Bill DeBlasio's war on merit

I'm convinced that DeBlasio will be the worst mayor for NYC since John Lindsay destroyed the city with his liberal social welfare programs in the 1960's. Stuff like this certainly does not make me change my mind.

So for those who are unfamiliar, NYC has a group of around 10 public magnet high schools where entrance is based purely on a standardized exam. If you get above the cutoff, you're in. If not, you're out. It's pretty plain and simple; no affirmative action, legacy preference, or some other fuzzy factor that can be twisted (total antithesis of MBA admissions!). This system has enabled poor smart NYC kids to get a top-notch secondary education and thus get a chance at getting into a top college. The intellectual talent and work ethic of students at schools such as Stuyvesant, Hunter, Bronx Science, and Brooklyn Tech, are pretty incredible.

Of course, liberals will never fail to inject race into any discussion, so the NY Times did a hit piece recently that complained about how "unfair" it was that Stuyvesant (along with Hunter the most prestigious NYC magnet school) is 70% Asian. "We can't have that!" the liberals lamented. "We need more diversity!" Following this line of reasoning, DeBlasio has come out and said that entrance should be more "holistic" and "fair."

A "holistic" admission process by its very definition is less fair than one based on an entrance exam. Whereas the latter is based on an objective criteria with no ambiguity, "holism" brings with it a flood of biases as well as an advantage for kids from wealthier and better connected families. Stuff like extracurriculars, sports, doing research at a top hospital, volunteering in Africa, etc., are stuff that oftentimes are not available for poor kids.

Finally, DeBlasio laments that the magnet schools should not be available only to people from certain backgrounds. This makes no sense. The opportunity is available for anyone in NYC who passes the exam. There is no racial, gender, or income discrimination. If anything, it is "holistic" admission dictated by a committee of biased admission officers that excludes those from certain backgrounds.

Simply put I sincerely hope that NYC stands firm on this issue and vote for merit, fairness, and objectivity.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-06-23/de-blasio-seeks-to-alter-entry…

 
mbavsmfin:

I'm convinced that DeBlasio will be the worst mayor for NYC since John Lindsay destroyed the city with his liberal social welfare programs in the 1960's. Stuff like this certainly does not make me change my mind.

So for those who are unfamiliar, NYC has a group of around 10 public magnet high schools where entrance is based purely on a standardized exam. If you get above the cutoff, you're in. If not, you're out. It's pretty plain and simple; no affirmative action, legacy preference, or some other fuzzy factor that can be twisted (total antithesis of MBA admissions!). This system has enabled poor smart NYC kids to get a top-notch secondary education and thus get a chance at getting into a top college. The intellectual talent and work ethic of students at schools such as Stuyvesant, Hunter, Bronx Science, and Brooklyn Tech, are pretty incredible.

Of course, liberals will never fail to inject race into any discussion, so the NY Times did a hit piece recently that complained about how "unfair" it was that Stuyvesant (along with Hunter the most prestigious NYC magnet school) is 70% Asian. "We can't have that!" the liberals lamented. "We need more diversity!" Following this line of reasoning, DeBlasio has come out and said that entrance should be more "holistic" and "fair."

A "holistic" admission process by its very definition is less fair than one based on an entrance exam. Whereas the latter is based on an objective criteria with no ambiguity, "holism" brings with it a flood of biases as well as an advantage for kids from wealthier and better connected families. Stuff like extracurriculars, sports, doing research at a top hospital, volunteering in Africa, etc., are stuff that oftentimes are not available for poor kids.

Finally, DeBlasio laments that the magnet schools should not be available only to people from certain backgrounds. This makes no sense. The opportunity is available for anyone in NYC who passes the exam. There is no racial, gender, or income discrimination. If anything, it is "holistic" admission dictated by a committee of biased admission officers that excludes those from certain backgrounds.

Simply put I sincerely hope that NYC stands firm on this issue and vote for merit, fairness, and objectivity.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-06-23/de-blasio...

A lot of kids who end up going to Stuy, Brooklyn Tech or Bronx Sci aren't really poor. They come from affluent neighborhoods, such as Hollis Hill, Bayside, Douglaston, Forrest Hills, Sheapshead Bay. Rarely will you see a kid from Cambria Heights, Corona, South side, East New York, South Bronx, or Harlem get into those schools.

