What an Ivy league education gets you - the Atlantic

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/2026/04/ivy-league-education-income/686682/?gift=2104cHYqEyxQuK2PwywZF7-YEJE1w30W8CBwJeAa-x4

New research dropped - yes, elite schools matter

- Students at Ivy League schools and the similarly selective University of Chicago, Duke, Stanford, and MIT together comprise less than half a percent of America’s undergraduate population. Yet their alumni represent more than 12 percent of all Fortune 500 CEOs, 32 percent of all New York Times journalists, and 13 percent of the wealthiest 0.1 percent of the population.

- the most important thing a student gets from an Ivy Plus education isn’t instruction or prestige or even connections. It’s the opportunity to learn how to succeed in an environment filled with the world’s most talented and ambitious people. “Being in the classroom with all these folks, doing homework assignments, having to cooperate with them in your club, sitting around the dining table with them, figuring out who’s going to live with whom—all that stuff comes together to make these schools really unparalleled training grounds to be in these upper-echelon professional jobs

- it’s worth every penny.

- economists used a clever study design. They looked only at applicants who were wait-listed. The ones who ultimately were admitted were virtually indistinguishable from the ones who weren’t, meaning that the first group’s superior career performance was almost certainly caused by attending the more selective school. “Sending someone to an Ivy Plus school instead of to one of these top flagship schools is per se a transformational opportunity,” Friedman said. “It’s not that they were always on that path to begin with.”

- that the most important thing about top colleges is the people who attend them—and the transformation that occurs when a critical mass of such high-achieving people are put together in one place. That young people’s peers affect their life trajectories is well established. Chetty’s research has found that “economic connectedness”—people forming friendships across class lines—is one of the strongest predictors of upward mobility.

- he thinks that what’s going on is more complex and harder to define: an implicit education in how to succeed in an environment full of some of the world’s most gifted, determined people. There’s no class that can really teach someone how to collaborate in a highly competitive environment or emerge as a leader among their peers. “It’s very difficult to develop this leadership skill without the opportunity to be in a community with lots of other ambitious and talented individuals, which is exactly what the Ivy Plus schools are providing,” Friedman said. Steel sharpens steel.

- The hypothesis is that exposure, not just to so many great students, but in such a compact space—that’s really what makes these Ivy Plus and other highly selective schools stand out in ways that are even different from those top flagship schools,” Friedman said.

BS article. I know people who did not attend Ivy League schools but they are with the 1%. And there are plenty.

Holy cow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:12% are ivy ceos. What about the other 88%? It’s a dumb report. I know plenty of multi millionaires who went to average schools and some who didn’t even go to college.

Jesus help me.

.5% of college graduates represent 12% of CEOs.

Told you DCUM was dumb…

Correlation does not equal causation. It’s equally (read: more) likely that those privileged folks destined to be future CEOs go to Ivy League schools (for various reasons) than that Ivy League schools CREATE future CEOs.

It's almost like they didn't invent regression analysis centuries ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/2026/04/ivy-league-education-income/686682/?gift=2104cHYqEyxQuK2PwywZF7-YEJE1w30W8CBwJeAa-x4

New research dropped - yes, elite schools matter

- Students at Ivy League schools and the similarly selective University of Chicago, Duke, Stanford, and MIT together comprise less than half a percent of America’s undergraduate population. Yet their alumni represent more than 12 percent of all Fortune 500 CEOs, 32 percent of all New York Times journalists, and 13 percent of the wealthiest 0.1 percent of the population.

- the most important thing a student gets from an Ivy Plus education isn’t instruction or prestige or even connections. It’s the opportunity to learn how to succeed in an environment filled with the world’s most talented and ambitious people. “Being in the classroom with all these folks, doing homework assignments, having to cooperate with them in your club, sitting around the dining table with them, figuring out who’s going to live with whom—all that stuff comes together to make these schools really unparalleled training grounds to be in these upper-echelon professional jobs

- it’s worth every penny.

- economists used a clever study design. They looked only at applicants who were wait-listed. The ones who ultimately were admitted were virtually indistinguishable from the ones who weren’t, meaning that the first group’s superior career performance was almost certainly caused by attending the more selective school. “Sending someone to an Ivy Plus school instead of to one of these top flagship schools is per se a transformational opportunity,” Friedman said. “It’s not that they were always on that path to begin with.”

