You’ve probably heard the phrase “Baptists and bootleggers“, referring to the odd coalition that favored the prohibition of alcohol.
That phrase came to mind when I saw the following graph:
There’s a recent trend away from emphasizing academic factors when determining who gets admitted to college. So who would benefit from less emphasis on grades and test scores? The graph shown above suggests two different groups: Those from low-income families (who tend to have slightly lower academic ratings) and the top 1% of the income distribution (who tend to get extremely high ratings on intangible factors.) Thus left wing social justice warriors and trust fund kids have a certain commonality of interests—de-emphasizing academic ratings.
I see a lot of academic studies, but rarely do I see a graph that is so “expressive”. In the TV show “Succession“, a spoiled rich young man makes fun of the sort of people who have to stay at a Marriott (which most people view as a pretty good hotel). This graph suggests that there really is something different about the entitled rich. I’m not surprised that they “earned” (bought?) higher ratings, although the extent of the increase did surprise me. But what most surprises me is that the intangible ratings seem pretty flat all the way up from 10% to 90% of the income distribution.
There’s a lot of recent debate about “white privilege”, and I would never deny that being white has advantages in certain situations. But this graph suggests that any advantage from being white is probably dwarfed by the advantage of being rich.
PS. I’m not saying the ratings are necessarily inaccurate; the rich have greater ability to achieve success in certain non-academic areas. Rather the problem (if there is one) would be if the college admission officer interpreted the ratings as measuring some sort of intrinsic characteristic of the applicant.
READER COMMENTS
Dylan
Jul 25 2023 at 3:51pm
Interesting graph. I’m curious what “Academic ratings” is exactly? Is that just grades, or something else? College grades?If it is grades, I’m honestly surprised that they are so tightly correlated with test scores with teacher ratings being so skewed at the upper end. With the exception of large seminar type classes, I would have guessed that grades would have been more correlated with teacher ratings than they would have been with test scores.
Scott Sumner
Jul 26 2023 at 1:35am
Grades and SAT scores?
Dylan
Jul 26 2023 at 9:43am
Well, they said for students with the same test scores, which I will assume are SAT or maybe SAT and ACT. So, the academic rating I think has to just be grades, but still there’s a lot of room for how they construct that measure. Is it GPA at graduation, after first year completed, something else? I don’t subscribe to NYT, so I don’t know what paper they are referencing to get the chart.
Scott Sumner
Jul 26 2023 at 10:45am
Thanks, I missed that point.
Dylan
Jul 27 2023 at 9:50am
I just noticed something else weird about the graph, it looks like all of the variables are measured on the same graph? So, roughly only 30% of students are rated highly by guidance counselors (at least below the 95th percentile), but something like 60% of students get high academic ratings? That makes no sense anywhere outside of Lake Wobegon.
derek
Aug 2 2023 at 3:33pm
@Dylan, I think it could make sense if we are dealing with a subset of relatively selective colleges.
MarkW
Jul 25 2023 at 6:18pm
It seems pretty obvious what is going to happen in the wake of Students for Fair Admission v Harvard. The highly-selective schools have been preparing for the decision by dropping standardized tests as admission criteria. This is partly so they can continue to admit based on race — but only partly. It will also allow them to form their freshman classes exactly they way they’ve always wanted — a combination of fuzzy measures of wealth and privilege and fuzzy measures of minority status. They will admit no more than a minimum of earnest, flyover state, middle-class (Asian?), public-high school strivers. And they will finally no longer be in the business of proving to US News that they are elite by the crass measure of publishing median SAT scores.
Monte
Jul 25 2023 at 9:47pm
But this graph suggests that any advantage from being white is probably dwarfed by the advantage of being rich.
Which left-wing SJWs will claim is still an advantage of being white, given that within the top 1% of households, less than 1% identify as Black.
Scott Sumner
Jul 26 2023 at 1:36am
Sure, but what about the other 99% of whites?
Monte
Jul 26 2023 at 11:50am
As a 99%’er, I think that’s a valid question. But forced to look at my reflection in the shattered mirror of DiAngelo’s book, White Fragility, I’m deemed privileged, “inculcated from birth by the white supremacy on which America was founded.”
Scott Sumner
Jul 26 2023 at 4:05pm
To be clear, I did not contest the claim that white privilege exists, I suggested that the data points to “wealthy privilege” being far more powerful.
Monte
Jul 26 2023 at 5:22pm
I agree. I just felt an asterisk was needed to footnote the breakdown of wealth by race for the benefit of those who think it’s relevant.
TMC
Jul 26 2023 at 3:35pm
“any advantage from being white” would be zero, or likely negative, at least in my adult lifetime.
I worked for a recruiting firm not long out of college and one of our big customers offered a 40% higher fee for minorities or women. Many others stated similar preferences. I was somewhat proud of my employer who just took the lower fee for everyone. We had a stated code of non discrimination that we took seriously.
Mark Z
Jul 25 2023 at 10:35pm
I think you’re being a bit conspiratorial. For one thing, how do you imagine rich students ‘buy’ better ratings from their teachers or counselors? I guess I’m a bit of an elitist, but frankly, in my experience, rich people (I’m talking about the top 10%; I’ve never met any billionaires) on average really are more pleasant, articulate, and polite than poor people, ceteris paribus. This graph seems entirely plausible to me even without anything shady to me. These traits may not be ‘earned,’ being the product of upbringing, peer effects, and primary schooling, but then IQ is probably mostly genetic, so that’s not ‘earned’ either.