So I wouldn't go as far saying the "opportunity" is available from anyone in NYC who passes the exams. So making it merit based isn't a bad thing.

 
SumOne:
mbavsmfin:

I'm convinced that DeBlasio will be the worst mayor for NYC since John Lindsay destroyed the city with his liberal social welfare programs in the 1960's. Stuff like this certainly does not make me change my mind.

So for those who are unfamiliar, NYC has a group of around 10 public magnet high schools where entrance is based purely on a standardized exam. If you get above the cutoff, you're in. If not, you're out. It's pretty plain and simple; no affirmative action, legacy preference, or some other fuzzy factor that can be twisted (total antithesis of MBA admissions!). This system has enabled poor smart NYC kids to get a top-notch secondary education and thus get a chance at getting into a top college. The intellectual talent and work ethic of students at schools such as Stuyvesant, Hunter, Bronx Science, and Brooklyn Tech, are pretty incredible.

Of course, liberals will never fail to inject race into any discussion, so the NY Times did a hit piece recently that complained about how "unfair" it was that Stuyvesant (along with Hunter the most prestigious NYC magnet school) is 70% Asian. "We can't have that!" the liberals lamented. "We need more diversity!" Following this line of reasoning, DeBlasio has come out and said that entrance should be more "holistic" and "fair."

A "holistic" admission process by its very definition is less fair than one based on an entrance exam. Whereas the latter is based on an objective criteria with no ambiguity, "holism" brings with it a flood of biases as well as an advantage for kids from wealthier and better connected families. Stuff like extracurriculars, sports, doing research at a top hospital, volunteering in Africa, etc., are stuff that oftentimes are not available for poor kids.

Finally, DeBlasio laments that the magnet schools should not be available only to people from certain backgrounds. This makes no sense. The opportunity is available for anyone in NYC who passes the exam. There is no racial, gender, or income discrimination. If anything, it is "holistic" admission dictated by a committee of biased admission officers that excludes those from certain backgrounds.

Simply put I sincerely hope that NYC stands firm on this issue and vote for merit, fairness, and objectivity.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-06-23/de-blasio...

A lot of kids who end up going to Stuy, Brooklyn Tech or Bronx Sci aren't really poor. They come from affluent neighborhoods, such as Hollis Hill, Bayside, Douglaston, Forrest Hills, Sheapshead Bay. Rarely will you see a kid from Cambria Heights, Corona, South side, East New York, South Bronx, or Harlem get into those schools.

So I wouldn't go as far saying the "opportunity" is available from anyone in NYC who passes the exams. So making it merit based isn't a bad thing.

Do you know what merit means? Do you know what holistic means? There are more affluent kids at these schools because they usually do better on tests than kids from poor areas. However if the kids from the poor areas do well on the tests they can get in.

That is pretty much the definition of merit.

Follow the shit your fellow monkeys say @shitWSOsays Life is hard, it's even harder when you're stupid - John Wayne
 

Not when the affluent kids have the advantage of going to private grammar schools and receive better educations because of their preliminary district.

@"mbavsmfin" Interesting topic though. I have a friend who's a teacher in the Bronx at a borderline affluent-underprivileged school, and while it's not related, common sentiment among PS teachers is that charter schools are also destructive and unfair.

People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for freedom of thought which they seldom use.
 
heister:
SumOne:
mbavsmfin:

I'm convinced that DeBlasio will be the worst mayor for NYC since John Lindsay destroyed the city with his liberal social welfare programs in the 1960's. Stuff like this certainly does not make me change my mind.

So for those who are unfamiliar, NYC has a group of around 10 public magnet high schools where entrance is based purely on a standardized exam. If you get above the cutoff, you're in. If not, you're out. It's pretty plain and simple; no affirmative action, legacy preference, or some other fuzzy factor that can be twisted (total antithesis of MBA admissions!). This system has enabled poor smart NYC kids to get a top-notch secondary education and thus get a chance at getting into a top college. The intellectual talent and work ethic of students at schools such as Stuyvesant, Hunter, Bronx Science, and Brooklyn Tech, are pretty incredible.

