..:) with my long speeches..

and yes, you're exactly right..either questionable answers-or if a person is too proud he'll be reluctant to answer at all

ah, remember one positive emotion-"leadership" makes me laugh..how many leaders one can possibly want?

thank you for opening this topic..tomorrow I'll be horrified seeing my level of participation..but yes, that is an important one.

I have read barely any of the responses. But what I want to say is that it doesn't really matter what institute of higher learning one attends, it matters what one does when they are there. All of my siblings and myself attended state schools, mostly in Illinois but also Utah. All of us have been highly successful. I'm not knocking the Ivy league schools, but the overwhelming majority of kids either can't get in, or if they could, would have insurmountable student debt. If money is the issue, go to a community college and get general stuff out of the way, then transfer to a state school. One does not need to spend 250,000.00 plus in order to get a good undergraduate degree.

aprilneverends, if I follow correctly, you've had two major moves, at 18 to Israel from elsewhere (the Soviet Union or a Muslim country, or something else completely different) and then from there to the US sometime later? I hope these moves weren't too traumatic and I hope they've left you with many interesting memories and experiences.

I don't know that much about it but I've read over the years that Israel was founded and exists today with political underpinnings of social welfare and addressing the greater good for its citizens that differ significantly from attitudes and practices in the US. That alone may account for different attitudes and education systems. There's a lot that can be improved in what we do but our practices would seem to be very different from theirs by design.

Most countries have elite universities with selective admission practices - the UK has Oxford and Cambridge, France has its Grandes écoles, Japan the University of Tokyo, etc. There as here, students who attended a highly selective school are viewed as having achieved higher academic attainment in a most demanding and competitive environment. As with anything else, there are exceptions. Oftentimes important academic, governmental, political and business leaders in these countries are graduates of their top tier universities. Not always.

Oh my own daughter went to community college first, then transferred. No, it wasn't amazing! awesome! wonderful! student experience-but it sure was a very useful one.

(what's with "student experience" btw? I was happy as hell to find myself in a real university. I chose it by mere chance-they were the only university to offer winter preparatory program, meaning I could start studying six or so month earlier. Why I was so eager and six months seemed such a big deal-well I don't know)) Time is interpreted differently when one is eighteen.

Well it was Hebrew University of Jerusalem, and the first day I saw the city that was it. It happened not right away but later , on not so pretty corner of Jaffa street-the part that's close to the market. The day was cold and kinda gray..and nothing really distinguished it. And then it was like a prism was turned..suddenly all the elements on this corner -the hilly street, the old stand with ads, a bit of half melted snow next to a stone building-almost all buildings in Jerusalem are built of Jerusalem limestone, to preserve the city's character-they somehow were brought together, and I recognized them, and it was like getting pieces of shuttered magic mirror in my eyes and my heart, and I can't get it out ever since. That city is merciless..)

Having said that..and may other off topic things lol..I understood the thread as being dedicated to the process of admissions itself..is it good, whether has to be tweaked, and how.

Also. There is a certain amount of snobbery. Oh it won't be widely proclaimed. But it exists. That's probably a bit universal though. I remember how in then-still-existing Soviet Union we were constantly told how all the jobs are important and respectful and how everybody's equal-but the moment somebody in class didn't put enough effort it was really usual to hear from a teacher "Who are you going to be, a janitor?" or "where you're going to end up, a trade school?"

So, like, decide, lol. Because the message given here is a really contradictory one

Granted, our school was more snobbish than probably any other school in the city. (which molded me into somebdy who hates a) snobbery b) show-off. They were kings of showing-off. But. The interior design was great)))

But I don't think this hypocritical approach was unique to our school. Or unique at all.

Sleeper blues, I absolutely agree with you about top tier schools not being essential for success. Personal qualities and drive matter much more than brand name schools overall.

Elmer, yes, Soviet Union to Israel, then Israel to USA, then USA back to Israel, then back to USA..changed coasts as well, at some point.

And yes I for sure have many interesting experiences and memories..:) wasn't always easy..never boring though.

Of course I recognize practices are wildly different in different countries. In Soviet Union the process was different altogether from Israel too. The school itself was different-no division-unless you move or change schools, you stay put for 10(now 11) years in the same school. Totally different approach. Some elements of it, I loved there more. Some..no question, so much better here, I envy my own kids a lot.

"But what I want to say is that it doesn't really matter what institute of higher learning one attends"

sleeperblues, I disagree with this comment. It does depend on what direction the student goes after graduation. If a job is desired with a highly selective employer, or entrance to a highly selective and competitive grad or professional school, it matters a lot.

