If you went to top schools but your kids are attending a lower tier, are you worried about downward mobility?

[Anonymous]

Funny. My dad went to Clemson and he did pretty well for himself. Happy. Good life. If my kids manage to do as well as him I’ll be happy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t live in the DC area, but where I am, it seems like it almost a flex for the wealthiest families to not really care where their kids go to school. They just want them to have fun, play their sport, whatever. They know their kids are taken care of, they don’t need to grind away with the climbers and strivers.

+1. I am in NYC, and same. Wealthiest families seem not to care, and I get it. One is pushing their talented son towards Broadway. Another enrolled theirs into a loosey-goosey school I wouldn't send my kids to if it were free, let alone be paying private tuition for. A third one is a grad of Trinity, but said too much pressure and is sending his kids to a small private school in Brooklyn.

[Anonymous]

Fascinating thread!

My grandfather went to Yale.
My dad went to Princeton.
I went to one of the SUNYs.

Yes, my dad was kind of disappointed in me.

[Anonymous]

Many of these replies are offensive because in 2025 you simply can't begin to control where your child gets in.

My DC was deferred in the ED round. Accepted to Clemson as his safety. Waiting on 20+ EA and RD schools but each has about a 5% admissions rate. It could very well be the case that DC attends Clemson. I can think of 10 other kids that I know who are in a similar spot as DC. These are brilliant kids who did everything right in high school: unweighted 4.0s, top scores, a gazillion APs, clubs, jobs, research, internships. Many will not get an elite college admit. Its just how the cookie crumbles in 2025. It's not controllable.

[Anonymous]

The measure of success after you begin working isn't where you went to college, it's your drive and ability. To that end, the opportunities a top student would get at Clemson with their academic drive could set them up well for that first job/internships. We have a guy in my office who has a masters from Yale and he's one of the biggest dolts I've met. Where you go to school doesn't matter when you can't do basic tasks.

[Anonymous]

The worry about downward mobility and college is NOT about the education but about the peer group.

This is the worry:
Kid that goes to Duke is going to be generally surrounded by financial-privileged, connected, worldly, and/or highly motivated students. Kid that goes to Radford is going to be generally surrounded by students that have a very narrow view of life, will stay in Virginia, are not worldly, will graduate with loans, have families that drag them down.

I am NOT saying that a Duke graduate can’t be a loafer, or a Radford graduate can’t be a successful CEO or doctor; I’m saying that the those of us with wealth but not generational wealth worry that our kid that goes to Radford will end of downward mobile because of peer group.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The worry about downward mobility and college is NOT about the education but about the peer group.

This is the worry:
Kid that goes to Duke is going to be generally surrounded by financial-privileged, connected, worldly, and/or highly motivated students. Kid that goes to Radford is going to be generally surrounded by students that have a very narrow view of life, will stay in Virginia, are not worldly, will graduate with loans, have families that drag them down.

I am NOT saying that a Duke graduate can’t be a loafer, or a Radford graduate can’t be a successful CEO or doctor; I’m saying that the those of us with wealth but not generational wealth worry that our kid that goes to Radford will end of downward mobile because of peer group.

This is one of the dumbest things I've ever read. There are plenty of high achieving kids from great families at Clemson. There are also kids who go to Duke whose families were not supportive of their academic journey. To boil it down to such generalities is silly and quite frankly you sound insane here. you can't curate who your kids are friends with as adults, may as well start figuring that out now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid is at an expensive boarding school, so obviously there is selection bias there. We also have a summer home in a wealthy east coast town. The vast majority who are very wealthy, care very much about what school their child attends. It’s not accurate to make these generalizations that very wealthy people don’t care. Unless, it is just an east coast thing.

The stories about very wealthy people paying outlandish sums to college counselors and donating huge amounts of money clearly shows that very wealthy people do care where their kids go to college.