Of course, liberals will never fail to inject race into any discussion, so the NY Times did a hit piece recently that complained about how "unfair" it was that Stuyvesant (along with Hunter the most prestigious NYC magnet school) is 70% Asian. "We can't have that!" the liberals lamented. "We need more diversity!" Following this line of reasoning, DeBlasio has come out and said that entrance should be more "holistic" and "fair."

A "holistic" admission process by its very definition is less fair than one based on an entrance exam. Whereas the latter is based on an objective criteria with no ambiguity, "holism" brings with it a flood of biases as well as an advantage for kids from wealthier and better connected families. Stuff like extracurriculars, sports, doing research at a top hospital, volunteering in Africa, etc., are stuff that oftentimes are not available for poor kids.

Finally, DeBlasio laments that the magnet schools should not be available only to people from certain backgrounds. This makes no sense. The opportunity is available for anyone in NYC who passes the exam. There is no racial, gender, or income discrimination. If anything, it is "holistic" admission dictated by a committee of biased admission officers that excludes those from certain backgrounds.

Simply put I sincerely hope that NYC stands firm on this issue and vote for merit, fairness, and objectivity.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-06-23/de-blasio...

A lot of kids who end up going to Stuy, Brooklyn Tech or Bronx Sci aren't really poor. They come from affluent neighborhoods, such as Hollis Hill, Bayside, Douglaston, Forrest Hills, Sheapshead Bay. Rarely will you see a kid from Cambria Heights, Corona, South side, East New York, South Bronx, or Harlem get into those schools.

So I wouldn't go as far saying the "opportunity" is available from anyone in NYC who passes the exams. So making it merit based isn't a bad thing.

Do you know what merit means? Do you know what holistic means? There are more affluent kids at these schools because they usually do better on tests than kids from poor areas. However if the kids from the poor areas do well on the tests they can get in.

That is pretty much the definition of merit.

Yeah sure merit. These kids had a better opportunity and chance to get into the top HS in NYC compared to those who aren't from affluent neighborhoods.

But De Blasio is wasting his time on this. The focus should be on how can we those kids from the ghetto to perform better on these test. That's for another debate.

 

Fair enough. There are plenty of middle and upper-middle class kids from the outer boroughs who attend these schools. The wealthy Manhattanites of course send their kids to private schools in the city or boarding schools throughout the east coast.

My point though is that DeBlasio gives the impression that these schools are somehow discriminating against those of certain races and backgrounds and that admission based solely on an entrance exam is "unfair." I think DeBlasio is way off base here because such a system is actually the most meritocratic and objective because admission is based on a single objective criteria that cannot be fabricated or be left to misinterpretation by those with biases.

Yes, in general, poor kids tend to do worse than others on standardized tests, but I think that's more due to cultural reasons insofar as poor parents tend to not emphasize education as rigorously as more affluent parents (Asians of course are different in this regard, further showing that it's not race but culture and family structure that matter).

 
mbavsmfin:

Fair enough. There are plenty of middle and upper-middle class kids from the outer boroughs who attend these schools. The wealthy Manhattanites of course send their kids to private schools in the city or boarding schools throughout the east coast.

My point though is that DeBlasio gives the impression that these schools are somehow discriminating against those of certain races and backgrounds and that admission based solely on an entrance exam is "unfair." I think DeBlasio is way off base here because such a system is actually the most meritocratic and objective because admission is based on a single objective criteria that cannot be fabricated or be left to misinterpretation by those with biases.

Yes, in general, poor kids tend to do worse than others on standardized tests, but I think that's more due to cultural reasons insofar as poor parents tend to not emphasize education as rigorously as more affluent parents (Asians of course are different in this regard, further showing that it's not race but culture and family structure that matter).

I'm a Big Brother with Big Brothers Big Sisters. I do my best to tutor my Little Bro once a week, but he is far behind across many educational subcategories. Unfortunately, he grew up in a poor area where his father was a drug dealer until moving out with his mom and sister in 5th grade. For the many years he lacked high quality education by going to a ghetto school.