I spent a career working for a company that hires thousands of business and finance grads every year. We were a highly selective employer, in a sense not different from highly selective universities. We focused our recruiting at schools with the top-ranked business and finance departments because our historical experience (analyzed thoroughly and updated annually) was that grads of the best schools had the most success with us, for themselves and therefore as contributors to our organization. In California, community college transferees can enter the UC system after two years and get a highly prized degree. In our experience, students from the UC that weren't able to gain admission as high school grads were less capable than those with 4 years in the system. Not all, but many.

My own kids have academic ability, worked hard, were lucky enough to go to highly selective universities, When it came time to apply to difficult and highly selective grad school/professional schools, they joyfully experienced a high level of success. Take it for what it's worth. Many of the top private schools with small undergraduate programs punch well above their weight compared to much larger public schools. The number of students admitted to medical schools (and the success rate of applicants) are but one example of that.

Success has many definitions. Not every path is linear and involves brand name schools and brand name employers. The absence of brand name school does not doom one to a second class life in this country, thankfully.

I think the surest path to any measure of success is having students who are hard working, intellectually curious and willing to persevere in the face of adversity and rejection.

While I am sure a top ranked Harvard or Dartmouth undergrad will have his pick of graduate school programs, it does not follow that a top graduate from a state school will not. The essential quality I think is being a top student. So tops at Trump U. will not do, but tops at the University of Nevada will yield a place at a perfectly good medical school.

The University of California at Riverside has a most impressive record for placing first generation college students into medical and dental school, for example. It is a specialty of theirs.

I have no doubt that a student at a lesser tier school who is determined to succeed in any field will be able to accomplish that goal. It may take more work to seek out mentors (at elite institutions mentors are served up on silver platters,) it may take more persistence to knock on more doors in search of internships and out of classroom learning experiences, and it may take more effort to get the employers who are used to recruiting on a limited number of campuses to pay attention to them, but it can be done- and it is routinely done by many people who for one reason or another did not go to one of the vaunted dream schools.

In my field, a graduate from a lesser law school may not be recruited by one of the prestigious white shoe firms while in law school, but she can most certainly get a meaningful clerkship with the help of her professors and set herself on the road to one of those highly desirable firms. I have seen this done. A graduate from a third tier school became a partner at Cravath in record time through her hard work and determination. She is not unique- an outlier, no doubt, but so is everyone else who achieves a certain level of traditional success. (This friend went on to work in venture capital in NYC, so her non-linear path has kept on producing results for her.)

And of course this discussion is focused on very traditional professions and career trajectories. I have no doubt that there are many other ways to achieve success- I am just very bourgeois in my outlook.

April, I just saw your last post before writing.

I am very happy to see the thread evolve. I think part of the madness of the admissions process is that people do not think hard enough about what they want from their education/for their children's education.

"The University of California at Riverside has a most impressive record for placing first generation college students into medical and dental school,"

Hmm, Rita, not so much. It's a large school (20K undergrads) and Hispanics are the largest constituent group. The absolute numbers of its med school applicants (66 of those identifying as Mexican or Hispanic for the last reported year) is wonderful but not a game changer. Fewer than half of medical school applicants overall get acceptances, so maybe even with affirmative action that means a few dozen made it? Take a look at the stats at the link shown below.

I got to know this AAMC site because it was the direction one of my kids went in. There's other interesting info there too, like, how many applications each med school gets for how many seats and more.

Undergrad schools of US medical school applicants

Elmer, I guess you should ask Mark Cuban what he thinks of this discussion. Needless to say, I don't agree with you.

Sleeper, I'm describing what I've seen and experienced myself many numerous times over, not an opinion. I think you're looking at the question backward. Are you suggesting that every graduate of a Big Ten school should be assessed with reference to what Mark Cuban did? (he was very lucky with the company he sold to make his fortune, to be sure)

Look at it the other way around - is completion of a rigorous, difficult to get into and difficult to be successful in program (of any kind) an accomplishment that one's next step in life will be influenced by, because of how it's regarded by third parties. Of course it will. Or conversely, will academic achievement and attendance at Lower Podunk Valley State A&M be viewed as an impressive credential for a job or grad school interview, relative to schools other applicants attended? Of course not.

In your professional field or geographic area, maybe you're saying a kid's academic record doesn't matter. In many different contexts and in many different places, it makes a great deal of difference.