Normal care where their kid goes to college because they want a good fit and a happy kid. The DCUM strivers care where their kids go to college so that they can put a seemingly impressive sticker on the back of their 3 series.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The measure of success after you begin working isn't where you went to college, it's your drive and ability. To that end, the opportunities a top student would get at Clemson with their academic drive could set them up well for that first job/internships. We have a guy in my office who has a masters from Yale and he's one of the biggest dolts I've met. Where you go to school doesn't matter when you can't do basic tasks.

Ok, doing a masters at Yale is NOT the same as attending undergrad.

I’ve worked with someone that attended the Harvard Kennedy School and she was an idiot. But I recognize this says nothing about Harvard undergrad.

Everyone knows that the master programs at these schools are pure cash cows.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The worry about downward mobility and college is NOT about the education but about the peer group.

This is the worry:
Kid that goes to Duke is going to be generally surrounded by financial-privileged, connected, worldly, and/or highly motivated students. Kid that goes to Radford is going to be generally surrounded by students that have a very narrow view of life, will stay in Virginia, are not worldly, will graduate with loans, have families that drag them down.

I am NOT saying that a Duke graduate can’t be a loafer, or a Radford graduate can’t be a successful CEO or doctor; I’m saying that the those of us with wealth but not generational wealth worry that our kid that goes to Radford will end of downward mobile because of peer group.

*shudder*

The Radford kid will be less of a blowhard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The worry about downward mobility and college is NOT about the education but about the peer group.

This is the worry:
Kid that goes to Duke is going to be generally surrounded by financial-privileged, connected, worldly, and/or highly motivated students. Kid that goes to Radford is going to be generally surrounded by students that have a very narrow view of life, will stay in Virginia, are not worldly, will graduate with loans, have families that drag them down.

I am NOT saying that a Duke graduate can’t be a loafer, or a Radford graduate can’t be a successful CEO or doctor; I’m saying that the those of us with wealth but not generational wealth worry that our kid that goes to Radford will end of downward mobile because of peer group.

Mmm, I don’t know - I could perhaps buy this argument 10-15 years ago but today you have so many top kids being shut out from the top schools and ending up at places like Clemson.

It feels like the peer group is stronger everywhere.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The worry about downward mobility and college is NOT about the education but about the peer group.

This is the worry:
Kid that goes to Duke is going to be generally surrounded by financial-privileged, connected, worldly, and/or highly motivated students. Kid that goes to Radford is going to be generally surrounded by students that have a very narrow view of life, will stay in Virginia, are not worldly, will graduate with loans, have families that drag them down.

I am NOT saying that a Duke graduate can’t be a loafer, or a Radford graduate can’t be a successful CEO or doctor; I’m saying that the those of us with wealth but not generational wealth worry that our kid that goes to Radford will end of downward mobile because of peer group.

*shudder*

The Radford kid will be less of a blowhard.

+ 1. Yup. I shudder at the idea that my kid would marry into one of the uber elite “connected “families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Clemson is a great school. There are lots of opportunities there. Not everyone can get into T10 or even T25. For those that can well great for them, T10 especially is a huge leg up, but they have to all fight it out with each other to be above a 3.5. There are still good outcomes from Clemson and similarly ranked schools and the benefit is a less stacked group of undergrads to compete against

Even kids who can get into higher ranked schools choose Clemson. It's a great school and a lovely place to spend 4 years.

Same with UNC. My son is a junior and I thought that UNC would make a nice safety school, but I learned that it's almost as hard to get into as an Ivy!
Parents need to let go of what they thought 30 years ago and relearn the landscape.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The worry about downward mobility and college is NOT about the education but about the peer group.

This is the worry:
Kid that goes to Duke is going to be generally surrounded by financial-privileged, connected, worldly, and/or highly motivated students. Kid that goes to Radford is going to be generally surrounded by students that have a very narrow view of life, will stay in Virginia, are not worldly, will graduate with loans, have families that drag them down.

I am NOT saying that a Duke graduate can’t be a loafer, or a Radford graduate can’t be a successful CEO or doctor; I’m saying that the those of us with wealth but not generational wealth worry that our kid that goes to Radford will end of downward mobile because of peer group.

Then go to a state school? There’s so much space between Duke and Radford

[Anonymous]

Don't forget that the academic world is changing because of race too.