...So I see DeBlasio's point in trying to alleviate the lack of education for poor individuals, but by sending them to these schools with high learning curves is NOT the solution (unless they're the "poor smart kids" as you mentioned), you'll only have the affluent fleeing to more prestigious schools and creating a greater education gap by doing so, while the uneducated poor individuals struggle to adapt (like my little bro)..

Investing in the ghettos to generate a reasonable learning curve within these communities is a much more viable solution. You can't take really poor, uneducated kids, and expect them to adapt efficiently to these more prestigious schools.

 
mbavsmfin:

Fair enough. There are plenty of middle and upper-middle class kids from the outer boroughs who attend these schools. The wealthy Manhattanites of course send their kids to private schools in the city or boarding schools throughout the east coast.

My point though is that DeBlasio gives the impression that these schools are somehow discriminating against those of certain races and backgrounds and that admission based solely on an entrance exam is "unfair." I think DeBlasio is way off base here because such a system is actually the most meritocratic and objective because admission is based on a single objective criteria that cannot be fabricated or be left to misinterpretation by those with biases.

Yes, in general, poor kids tend to do worse than others on standardized tests, but I think that's more due to cultural reasons insofar as poor parents tend to not emphasize education as rigorously as more affluent parents (Asians of course are different in this regard, further showing that it's not race but culture and family structure that matter).

Good point and I think another reason we see a high amount of Asians at Stuy and etc, is that even kids from affluent neighborhoods I mentioned earlier tend to attend private schools such as, St. Francis Prep, Molloy etc. Asian parent's are cheap they don't want to pay for a private school when their child gets into a top public HS. I am South Asian, I would know.

 

I'm not a parent but a deeply concerned uncle. My nephew (who does not live in NYC but the suburb of another city) is going to be a freshman at the same public high school I went to, which quite frankly is mediocre at best. There is one magnet high school there that is exceptional and has gotten national acclaim. It is especially strong in math and sciences, which is what my nephew is interested in. Admission is based on a lottery. Why? Because the liberals freaked out over the prospect of an entrance exam and said that is "unfair" and that a lottery will everyone an equal chance of getting in. Well, my nephew did not get a spot in the lottery and is relegated to a third-tier secondary education. Meanwhile, the dropout rate at this magnet school is close to 50% during freshman year. Geez, I wonder why. When you don't have an objective admission standard, a lot of people who have on business being there will get in and get academically PWND.

 

Roger Goodell (CEO of the NFL):

“We cannot have teams strictly rely on the player’s athletic ability when drafting players. We cannot have a dynamic where the running back and wide receiver positions are only available to the fastest players. NFL teams should have a more holistic approach at the NFL Draft and recruit players based not only on their athletic ability, but also on their culture, background, income, and extracurricular activities

 

Lip service bullshit. The only thing in the NFL is athleticism and being able to remember a play long enough to run it. What kind of extracurricular activities is he talking about? The guys who volunteer and play in the rec soccer league? Please, its a business. No one gives a shit if the players are role models or not, as long as they can run a 4.2 40 and catch a ball made of leather that is thrown to them.

Follow the shit your fellow monkeys say @shitWSOsays Life is hard, it's even harder when you're stupid - John Wayne
 
heister:

Lip service bullshit. The only thing in the NFL is athleticism and being able to remember a play long enough to run it. What kind of extracurricular activities is he talking about? The guys who volunteer and play in the rec soccer league? Please, its a business. No one gives a shit if the players are role models or not, as long as they can run a 4.2 40 and catch a ball made of leather that is thrown to them.

Not lip service bullshit at all. Are you serious? Obviously there aren't rec league guys in the league, you need a certain level of skill and athleticism. But, to say that character doesn't play a role is insane.

 
heister:
Please, its a business. No one gives a shit if the players are role models or not, as long as they can run a 4.2 40 and catch a ball made of leather that is thrown to them.

If you don't think the NFL teams are taking large consideration into each draft pick's character you are an absolute moron. This is nothing new either, wake up.

 

First off, I don't even know which player you're referring to. If it's Pacman Jones, he wasn't with the Bengals until 2010.

