[microarchitect]

Are you suggesting that affirmative action should be based on family income, then? Seems like a good idea to me, but I might be missing something.

I'd be interested in a break up of admission statistics, SAT scores, race and family income for the Ivies. because I'm not entirely convinced that just because SAT scores follow family income in the general population, the trends are exactly the same among admitted students.

[estevez]

Yes, to an extent. I think the focus on what the ivies do or don't do distorts our view (the majority of US undergraduates attend community colleges, for example) of what truly is broken in higher ed. I've commented before on it here:

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3309894

[michael_miller]

It's not fair to take affirmative action solely on family income, as the cost of living varies vastly across the US. $100K in Manhattan is nothing, but can translate to an extremely comfortable lifestyle in rural Texas.

[_delirium]

What I found most lacking among my own relatively diverse class (relatively diverse for an engineering school, anyway) was actually people from areas with low cost of living, aka "poor areas". For example, the school boasted that the incoming class represented 49 of the 50 states; the one missing was West Virginia. And in general people from places like West Texas or other non-major-metropolitan areas were underrepresented. Also true among minorities; there were a few black students from Los Angeles and Atlanta, but none from Mississippi.

[estevez]

Not solely on family income (but I'd suggest that if 100K is nothing in Manhattan one might be better served by looking a bit farther afield, Brooklyn perhaps...), but as it currently stands low income students receive no advantage at many elite institutions.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/25/business/economy/25leonhar...