You’re also writing as though it’s not widely known that the reason schools are de-emphasizing academic standards is specifically to help black applicants, not rich ones. Even if they are somehow prevented from selecting ‘non-academic standards’ that are proxies for race, using non-academic standards may well still hurt rich applicants relative to the status quo. Even if non-academic standards correlate with wealth, as long as they correlate less strongly with wealth than test scores do (which is plausible, since IQ is heritable and also correlates with wealth), they would lead to more poor students being admitted than are under an academic standards-based regime. Bruenig’s graph simply doesn’t demonstrate that using non-academic standards would rich students. To demonstrate that he’d have to show that nonacademic standards are even more strongly associated with wealth than academic standards are.
Scott Sumner
Jul 26 2023 at 1:41am
“To demonstrate that he’d have to show that nonacademic standards are even more strongly associated with wealth than academic standards are.”
That’s precisely what the graph shows.
“I think you’re being a bit conspiratorial.”
Where was I conspiratorial?
“I’m a bit of an elitist, but frankly, in my experience, rich people (I’m talking about the top 10%; I’ve never met any billionaires) on average really are more pleasant, articulate, and polite than poor people,”
I don’t think you understood the graph. It claims people at the 90% or even 95% are much more like poor people than they are like rich people.
Jim Glass
Jul 26 2023 at 11:50pm
It’s worth remembering that the SAT and other such standardized tests were developed explicitly to identify talented students from disadvantaged backgrounds, who didn’t have the unearned benefits of family connections, legacy status, diplomas from “good quality” high schools and the like boosting them into colleges. They were designed to increase admissions by merit for those of lower social status — and in this they were highly successful for many years. (Look at the list of Nobel winners who came out of the NYC working class, many the children of immigrants, in the first half of the 20th Century.)
Now it seems the rich are striking back.
Mark Z
Jul 27 2023 at 3:03am
“That’s precisely what the graph shows.”
For about 95% of the income distribution, there is a clear association with academic standards and not for nonacademic standards. It’s only at the top 5% that nonacademic standards are associated with wealth. The graph doesn’t prove the latter factor outweighs the former.
“I don’t think you understood the graph…”
That’s why I referred to people in the top 10% (or top 5%, whatever, roughly, wealthy but not ‘super rich’ people).
derek
Aug 2 2023 at 3:37pm
I think part of non-nefarious mechanism here could be that counselors and teachers at high-end private schools are especially good at writing recommendation letters since almost their entire job is to get students into prestigious schools. Public school teachers and counselors will be more honest and are more likely to use the same sort of letter for all but the very best or most favored students.
Richard Fulmet
Jul 25 2023 at 11:41pm
i suspect that there are advantages to being a member of the ethnic majority in any country. No doubt there are benefits to being Japanese in Japan.
Monte
Jul 27 2023 at 1:34am
Yet the U.S. is the only country in the world where a large percentage of the ethnic majority now feels the need to apologize for that distinction. Unfortunately, that guilt is being reinforced on many fronts, including the APA with this formal apology and resolution. Madness!
Scott H.
Jul 26 2023 at 8:24am
I guess this is what keeping the Asians out looks like.
Scott Sumner
Jul 26 2023 at 10:47am
Exactly.
diane keller
Jul 26 2023 at 4:13pm
Wealthy parents might opt to send their children to private high schools where the teachers and guidance counselors really know the kids. At a lot of public high schools, guidance counselors “counsel” by mass assembly and no longer write recommendations. Likewise teachers have many students and cannot write recs for all of them. Private high schools are geared for more a personal approach, as that is part of what parents pay for.
Scott Sumner
Jul 27 2023 at 2:08am
I agree.
MarkW
Jul 27 2023 at 6:30am
Don’t forget that prep school guidance counselors typically have longstanding working relationships with Ivy League admissions officers. Parents aren’t just paying for guidance counselors who know their kids well, they’re paying for guidance counselors who know how to get their kids admitted.
robc
Jul 27 2023 at 8:32am
If that were the case, the uptick would start before the top 5%. Unless its only an effect from the elitist of elite prep schools.
Alexander Turok
Jul 26 2023 at 7:53pm
I wouldn’t say “leftists and trust fund kids” since the latter is a subset of the former.
Knut P. Heen
Jul 27 2023 at 8:31am
Teacher rating is really odd. The graph is decreasing from around 67 to 90. The academic rating is increasing from around 67 to 90. It looks like teachers have something against children of parents with higher income than teachers (except at the very top level). Both should measure the same thing. The difference is subjective assessment vs. objective assessment. It looks like systemic discrimination against the upper middle class.
robc
Jul 27 2023 at 8:37am
I think its a sample size issue, look how jaggedy the academic rating is in top 5%. Im not sure any of the changes are significant outside that sharp up curve in top 5% of non academic ratings.
Either that or teachers really hate the 30th percentile kids.
Knut P. Heen
Jul 28 2023 at 10:09am
I also suspect small sample size at the top (the 99.9 may be only one observation), but there must be many observations between 67 and 90.
Comments are closed.