What an Ivy league education gets you - the Atlantic

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It doesn’t prove Ivy League schools matter. You can argue it’s the high student caliber in those schools that led to the results.

The waitlisted students are of a similar calibre yet don't get the same benefits

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are a bunch of new ivies including Emory, Vandy, Rice. They can simulate a similar environment.

😂

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I did some back and forth with several AI engines, and I left even less impressed with the DCUM Ivy focus. The typical job for an Ivy grad is something in finance, consulting, or tech. It’s a job. It has a salary. But, many kids get this from a good school.

The students who go on to become standout alumni fall into one of several buckets:

1) They already had access to capital and networks before they arrived at school. The degree confirmed their birthright.

2) Ivy was a FIRST step among many to success, like a prestigious job, then a prestigious graduate degree, then another prestigious job, and then many years of hard work, and then they got the prize.

3) They were risk takers. Four of the wealthiest people in the US attended an Ivy and dropped out. It definitely wasn’t the education that determined their success. Other notables didn’t follow the safe path of the prestigious job, but ran for office, wrote a book, etc.

Whatever the case, only 1 in 50,000 Ivy dudes will become a CEO, and it’s hard to know if it was their Ivy degree, jobs after school, graduate education, or something else that got them there. Whatever the case, it’s clear that most Ivy students won’t be CEOs.

The takeaway is that while kids who attend Ivies are smart and probably more ambitious and competitive than most, only a fraction of even them have the insatiable ambition and drive to actively leverage the available network to make an outstanding difference.

For what it’s worth, I have a SIL who attended an Ivy undergraduate and Ivy medical school. She complains all the time about how her non-Ivy peers get paid the same money.

Why did your SIL choose an equitable field rather than a prestige sensitive one like high finance, consulting, etc?

The study in question didn't just look at a handful of CEOs, but the much larger portion making big money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The most sure thing you get from an Ivy degree (really only HPY) is bragging rights. In most circles it is shorthand for I’m smart.

But, it also comes with a lot of baggage, especially outside Ivy circles. Many think that Ivy “normals” rest on their laurels and think too highly of themselves. Some normals are so intoxicated by their supposed sophistication that they are tone-deaf to their obnoxiousness. The worst is when Ivy normals level-up by name-dropping notable alumni, especially ones who attended school at the same time but didn’t interact with them. In other words, for many Ivy graduates, the diploma becomes a burden that many don’t wear well. With great opportunities come great, perhaps insurmountable, expectations.

The most obnoxious are the people who turned down and Ivy to attend a lower ranked school. They'll always tell you where they got in and why they turned it down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I did some back and forth with several AI engines, and I left even less impressed with the DCUM Ivy focus. The typical job for an Ivy grad is something in finance, consulting, or tech. It’s a job. It has a salary. But, many kids get this from a good school.

The students who go on to become standout alumni fall into one of several buckets:

1) They already had access to capital and networks before they arrived at school. The degree confirmed their birthright.

2) Ivy was a FIRST step among many to success, like a prestigious job, then a prestigious graduate degree, then another prestigious job, and then many years of hard work, and then they got the prize.

3) They were risk takers. Four of the wealthiest people in the US attended an Ivy and dropped out. It definitely wasn’t the education that determined their success. Other notables didn’t follow the safe path of the prestigious job, but ran for office, wrote a book, etc.

Whatever the case, only 1 in 50,000 Ivy dudes will become a CEO, and it’s hard to know if it was their Ivy degree, jobs after school, graduate education, or something else that got them there. Whatever the case, it’s clear that most Ivy students won’t be CEOs.

The takeaway is that while kids who attend Ivies are smart and probably more ambitious and competitive than most, only a fraction of even them have the insatiable ambition and drive to actively leverage the available network to make an outstanding difference.

For what it’s worth, I have a SIL who attended an Ivy undergraduate and Ivy medical school. She complains all the time about how her non-Ivy peers get paid the same money.

Why is she complaining?

Because it was harder to get into her schools, and it cost her family more money. Basically, she thinks she’s smarter and better prepared than her peers, but standard medical reimbursement pays for basic outcomes, not the ego and pedigree of the practitioner.

But she was the one who chose to waste her family's money on a needlessly expensive qualification. It's like paying $100k for a used Honda and then being made other people got the same car for a fraction of the price.

If she was significantly more talented than her peers and wanted to make more than them, why not go into plastics or derm etc, or concierge medicine where she can choose how much to charge based on the (perceived) quality of her (allegedly superior) care?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It doesn’t prove Ivy League schools matter. You can argue it’s the high student caliber in those schools that led to the results.

The waitlisted students are of a similar calibre yet don't get the same benefits

So all these CEOs and leaders they’re looking at were waitlisted first? How do they even know if someone was waitlisted in 1950?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It doesn’t prove Ivy League schools matter. You can argue it’s the high student caliber in those schools that led to the results.