- that the most important thing about top colleges is the people who attend them—and the transformation that occurs when a critical mass of such high-achieving people are put together in one place. That young people’s peers affect their life trajectories is well established. Chetty’s research has found that “economic connectedness”—people forming friendships across class lines—is one of the strongest predictors of upward mobility.

- he thinks that what’s going on is more complex and harder to define: an implicit education in how to succeed in an environment full of some of the world’s most gifted, determined people. There’s no class that can really teach someone how to collaborate in a highly competitive environment or emerge as a leader among their peers. “It’s very difficult to develop this leadership skill without the opportunity to be in a community with lots of other ambitious and talented individuals, which is exactly what the Ivy Plus schools are providing,” Friedman said. Steel sharpens steel.

- The hypothesis is that exposure, not just to so many great students, but in such a compact space—that’s really what makes these Ivy Plus and other highly selective schools stand out in ways that are even different from those top flagship schools,” Friedman said.

BS article. I know people who did not attend Ivy League schools but they are with the 1%. And there are plenty.

DCUM dumbass count+1

[Anonymous]

I have no doubt Ivy League degrees help people get MBB and similar jobs. We all know who those "prestigious firms" hire and why.

The notion though that Ivy League schools actually confer abilities that other environments cannot, however, is pure conjecture. In my workplace being competitive is not a desirable trait.

[Anonymous]

Princeton was the cheapest offer we got, cheaper than in state. Why wouldnt we grab that

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have no doubt Ivy League degrees help people get MBB and similar jobs. We all know who those "prestigious firms" hire and why.

The notion though that Ivy League schools actually confer abilities that other environments cannot, however, is pure conjecture. In my workplace being competitive is not a desirable trait.

You’re grasping to understand things you don’t quite comprehend. What the top schools teach you culturally is how to co-exist with highly accomplished peers, not to be overtly competitive in professional settings. The competitive strivers are those who bubbled up from second and third-tier schools and go through life with a big chip on their shoulders constantly having to prove themselves.

[Anonymous]

What’s interesting to me as my education got more elite through grad school (not Ivy) it is was generally that I strongly disliked the high ego/hardworking/great resume students even as I saw them succeed around me. In work, similarly, these types of people turn me off. It might of course be that I’m an introverted person with a sense of personal justice that verges on carrying grudges. So a Lyndon Johnson or Zuckerberg or Ted Cruz or Tom Cruise is likely to not hit it off with me.

I don’t know what to do with that. I was a good student from a school that didn’t produce many. So not acculturated. Maybe it’s a class thing. I just wonder what to do about my kids - don’t I want them to succeed? But I don’t want them to be the kind of people I see succeed in a lot of places in the meritocracy.


Confused. Probably need a little psych help but I wonder if driving my kids toward high success schools like ivies means they succeed but are no longer like me, in several ways.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have no doubt Ivy League degrees help people get MBB and similar jobs. We all know who those "prestigious firms" hire and why.

The notion though that Ivy League schools actually confer abilities that other environments cannot, however, is pure conjecture. In my workplace being competitive is not a desirable trait.

I don’t understand that comment.

Literally all the people at the top of their area are competitive. Professors, medical labs/researchers, doctors, musicians, actors, NPO founders…literally everything …you read or watch interviews and they talk about their competitive drive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no doubt Ivy League degrees help people get MBB and similar jobs. We all know who those "prestigious firms" hire and why.

The notion though that Ivy League schools actually confer abilities that other environments cannot, however, is pure conjecture. In my workplace being competitive is not a desirable trait.

I don’t understand that comment.

Literally all the people at the top of their area are competitive. Professors, medical labs/researchers, doctors, musicians, actors, NPO founders…literally everything …you read or watch interviews and they talk about their competitive drive.

None of those fields are well suited to work life balance especially with young kids

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What’s interesting to me as my education got more elite through grad school (not Ivy) it is was generally that I strongly disliked the high ego/hardworking/great resume students even as I saw them succeed around me. In work, similarly, these types of people turn me off. It might of course be that I’m an introverted person with a sense of personal justice that verges on carrying grudges. So a Lyndon Johnson or Zuckerberg or Ted Cruz or Tom Cruise is likely to not hit it off with me.