I have an earlier post that's not visible, a response to something Rita said. I'll repost it here and delete it if it becomes a duplicate

Starts now:

"The University of California at Riverside has a most impressive record for placing first generation college students into medical and dental school,"

Hmm, Rita, not so much. It's a large school (20K undergrads) and Hispanics are the largest constituent group. The absolute numbers of its med school applicants (66 of those identifying as Mexican or Hispanic for the last reported year) is wonderful but not a game changer. Fewer than half of medical school applicants overall get acceptances, so maybe even with affirmative action that means a few dozen made it? Take a look at the stats at the link shown below.

I got to know this AAMC site because it was the direction one of my kids went in. There's other interesting info there too, like, how many applications each med school gets for how many seats and more.

Undergrad schools of US medical school applicants

Many of the very top students in my DGS's HS have parents (usually both) who are doctors in academic medicine. Many of their children do NOT choose to go to elite universities. Instead, due to their very high ACT scores (think it must be a 35-36), they get a full ride to the local university, which is part of the state university system. They also get a monthly stipend. AND there's more! No, not a free set of knives, but guaranteed admission to the medical school and a full ride for it.

So, they graduate from med school with zero debt. Since these are very, very bright students, they are always in the very top of their class and they get matched with the very best residency programs. In academic medicine, what matters is where one does ones residency - this is where the prestige comes into play.

It's really a very wise choice for them and their family - no wiping out parent's savings, and no debt.

But for most, where one got ones undergraduate degree can make an enormous difference. First of all, if one is at an elite university, one is surrounded by other very bright, hard working engaged students. They are constantly challenged and intellectually stimulated. When bright students are with other bright students, things magnify tremendously. And when highly desirable employers are wading through thousands of applications, a very easy way to bring them down to a manageable number is to see where the applicant graduated. It it's an elite school, this becomes a huge advantage.

Just as an applicant to an elite university had to have that "something different' that made them stand out, so too, does the applicant for a job with a prestigious company. And that's where the money is. PLUS, having worked there puts a lot of prestige on ones resume. If one can say they worked for Goldman Sachs, it WILL open doors. Same if they worked for Google, Amazon, Apple, Microsoft - the list goes on....

In the US and in much of the world today, like it or not, it's all about the "brand". Fair? Probably not, but then we DID learn in kindergarten, didn't we, that "life is not fair".

Can someone have a highly satisfying life, buy a house, have a family and have gone to one of their in-state colleges or universities? Of course they can! But many of these students are aiming far higher than that. And isn't it wonderful that here in the US, if we work hard enough, we have that choice. One size does not fit all.

Did you go to a top school, Anglo? I'm curious how you've formed your opinions about what it's like. I didn't have the experience that you are talking about at all, and neither did any of my friends.

What you're saying is exactly what we believed going in, but we all commented that the reality after graduation was very different.

Upon further reflection, I also went to an extremely difficult school. I have heard many times that the academics in some of the other top schools are less difficult. Maybe I would have had a different experience in one of those.

Elmer & Anglo, nobody is denying that attending an elite university confers many marvelous advantages. What I was saying was that there are other ways of achieving traditional success as well. Just like it takes tremendous persistence and sacrifice to get admitted to one of these hallowed schools, with he same drive and stick-to-it-ness, a student who did not attend an Ivy+ can arrive at the same destination.

Anglo, of your list of Google, Amazon, Microsoft and Apple, Anglo, for undergrad:

Tim Cook went to Auburn University,

Sundar Pichai to IIT Kharagpur (no. 3 in India for engineering),

Satya Nadella went to Maniple Institute of Technology (not in top 10 for engineering in India),

Jeff Bezos went to Princeton.

I'll be back later ... I am being rudely interrupted by pesky offspring ;-)

ETA Pesky offspring- very far from peak- my spellcheck and autosuggest drive me batty.

"nobody is denying that attending an elite university confers many marvelous advantages"

Right, that's what I was saying. You're better with words than I am and as a result can say the right thing with much more economy.

I liked "peak," Rita! Made me wonder what kind of judging system you had in place for your kids!

Is life all about the money? How is "success" measured?

Useless questions as I know what the answers will be. I'm very unsuccessful, I guess, having limited my work experience to the elderly population. I didn't like holding hands with them when they passed away, but I loved what I learned from them, and about myself.

FTR, I hated every minute of my university life.

Was my life successful? Not by the standards of many of you, I think.

Penny, you sure know how to ask the hard questions. Of course the measure of success is entirely personal.

For me, success is living up to your potential and achieving your goals, contributing to the betterment of society through your everyday actions as well as your extraordinary actions, and living in harmony with your spiritual center.

I think my definition is broad enough to include everyone. Nobody is excluded from my definition. People could choose not to live up to their potential and not to contribute to society. I would call those people unsuccessful.

