How Do You Grow Your Own Miniature David Brooks?
Parents understand backwards induction. We believe that if our child can attend an elite university that this will build his/her human capital, social networks and resume. The fancy university bumper sticker on your car will signal that this kid should and will be part of the meritocratic elite (i.e the NY Times David Brooks). Is any of this logic actually true? Do the elite schools really have such a "treatment effect"?
Regardless of the truth, we believe that there are benefits of a Harvard degree. With the bulge in the number of upper-middle class types of people all seeking these scarce slots at Ivy League Schools, the probability of getting into these elite schools is getting real low.
To raise your kid's chance --- the kid has to attend the right high school and before that the right elementary school and before that the right kindergarten. So, this is dynamic programming. While the behavioral economists say we do not plan consistently, this NY Times article focuses on the "hyper-rational" parents who are competing into a frenzy over getting their kids into the right 4 year old schools.
Stanley Kaplan should be proud. The winners in this "arms race" will be the test prep programs as the Admissions Committees at the Daltons of the world must come up with a new test that the ambitious parents cannot use their $ to give their kid a leg up .
A sociologist might say that this is all a waste of money as it creates anxiety for no good reason over a keeping up with the joneses status competition ("my kid attends a school in the 02138 zip code in Cambridge").
A human capital theorist might push back saying that as long as the kid doesn't burn out due to stress that dynamic complementarities in learning to solve problems means that this strange process does create some very talented people.
Now can elite schools remain "diverse" if a subset of applicants know how to play the admissions game and are using their inside knowledge to maximize the probability that their kids get the elite slots? This is interesting game played between the admissions officers, the elite parents and the more naive other sets of parents.
A mechanism design theorist should think of a way for admissions officers to be able to categorize parents into the two types (Scarsdale versus naive); but not based simply on geographical residence when the kid is in High School or parental income. Armed with knowing the "types distribution", the admissions officers could have different standards for different types. Now whether this would hold in Court, I can't say.
Regardless of the truth, we believe that there are benefits of a Harvard degree. With the bulge in the number of upper-middle class types of people all seeking these scarce slots at Ivy League Schools, the probability of getting into these elite schools is getting real low.
To raise your kid's chance --- the kid has to attend the right high school and before that the right elementary school and before that the right kindergarten. So, this is dynamic programming. While the behavioral economists say we do not plan consistently, this NY Times article focuses on the "hyper-rational" parents who are competing into a frenzy over getting their kids into the right 4 year old schools.
Stanley Kaplan should be proud. The winners in this "arms race" will be the test prep programs as the Admissions Committees at the Daltons of the world must come up with a new test that the ambitious parents cannot use their $ to give their kid a leg up .
A sociologist might say that this is all a waste of money as it creates anxiety for no good reason over a keeping up with the joneses status competition ("my kid attends a school in the 02138 zip code in Cambridge").
A human capital theorist might push back saying that as long as the kid doesn't burn out due to stress that dynamic complementarities in learning to solve problems means that this strange process does create some very talented people.
Now can elite schools remain "diverse" if a subset of applicants know how to play the admissions game and are using their inside knowledge to maximize the probability that their kids get the elite slots? This is interesting game played between the admissions officers, the elite parents and the more naive other sets of parents.
A mechanism design theorist should think of a way for admissions officers to be able to categorize parents into the two types (Scarsdale versus naive); but not based simply on geographical residence when the kid is in High School or parental income. Armed with knowing the "types distribution", the admissions officers could have different standards for different types. Now whether this would hold in Court, I can't say.
posted by Matthew Kahn at 8:00 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home