Since you had a reading comprehension fail, I reiterate: I'm not trying to say you will not be given an opportunity by an NFL franchise if you possess exceptional physical ability and a very poor character/criminal record, but I am saying that NFL teams will largely consider it as a negative factor when looking to draft or sign a player. This has been shown time and time again in free agent contracts not being as lucrative as they could have been and similarly players falling down the draft board. It also appears to be a growing phenomenon, as Chip Kelly/Howie Roseman in Philly and other GMs favor drafting players who have completed their college degrees.

All I'm trying to say is that it's certainly a considered factor to varying degrees.

 

Right... so the Bengals have had some players of poor character much like every other franchise. Congrats on pointing that out. So as I've said, players are given an opportunity to play with terrible character attributes but it negatively effects their earning potential and draft position. What do you not understand about this? It's a large factor being weighed by every organization, that doesn't mean they won't sign a bad character guy but it means teams will be more cautious and offer less money than otherwise.

 
Best Response

You mentioned nothing about earnings potential in your initial post. You also never mentioned anything about free agent contracts in your first post. All your first post was talking about was drafting. You kind of just tacked on FA contracts and earnings potential as an afterthought. I'm not saying those aren't valid points, but that wasn't what I was responding to.

Let's go back to drafting, though...Take a guy like Jameis Winston. Which round do you think he will go in when he enters the draft? I have a hard time seeing the serial shoplifter and alleged sex offender falling past the third round. You can even see it in the way the Tallahassee police handled the investigation:

On April 16, 2014, The New York Times reported irregularities in the rape investigation involving Winston. Though a medical examination of the victim revealed injuries consistent with sexual trauma – including bruises and semen – and the victim would later identify Winston by name as her attacker, Tallahassee police reportedly never obtained a DNA sample from Winston, never interviewed him, nor attempted to obtain video of the alleged assault taken by Seminoles teammate Chris Casher. The investigation was conducted by Officer Scott Angulo, who, the Times' article notes, did private security work for the Seminole Boosters, the primary financier of Florida State athletics.

He's too damn good at football and they're basically doing everything they can to make sure his career isn't derailed. We'll see what happens, but I think teams value his skills on the field too much to let his off-the-field issues get in the way.
 
TheKing:

You do realize that professional athletes are judged on more than just on-field performance, right? NFL teams do take a holistic approach. Just like how people beat out other candidates for jobs despite having lower SAT scores and lower GPAs and coming out of worse schools.

I am a decent athlete, play flag football, and come from a background not represented by the NFL. However, my parents never pushed me to attend football practice for 5 hours a day, to lift weights in the gym, and to work on my speed and agility. If the NFL implements the same approach that De Blasio is proposing these top schools to implement, NFL might even draft me. :)

 
HarvardBusinessingSchool:

Roger Goodell (CEO of the NFL):

“We cannot have teams strictly rely on the player’s athletic ability when drafting players. We cannot have a dynamic where the running back and wide receiver positions are only available to the fastest players. NFL teams should have a more holistic approach at the NFL Draft and recruit players based not only on their athletic ability, but also on their culture, background, income, and extracurricular activities

You do realize that professional athletes are judged on more than just on-field performance, right? NFL teams do take a holistic approach.

Just like how people beat out other candidates for jobs despite having lower SAT scores and lower GPAs and coming out of worse schools.

 

I laugh at the character of NFL draftees, character will win out when there are two athletes of equal level. However that is rarely if never the case because teams have different needs. Why do you think the teams at the top draft the best player available unless they have a massive need for a specific position. It is because talent is all that maters in the draft. Since the vast majority of the picks end up to be busts anyway, its better to have the guy with a questionable character that is much more likely to play than the guy who is a saint but has next to no chance of playing.

Follow the shit your fellow monkeys say @shitWSOsays Life is hard, it's even harder when you're stupid - John Wayne
 

Look, I get that you're a "concerned uncle," but you sound like some right wing troll that spends his days commenting on Politico articles. I don't love Deblasio, at all, but there's plenty of other shit to do or talk about as opposed to getting amped up over charter school bullshit.

 

Having 1 test be the base of a student's potential life trajectory is ridiculous IMO. Saw the article and welcome changes to admission process BC URMs are poorly represented at NYC magnet schools. Of course, any process will involve an admissions board and subjectivity. Either way you slice it, the current admissions method is outdated; it reminds me of the military's test to slot recruits into certain career fields.