Would I call a person who held the hand of elderly people as they lay dying successful? Most certainly I would. That person would have stretched herself enormously and contributed tremendously. Was that avocation financially rewarding? Most probably not much money in easing the end of old people's lives.

The day after tomorrow will mark the second anniversary of my mother's untimely death. I can assure you the nurse and chaplain who supported her and me in that terrible time of need will never be forgotten. Their kindnesses will never be forgotten.

For my children, I seek the same things. I have a pretty good sense of what they are capable of and I am happiest when they are pushing themselves and growing both academically and personally.

There is no financial dimension to my definition of success. My definition encompasses the stay at home mother and Supreme Court justice, the struggling artist and the founder of the next great start-up.

Have I encouraged my sons to pursue career paths that are not financially rewarding? No. I am too practical a person for that. I see no romance in struggling to pay the rent. Life presents us with enough challenges without needing to make procuring your daily bread one as well.

Thank you Rita, both for taking the time to answer my (to me) off topic question, and for your very kind words...they mean a lot to me :) And I'm truly sorry about your mom....My parents are getting on in years and I am trying to mentally prepare with the full knowledge that doing so is impossible.

Now stop making me tear up! I have to get back to the truly important stuff in life, like telling people what shade of gray to paint their rooms ;)

Maybe it's what makes millennials roll but my kids' college friends seem to be much more altruistic in their career directions than I think my college friends were (I'm a boomer). Just off the top of my head one, an Ivy graduate also with a law degree from an Ivy law school works as an attorney for a large city's police department. A cross-over from working at a previous job as a prosecutor in the DA's office, a position to help the police conduct their investigations and put together criminal cases more effectively under the law for trial success. Another Ivy grad works as a principal in an inner city school. Another top school grad works for an NGO trying to improve water quality and disease prevention in sub-Saharan Africa. These aren't jobs leading to big bucks. My own kids will do just fine in their careers but will not earn top dollars for the segments they're in because of their concern for being of service to others. I never spent a moment trying to influence their career directions other than to insist they have goals. With the credentials to open doors, it remains the individuals' choices which doors to have an interest in opening.

Rita I truly admire how you write..and what you write..I was thinking hard about penny's question and knew that it'd be long messy post with a very strange ending that I wouldn't know myself until I'm there

but at least it gives some assurance, penny, that no, not only you don't know the answers..I don't know my own answers myself for example:)

(of course I loved university. I had very turbulent youth though. So I had some wonderful things going on-and some s-tty aspects lets call them so. Interestingly whatever happened-I continued to study..and continued to study..well 6 years was my limit though (and of course the best were actually studies after bachelor's degree..even though hard logistically already, the level was just so much deeper. Very challenging, in every way possible.

Then I wanted to continue to study again-several times-and weighed some additional directions too...but something always happened. It's like you're swimming down a river..whenever you choose to swim to the left-you miss on right turn. Or it's chosen for you, and then you just swim further. It's kinda hard to cover the whole river..

so..now, it's the same in terms of quantative distribution:) just totally other aspects of life are wonderful. and totally others yet are s-tty.

I guess I'm happier now. Strangely so. Even though I do remember all happy things of then.

Success? I think we all hold kind of scales..of things most important to us. And maybe even vocabularies differ. Success is not exactly my word (even though Rita's definition is simply too good so i might reconsider), so it's not exactly part of my scale either. Some, their scale is "strength vs weakness". Some, "freedom vs dependency". Mine? I thought I know it. I thought it's more like "being close vs being far"...

Great. Still wrote the post. Started with how I shouldn't write it. Another great job lol.

My late husband went to a Ivy - I went to a Top 100 university. DD went to an Ivy, DS went to a Top 50. My husband was an independent school, secondary math teacher so clearly I don't equate success with wealth! We had none! But that Ivy degree got him many interview another school might not have,

I'm well aware that many of the top execs from Fortune 500 companies went to more modest schools. Unfortunately, the HR depts often choose to ignore that fact.

I'm a firm believer that the cream does rise to the top, and that a graduate of a pretty humble college or university may well achieve greatness. I also have seen what a student gains with being surrounded by other really bright students. And then there us networking...lots of good things happen that way.

College is not for everyone and it's very costly today. I hate seeing parents spending close to $70,000 or a young person taking on hundreds of thousands dollars in debt, for a mediocre education. My cousin's daughter did this. At 52, she went back to college and racked up $65,000 in debt at a state university better known for its football team than its academics. She has ended up with a poorly paid job teach ESL to the children of chicken pluckers at Tysons. They have no interest at all in an education so it's a very tedious job. And she'll soon be 64 and still owes a fortune in student loans. Total waste of money.