I don’t know what to do with that. I was a good student from a school that didn’t produce many. So not acculturated. Maybe it’s a class thing. I just wonder what to do about my kids - don’t I want them to succeed? But I don’t want them to be the kind of people I see succeed in a lot of places in the meritocracy.

.

You seem like you would prefer the old ideal of the Ivy League—the genteel white shoe lawyer, the third generation Harvard legacy who doesn’t study that hard and is happy with a gentleman’s C, a world where job referrals come with a handshake with the dad of your fellow Finals Club member, and people studied “useless” subjects like the humanities because their families already had money and so they didn’t feel pressure to “make it big” to raise up the circumstances of rest of their family. Those days are long gone, as the type pf student they admit has changed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no doubt Ivy League degrees help people get MBB and similar jobs. We all know who those "prestigious firms" hire and why.

The notion though that Ivy League schools actually confer abilities that other environments cannot, however, is pure conjecture. In my workplace being competitive is not a desirable trait.

You’re grasping to understand things you don’t quite comprehend. What the top schools teach you culturally is how to co-exist with highly accomplished peers, not to be overtly competitive in professional settings. The competitive strivers are those who bubbled up from second and third-tier schools and go through life with a big chip on their shoulders constantly having to prove themselves.

The ivy leaguers I have worked with did not learn that lesson at all lol

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no doubt Ivy League degrees help people get MBB and similar jobs. We all know who those "prestigious firms" hire and why.

The notion though that Ivy League schools actually confer abilities that other environments cannot, however, is pure conjecture. In my workplace being competitive is not a desirable trait.

I don’t understand that comment.

Literally all the people at the top of their area are competitive. Professors, medical labs/researchers, doctors, musicians, actors, NPO founders…literally everything …you read or watch interviews and they talk about their competitive drive.

None of those fields are well suited to work life balance especially with young kids

Well “literally everything” means everything else as well. I don’t know any field where being competitive is undesirable.

What does this discussion have to do with work life balance?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no doubt Ivy League degrees help people get MBB and similar jobs. We all know who those "prestigious firms" hire and why.

The notion though that Ivy League schools actually confer abilities that other environments cannot, however, is pure conjecture. In my workplace being competitive is not a desirable trait.

You’re grasping to understand things you don’t quite comprehend. What the top schools teach you culturally is how to co-exist with highly accomplished peers, not to be overtly competitive in professional settings. The competitive strivers are those who bubbled up from second and third-tier schools and go through life with a big chip on their shoulders constantly having to prove themselves.

You have illustrated exactly how many Ivy Leaguers view non Ivy Leaguers and it is not a good look at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no doubt Ivy League degrees help people get MBB and similar jobs. We all know who those "prestigious firms" hire and why.

The notion though that Ivy League schools actually confer abilities that other environments cannot, however, is pure conjecture. In my workplace being competitive is not a desirable trait.

I don’t understand that comment.

Literally all the people at the top of their area are competitive. Professors, medical labs/researchers, doctors, musicians, actors, NPO founders…literally everything …you read or watch interviews and they talk about their competitive drive.

None of those fields are well suited to work life balance especially with young kids

Well “literally everything” means everything else as well. I don’t know any field where being competitive is undesirable.

What does this discussion have to do with work life balance?

In my definition of success and what I want for my kid work life balance is absolutely critical..so much of this thread and how it describes thr "opportunities" that an Ivy League degree gives you make me just think "but why would I want that?"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no doubt Ivy League degrees help people get MBB and similar jobs. We all know who those "prestigious firms" hire and why.

The notion though that Ivy League schools actually confer abilities that other environments cannot, however, is pure conjecture. In my workplace being competitive is not a desirable trait.

I don’t understand that comment.

Literally all the people at the top of their area are competitive. Professors, medical labs/researchers, doctors, musicians, actors, NPO founders…literally everything …you read or watch interviews and they talk about their competitive drive.

Saying literally multiple times doesn’t make your opinion literally true. Just FYI.