The Atlantic How College Became a Ruthless Competition ...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's easy to agree with this in the abstract, but the fact is that it's easier to have a good life if you have enough money, and it's easier to make money if you go to a prestigious school. The employers and industries that pay the most and offer the most obvious path to prosperity hire disproportionately from these schools. That is also true for the jobs and fields that wield the most power in this country - when was the last time there was a supreme court justice, or even clerk, who didn't graduate from an Ivy/Stanford? You can get a great education many places, but the more "status" a university has, the more options it keeps open for the future. Obviously there are successful people who didn't take this route, but it's harder without that type of a well-worn path. How many of us are visionary entrepreneurs? I'm certainly not. Biglaw has been a good fit for me.

Last year? Amy Coney Barrett went to Rhodes College and Notre Dame Law School.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's easy to agree with this in the abstract, but the fact is that it's easier to have a good life if you have enough money, and it's easier to make money if you go to a prestigious school. The employers and industries that pay the most and offer the most obvious path to prosperity hire disproportionately from these schools. That is also true for the jobs and fields that wield the most power in this country - when was the last time there was a supreme court justice, or even clerk, who didn't graduate from an Ivy/Stanford? You can get a great education many places, but the more "status" a university has, the more options it keeps open for the future. Obviously there are successful people who didn't take this route, but it's harder without that type of a well-worn path. How many of us are visionary entrepreneurs? I'm certainly not. Biglaw has been a good fit for me.

Last year? Amy Coney Barrett went to Rhodes College and Notre Dame Law School.

And their boss went to UD

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's easy to agree with this in the abstract, but the fact is that it's easier to have a good life if you have enough money, and it's easier to make money if you go to a prestigious school. The employers and industries that pay the most and offer the most obvious path to prosperity hire disproportionately from these schools. That is also true for the jobs and fields that wield the most power in this country - when was the last time there was a supreme court justice, or even clerk, who didn't graduate from an Ivy/Stanford? You can get a great education many places, but the more "status" a university has, the more options it keeps open for the future. Obviously there are successful people who didn't take this route, but it's harder without that type of a well-worn path. How many of us are visionary entrepreneurs? I'm certainly not. Biglaw has been a good fit for me.

My husband and I are both graduates of Stanford Law School. We had many classmates at Stanford who came from undergrad schools that we had never heard of. These folks were just as smart as those of us who were lucky enough to go to fancy pants colleges. And, if you're in BigLaw, you know that there are plenty of partners who didn't go to T3 or even T6 or T14 law schools. Again, these people are excellent lawyers, as smart as their partners who went to far less prestigious schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's easy to agree with this in the abstract, but the fact is that it's easier to have a good life if you have enough money, and it's easier to make money if you go to a prestigious school. The employers and industries that pay the most and offer the most obvious path to prosperity hire disproportionately from these schools. That is also true for the jobs and fields that wield the most power in this country - when was the last time there was a supreme court justice, or even clerk, who didn't graduate from an Ivy/Stanford? You can get a great education many places, but the more "status" a university has, the more options it keeps open for the future. Obviously there are successful people who didn't take this route, but it's harder without that type of a well-worn path. How many of us are visionary entrepreneurs? I'm certainly not. Biglaw has been a good fit for me.

Last year? Amy Coney Barrett went to Rhodes College and Notre Dame Law School.

And their boss went to UD

Fair point about Barrett, but she is the exception that proves the rule. But Biden is not their "boss." Co-equal branches of government and all that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's easy to agree with this in the abstract, but the fact is that it's easier to have a good life if you have enough money, and it's easier to make money if you go to a prestigious school. The employers and industries that pay the most and offer the most obvious path to prosperity hire disproportionately from these schools. That is also true for the jobs and fields that wield the most power in this country - when was the last time there was a supreme court justice, or even clerk, who didn't graduate from an Ivy/Stanford? You can get a great education many places, but the more "status" a university has, the more options it keeps open for the future. Obviously there are successful people who didn't take this route, but it's harder without that type of a well-worn path. How many of us are visionary entrepreneurs? I'm certainly not. Biglaw has been a good fit for me.

My husband and I are both graduates of Stanford Law School. We had many classmates at Stanford who came from undergrad schools that we had never heard of. These folks were just as smart as those of us who were lucky enough to go to fancy pants colleges. And, if you're in BigLaw, you know that there are plenty of partners who didn't go to T3 or even T6 or T14 law schools. Again, these people are excellent lawyers, as smart as their partners who went to far less prestigious schools.

