No, the 'diversity' angle is frequently tied to things like skin color, sex, ethnicity, heritage, etc. You can have two people that match in all of those categories but one chose to go to a state school because of a family issue and then they will be ignored by Google.

This is not something any diversity program I know of in the big companies is trying to address.

In the UK this would be called classism. It's the same thing but in the US setting.

> but one chose to go to a state school because of a family issue and then they will be ignored by Google

A person with a family issue probably still has a family issue incompatible with working for a corporation across the country.

Ever think their process of selecting unencumbered elitists might be by design and super effective?

>probably still has a family issue

Probably? That seems to be an expansive assumption, to be charitable.

It is the diversity angle, considering many smart students of minority groups choose to go to public school because many come from families that cannot pay for tuition of the top 5.

Very much a diversity issue.

Top 5 universities (and elite private schools more generally) are usually much cheaper than public universities for students with limited means because they have deep pockets for need-based financial aid while public schools have little if any additional campus aid.

Now, awareness of this fact may be not widespread enough, skewing the applicant pool toward the outcome.you describe because of perceived cost, but it's much more likely that a student wouldn't be able to afford a public college than an elite private one.

That’s a common myth.

They usually weasel word the scope of their generosity, treat loans as gifts, etc.

The sticker price is always negotiable, but state schools are usually ahead.

> That’s a common myth.

Since I personally experienced it, I'm pretty sure it's not.

I'm sure you and few others experienced it. But I'd say it's not that common. Just look at the make up of study body at the top 5 schools.

>> But I'd say it's not that common.

Then you should look at the actual university policies outlined on their website. At top of line elite schools (Stanford, Princeton level), if your family income <$65-75K, both tuition and housing are free, and <$125K tuition is free.

I know for a fact that state schools like UC Berkeley and UCLA aren't that generous with housing.

>> Just look at the make up of study body at the top 5 schools.

Students from wealthier backgrounds tend to have more access to academic and educational resources and are thus more qualified and more likely to be admitted.

Not a judgement suggesting that a less fortunate child would not succeed in a similar environment; many of them just don't have one.

That reflects more the effects of family educational background and socioeconomic class on pre-collegiate academic achievement and, even with good achievement, inclination to even bother to apply to elite schools (in part, again, because of lack of awareness that headline price isn't the whole affordability story.)

No. They're cheaper for people with nearly no means.

The people with some means (aka the "middle class") can stretch their budget to afford state school.

Most states also have transfer programs that let you go from a 2yr at a CC into the equivalent 4yr at state school which takes a huge chunk out of the cost.