Are Ivy Leagues outdated and irrelevant these days?

[Anonymous]

Tech had the 7th highest unemployment rate currently

[Anonymous]

Why are you constantly posting stupid posts about the Ivies. Why are you obsessed with them

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Ivy League is an athletic conference that is very much relevant.

- in college athletics.

Not much else.

College Athletics are of little importance. The educational opportunities at these schools are outstanding.

That is no longer the case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s the era of the tech/STEm schools. They’re the ones changing the world these days. IMO, the most important schools the last 100 years are:

Berkeley
Stanford
MIT
CMU
Georgia Tech

In that order.

Harvard had a big role in Ethernet, TCP/IP which is the foundation of today’s tech.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why are you constantly posting stupid posts about the Ivies. Why are you obsessed with them

Because from their mom's basement in rural West Virginia they seem really fascinating?

[Anonymous]

Managers are reluctant to hire recent ivy grads

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Managers are reluctant to hire recent ivy grads

https://www.resume.org/research/recent-college-grads-are-hard-to-manage-and-always-on-their-phones-many-managers-avoid-hiring-them/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Managers are reluctant to hire recent ivy grads

Stupid managers are reluctant to hire recent ivy grads. Anyone running a white collar company who pre-emptively rejects someone because they went to an Ivy League school is a moron. If you find out it is someone who was destroying buildings at Columbia or something, that is a different story.

If your company is doing this, please tell me the name of the company so I can short its stock as it is clearly being run by idiots.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Managers are reluctant to hire recent ivy grads

https://www.resume.org/research/recent-college-grads-are-hard-to-manage-and-always-on-their-phones-many-managers-avoid-hiring-them/

This article says they don't want to hire ANY college grads. Nothing to do with Ivy league or non-Ivy league.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With maga taking down ivies, this might become true in a few years. Sad.

The Ivies are falling out of favor because people finally discovered the 30% legacy admissions, the sports recruiting, and figured out the academic accomplishments are highly inflated at the Ivies.

+1

Yeah, it's also not like the old days when fewer students attended college and high-achieving students were concentrated in a few prestigious institutions. Nowadays, most high school seniors pursue higher education, and talented students are distributed across many universities throughout the country.

This answer doesn’t come close to describing the “old days” at all.

In the old days, 90% of all students went to college like 30 miles of where they lived…even boarding school kids were fairly local to Boston and Mass.

My grandfather went to Harvard because he was smart and lived 5 miles away. If he lived in the middle of Iowa, he would have attended some college within around 30 miles.

Harvard was more like 75% only because there was a large group from NYC even “back in the day”.

DP: Was 2020 the "old days"? Because the median distance to college in 2020 was 17 miles, with 69% of college students traveling no more than 50 miles. https://ticas.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/HIllman-Geography-of-Opportunity-Brief-2_2023.pdf

Most students still attend colleges close to home.

That’s the point…imagine what it was in the 1950s or 1980s or whatever the “old days” are.

Many people like to reference a time in the past where only the most deserving attended the best schools and somehow kids from the middle of South Dakota found their way to Harvard.

Problem is that time has never existed.

+100. I’d love to know when the meritocracy was ever at the Ivies. At least now they’ve expanded their financial aid policies and try to recruit FGLI through organizations like QuestBridge and Posse. But “the good old days” were for the wealthy white males. Columbia became co-ed in 1983.

So, the idea that 'prestige' reflects intelligence was flawed from the very beginning?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With maga taking down ivies, this might become true in a few years. Sad.

The Ivies are falling out of favor because people finally discovered the 30% legacy admissions, the sports recruiting, and figured out the academic accomplishments are highly inflated at the Ivies.

+1

Yeah, it's also not like the old days when fewer students attended college and high-achieving students were concentrated in a few prestigious institutions. Nowadays, most high school seniors pursue higher education, and talented students are distributed across many universities throughout the country.

This answer doesn’t come close to describing the “old days” at all.

In the old days, 90% of all students went to college like 30 miles of where they lived…even boarding school kids were fairly local to Boston and Mass.

My grandfather went to Harvard because he was smart and lived 5 miles away. If he lived in the middle of Iowa, he would have attended some college within around 30 miles.

Harvard was more like 75% only because there was a large group from NYC even “back in the day”.

DP: Was 2020 the "old days"? Because the median distance to college in 2020 was 17 miles, with 69% of college students traveling no more than 50 miles. https://ticas.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/HIllman-Geography-of-Opportunity-Brief-2_2023.pdf

Most students still attend colleges close to home.

That’s the point…imagine what it was in the 1950s or 1980s or whatever the “old days” are.

Many people like to reference a time in the past where only the most deserving attended the best schools and somehow kids from the middle of South Dakota found their way to Harvard.

Problem is that time has never existed.

+100. I’d love to know when the meritocracy was ever at the Ivies. At least now they’ve expanded their financial aid policies and try to recruit FGLI through organizations like QuestBridge and Posse. But “the good old days” were for the wealthy white males. Columbia became co-ed in 1983.

So, the idea that 'prestige' reflects intelligence was flawed from the very beginning?

And Barnard was right across the street with access to Columbia before 1983.

The Ivies have long schooled a disproportionate share of the best and the brightest. Not all, but more than a typical university, public or private.

[Anonymous]

No matter how many threads are posted on this topic, unfortunately your sheer will can’t make them irrelevant. The obsession on her just shows how powerful they were and continue to be.

[Anonymous]

There's way more variation within schools than between. School quality is real, but the best students at U of Maryland or U Pittsburgh are way better than the worst students at Harvard or Berkeley. Stop focussing so much on where someone will go or went, and more on what they do there and afterwards.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The best thing about being an Ivy (actually, double Ivy) grad is knowing how much we live inside the heads of the terminally resentful.

You are not an ivy grad. People should resent these institutions-they’re morally bankrupt and produce so many miserable and evil world “leaders”

NP, I am and I think your and others' obsession with Ivies is telling.

You can tell Ivies are not outdated and irrelevant just by the fact that you started a post about them.

[Anonymous]

I went to an Ivy, and I am constantly amazed how many high profile people come from there. Names you read about every day in the news. So no, hardly irrelevant.