But there aren't "plenty" of partners who didn't go to T14 schools. There are a handful. And fewer associates. If you want to be hired by an S&C or a Davis Polk or a Goldman or a McKinsey, you have a much, much better chance if you graduated from a "top" school(s). The partners who went to lower ranked schools for the most part joined the firm laterally after proving themselves elsewhere. I don't see the point of arguing that this doesn't give you a significant leg up. Anyone can succeed, but it's much easier if you get your foot in the right doors early. I am not suggesting this system is normative, just that it's ridiculous to pretend this dynamic doesn't exist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's easy to agree with this in the abstract, but the fact is that it's easier to have a good life if you have enough money, and it's easier to make money if you go to a prestigious school. The employers and industries that pay the most and offer the most obvious path to prosperity hire disproportionately from these schools. That is also true for the jobs and fields that wield the most power in this country - when was the last time there was a supreme court justice, or even clerk, who didn't graduate from an Ivy/Stanford? You can get a great education many places, but the more "status" a university has, the more options it keeps open for the future. Obviously there are successful people who didn't take this route, but it's harder without that type of a well-worn path. How many of us are visionary entrepreneurs? I'm certainly not. Biglaw has been a good fit for me.

My husband and I are both graduates of Stanford Law School. We had many classmates at Stanford who came from undergrad schools that we had never heard of. These folks were just as smart as those of us who were lucky enough to go to fancy pants colleges. And, if you're in BigLaw, you know that there are plenty of partners who didn't go to T3 or even T6 or T14 law schools. Again, these people are excellent lawyers, as smart as their partners who went to far less prestigious schools.

+1 I don't understand why people don't get this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's easy to agree with this in the abstract, but the fact is that it's easier to have a good life if you have enough money, and it's easier to make money if you go to a prestigious school. The employers and industries that pay the most and offer the most obvious path to prosperity hire disproportionately from these schools. That is also true for the jobs and fields that wield the most power in this country - when was the last time there was a supreme court justice, or even clerk, who didn't graduate from an Ivy/Stanford? You can get a great education many places, but the more "status" a university has, the more options it keeps open for the future. Obviously there are successful people who didn't take this route, but it's harder without that type of a well-worn path. How many of us are visionary entrepreneurs? I'm certainly not. Biglaw has been a good fit for me.

My husband and I are both graduates of Stanford Law School. We had many classmates at Stanford who came from undergrad schools that we had never heard of. These folks were just as smart as those of us who were lucky enough to go to fancy pants colleges. And, if you're in BigLaw, you know that there are plenty of partners who didn't go to T3 or even T6 or T14 law schools. Again, these people are excellent lawyers, as smart as their partners who went to far less prestigious schools.

But there aren't "plenty" of partners who didn't go to T14 schools. There are a handful. And fewer associates. If you want to be hired by an S&C or a Davis Polk or a Goldman or a McKinsey, you have a much, much better chance if you graduated from a "top" school(s). The partners who went to lower ranked schools for the most part joined the firm laterally after proving themselves elsewhere. I don't see the point of arguing that this doesn't give you a significant leg up. Anyone can succeed, but it's much easier if you get your foot in the right doors early. I am not suggesting this system is normative, just that it's ridiculous to pretend this dynamic doesn't exist.

Honestly, you are just wrong. Also, just as there are more than three law schools, there are more than three law firms where lawyers are making more than any human needs. You are so tunnel-visioned that you are blind.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Agree with prior poster, and I am not rich.

I think you are choosing a place where your kid will finish forming into an adult. If you want them to do that somewhere full of frat bros or backstabbers, go for it.

My child was not fully baked when I sent her away, so we both gravitated to a place that would be forgiving and steer her/him towards independence and social responsibility. For example, at the parents session when I dropped my child off, the adminstrators shared their goals (for their students) with us, so we could all be on the same page.For example, if our kid called us freshman year asking for guidance how to approach a paper, they told us about campus resources that we should direct the kids to instead. So they would learn how to solve their own problems. Similarly, they had a slide with attributes that they hoped their graduates would emulate. One was kindness. I really liked that and wondered if it would appear on the list of some hard-charging school that prided itself on sending graduates off to Goldman Sachs?

Which school? Sounds like a perfect place for my HS junior to look at!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's easy to agree with this in the abstract, but the fact is that it's easier to have a good life if you have enough money, and it's easier to make money if you go to a prestigious school. The employers and industries that pay the most and offer the most obvious path to prosperity hire disproportionately from these schools. That is also true for the jobs and fields that wield the most power in this country - when was the last time there was a supreme court justice, or even clerk, who didn't graduate from an Ivy/Stanford? You can get a great education many places, but the more "status" a university has, the more options it keeps open for the future. Obviously there are successful people who didn't take this route, but it's harder without that type of a well-worn path. How many of us are visionary entrepreneurs? I'm certainly not. Biglaw has been a good fit for me.

My husband and I are both graduates of Stanford Law School. We had many classmates at Stanford who came from undergrad schools that we had never heard of. These folks were just as smart as those of us who were lucky enough to go to fancy pants colleges. And, if you're in BigLaw, you know that there are plenty of partners who didn't go to T3 or even T6 or T14 law schools. Again, these people are excellent lawyers, as smart as their partners who went to far less prestigious schools.