As for DeBlasio, he's a 1 term mayor BC he's a complete wacko.

 
IvyLeagueVet:

Having 1 test be the base of a student's potential life trajectory is ridiculous IMO. Saw the article and welcome changes to admission process BC URMs are poorly represented at NYC magnet schools. Of course, any process will involve an admissions board and subjectivity. Either way you slice it, the current admissions method is outdated; it reminds me of the military's test to slot recruits into certain career fields.

As for DeBlasio, he's a 1 term mayor BC he's a complete wacko.

So lets go to a feel good holistic approach and then have drop out rates that pass the ghettos of LA. If you can't score high enough on the test then you most likely can't handle the rigors of the course load. So why punish qualified students to appease the idiots who think things aren't fair.
Follow the shit your fellow monkeys say @shitWSOsays Life is hard, it's even harder when you're stupid - John Wayne
 

Having graduated from Stuyvesant I find it somewhat humorous. I say let him implement a "holistic" process such as interview, sports and other ecs, etc. It only means the Asian parents will spend a couple more hundred bucks from their already LOW income to put their kids through interview lessons, sports lessons, and other "creative" type sht which they already were planning to do later on for college admissions. I'm gonna laugh when it becomes 90% Asian, 9% White, and .5% for both Hispanic and Blacks.

 

Having graduated from Stuyvesant I find it somewhat humorous. I say let him implement a "holistic" process such as interview, sports and other ecs, etc. It only means the Asian parents will spend a couple more hundred bucks from their already LOW income to put their kids through interview lessons, sports lessons, and other "creative" type sht which they already were planning to do later on for college admissions. I'm gonna laugh when it becomes 90% Asian, 9% White, and .5% for both Hispanic and Blacks.

 

Great article on NY Post, which argues that DeBlasio's proposed policy will hurt poor Asians the most, not the rich kids who can afford test prep. For these kids, who cannot afford private high schools, going to a magnet school is their best shot at getting a top notch education and moving one step closer towards the American Dream. It's unbelievable to me that Asians vote democratic even though the party's policies hurt them.

http://nypost.com/2014/07/19/why-nycs-push-to-change-school-admissions-…

 

Molestias fugit aspernatur optio omnis enim vel est. Tempora consequatur rerum odio dolorem cum ut tempore. Dolor voluptatem ipsam error dolorem quisquam non. Explicabo omnis dignissimos est enim.

Error aut laudantium quo. Facilis est est ut vero beatae qui et. Expedita blanditiis fuga praesentium. Eum quibusdam ea aut aut sit. Voluptatem atque minus vel eum ut iste quasi. Praesentium ipsam repellendus et quis.

Quia minus ut et tempore. Pariatur sed aut est molestias deleniti velit voluptatum. Ex necessitatibus sequi totam sit. Adipisci et est cupiditate beatae unde reiciendis.

Repudiandae molestias reprehenderit sit accusamus nobis voluptatem. A voluptas explicabo et consequatur sint. Id consectetur iusto odio sed soluta enim. Reprehenderit iste quia officiis in nulla. Excepturi et qui dolore laborum laborum nulla.

Career Advancement Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Jefferies & Company 02 99.4%
  • Goldman Sachs 19 98.8%
  • Harris Williams & Co. (++) 98.3%
  • Lazard Freres 02 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 03 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Harris Williams & Co. 18 99.4%
  • JPMorgan Chase 10 98.8%
  • Lazard Freres 05 98.3%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.7%
  • William Blair 03 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Lazard Freres 01 99.4%
  • Jefferies & Company 02 98.8%
  • Goldman Sachs 17 98.3%
  • Moelis & Company 07 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 05 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Director/MD (5) $648
  • Vice President (19) $385
  • Associates (86) $261
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (13) $181
  • Intern/Summer Associate (33) $170
  • 2nd Year Analyst (66) $168
  • 1st Year Analyst (202) $159
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (144) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
3
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
99.0
4
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
5
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
6
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
7
kanon's picture
kanon
98.9
8
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
9
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
10
Jamoldo's picture
Jamoldo
98.8
success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”