But there aren't "plenty" of partners who didn't go to T14 schools. There are a handful. And fewer associates. If you want to be hired by an S&C or a Davis Polk or a Goldman or a McKinsey, you have a much, much better chance if you graduated from a "top" school(s). The partners who went to lower ranked schools for the most part joined the firm laterally after proving themselves elsewhere. I don't see the point of arguing that this doesn't give you a significant leg up. Anyone can succeed, but it's much easier if you get your foot in the right doors early. I am not suggesting this system is normative, just that it's ridiculous to pretend this dynamic doesn't exist.

Honestly, you are just wrong. Also, just as there are more than three law schools, there are more than three law firms where lawyers are making more than any human needs. You are so tunnel-visioned that you are blind.

? What is your agenda here? It's not "wrong" that it's easier to get a "prestigious" job out of a "prestigious" school. That is simply a fact. There are plenty of data to support this; here is one example: https://abovethelaw.com/2020/03/the-best-law-schools-for-getting-a-biglaw-job-2020/. If employers were able and willing to consider non-unicorn candidates from other schools, they would find many talented, ambitious people. But in general they prefer to rely on proxies for success with which they are familiar, such as school ranking and test scores. I didn't go to Ivies myself; more like T30 schools for undergrad and law school, and I loved school and consider myself to have had a successful career so far (including when I worked in government). I'm well aware that it's possible. But the "better" your school, the more options you will have upon graduation. What is your theory for why these schools are so competitive, if not the dynamic I've described?

[Anonymous]

Even the article argues that these schools can give people a leg up. He’s arguing that the idea of prestige in itself as BS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Focusing intensely on career and future wages is because of the insane price of college these days. If you pay full price, 80k for 4 years, you don’t have the luxury of saying I went to college to enrich my mind. You need a high paying job to justify your parents having spent over $300,000 for college for only one child. For 3 kids, you can end up spending close to $1 million. How can you not be career focused with these kinds of costs. Canada and Europe have figured it out much better than the US in my opinion. Maybe Asia too although HS stress in Asia is just too much

+1 parents are expected to save from the time their kid is a fetus or risk the kid having lifetime of crushing debt, yet we’re supposed to pretend that salary isn’t an outcome that matters

I've been saving since my kids were born to save them from a lifetime of crushing debt precisely so that the salary they make after college doesn't matter! I want them to pursue what interests them and figure out to make lives for themselves. I don't expect some financial return on the investment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Love this: Leon Botstein, the president of Bard College, once quipped that "the next thing they’ll do is rank churches. You know, ‘Where does God appear most frequently? How big are the pews?”

Ok Bard. But where will our future astrophysicists come from? Bard? Maybe but I think is fair to say that there might be a better option for them out there.

Sure but how many books in the school library probably don’t matter then. You missed the point.

I don't think so. How should a student choose a college? I understand thr point of the article but it does not really address how to choose a college. Anyone that has been through highschool or had a kid go through high school has seen the big range of student interest ability and motivation. Is there no difference between going to study physics here as opposed to there? Really?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Very interesting perspective. From the article:
“Education’s core purpose is (or once was) to help people engage with the world and grow into themselves—to discover the overlap between their interests and their talents and develop it. Different people and schools each embrace distinctive visions of empathy, understanding, wisdom, and usefulness: The scholar aspires to know the forces that drive history forward, the inventor seeks to bend technology to practical ends, and the activist strives to reform institutions and inspire citizens to embrace justice. Schools with different educational missions ought to favor different students, and students with different aspirations ought to favor different schools. ”

Yes! I have repeatedly said on here and say to my kids that college is not intended to be trade school!

Do your kids have a trust fund?

[Anonymous]

I don't see why these students can't look at the different options and examine the different programs available and pursue the one that think is the best fit. What is this author suggesting these kids do....pick out of a hat? Why?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's easy to agree with this in the abstract, but the fact is that it's easier to have a good life if you have enough money, and it's easier to make money if you go to a prestigious school. The employers and industries that pay the most and offer the most obvious path to prosperity hire disproportionately from these schools. That is also true for the jobs and fields that wield the most power in this country - when was the last time there was a supreme court justice, or even clerk, who didn't graduate from an Ivy/Stanford? You can get a great education many places, but the more "status" a university has, the more options it keeps open for the future. Obviously there are successful people who didn't take this route, but it's harder without that type of a well-worn path. How many of us are visionary entrepreneurs? I'm certainly not. Biglaw has been a good fit for me.

Really? I disagree that going to a more prestigious school and a more lucrative profession such as Biglaw makes for a happier life. In Mr. Darcy’s time (from the article), the elite could be idle or pursue their little passion projects. Today the elite work the longest hours and are under the most stress.

Going to elite colleges are like a pie-eating contest where the award is more pie.