When these schools corner the market on high student caliber, the result is the same.
There schools studied have the maximum density if you will of superior minded students, everywhere: classrooms, labs, clubs.
Though I suppose one could add Caltech, Northwestern and JHU to the ivy+ schools studied: based on pre-test optional data they are likely essentially the same student population.

Caltech provides something Americans don’t respect: rigorous education and a dedication towards improving science, not for profit, but for humanity’s sake. There’s a reason the American people adore MIT as a bastion for intellectual science while having never heard of Caltech- MIT provides all the useful tech for bombing others, stealing our data, creating polarizing media. Meanwhile Caltech students disproportionately receive PhDs and go in to the less profitable route of academia to improve our society.

Plenty of Caltech grads work under the DoD's funding

[Anonymous]

I marvel at the insecurity of the OP starting this truly silly thread and at the posters defending its premise.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It doesn’t prove Ivy League schools matter. You can argue it’s the high student caliber in those schools that led to the results.

The waitlisted students are of a similar calibre yet don't get the same benefits

So all these CEOs and leaders they’re looking at were waitlisted first? How do they even know if someone was waitlisted in 1950?

You should read the study, or paste it into AI and ask it these questions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It doesn’t prove Ivy League schools matter. You can argue it’s the high student caliber in those schools that led to the results.

The waitlisted students are of a similar calibre yet don't get the same benefits

So all these CEOs and leaders they’re looking at were waitlisted first? How do they even know if someone was waitlisted in 1950?

You should read the study, or paste it into AI and ask it these questions.

Where’s the study? All I see is a paywalled Atlantic article telling me I'm worthless because I didn’t go to an Ivy. Sorry but I’m not super motivated to pay someone for more detail about exactly how worthless they think my life must be.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It doesn’t prove Ivy League schools matter. You can argue it’s the high student caliber in those schools that led to the results.

When these schools corner the market on high student caliber, the result is the same.
There schools studied have the maximum density if you will of superior minded students, everywhere: classrooms, labs, clubs.
Though I suppose one could add Caltech, Northwestern and JHU to the ivy+ schools studied: based on pre-test optional data they are likely essentially the same student population.

Caltech provides something Americans don’t respect: rigorous education and a dedication towards improving science, not for profit, but for humanity’s sake. There’s a reason the American people adore MIT as a bastion for intellectual science while having never heard of Caltech- MIT provides all the useful tech for bombing others, stealing our data, creating polarizing media. Meanwhile Caltech students disproportionately receive PhDs and go in to the less profitable route of academia to improve our society.

Cool story bro.
today’s Caltech is for MIT rejects, which isn’t that bad actually:

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The study findings are what I intuitively would have said was the thing an elite institution gets you. I was a small town girl from a MC high school. Living in a dorm with heiresses and UMC girls acclimated me to the life I lived "ever after."

I would say the same but with regard to academic and intellectual firepower rather than lifestyle factors.

I managed to get to a T10 school without working hard or challenging myself much in high school. I knew I was very smart, so though I engaged when I wanted to, I mostly coasted through.

My T10 college changed that immediately. The environment stimulated and challenged me - to dig deeper, work harder, and push myself to the learning edge again and again. The discourse was more complex and sophisticated, and the “average” performance was astronomical compared to my previous environments. My classmates were truely impressive, and being around them helped me grow more than any concept or material I learned in a book or from a lecture.

It’s always about the people. Our peers help frame our daily lives and influence us so much more than we often realize.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The study findings are what I intuitively would have said was the thing an elite institution gets you. I was a small town girl from a MC high school. Living in a dorm with heiresses and UMC girls acclimated me to the life I lived "ever after."

I would say the same but with regard to academic and intellectual firepower rather than lifestyle factors.

I managed to get to a T10 school without working hard or challenging myself much in high school. I knew I was very smart, so though I engaged when I wanted to, I mostly coasted through.

My T10 college changed that immediately. The environment stimulated and challenged me - to dig deeper, work harder, and push myself to the learning edge again and again. The discourse was more complex and sophisticated, and the “average” performance was astronomical compared to my previous environments. My classmates were truely impressive, and being around them helped me grow more than any concept or material I learned in a book or from a lecture.

It’s always about the people. Our peers help frame our daily lives and influence us so much more than we often realize.

Kids like you don’t get into T10s any more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It doesn’t prove Ivy League schools matter. You can argue it’s the high student caliber in those schools that led to the results.

That has been studied, multiple times, comparing the group of students who had the choice and picked ivy+ MIT/Stanford/Duke /Chicago versus those who picked lower ranked schools. For the most competitive sectors of various fields, the ivy+ schools gave a small but statistically significant boost.

Until you control for family income and education. In those cases it's pretty negligible except in cases of kids going from poverty to ivy--but there's not a huge control group because those kids will get full rides anywhere so there isn't a huge comparison group at flagships.

For UMC kids, not much difference.

Oh yes there is. You have to have one at an ivy and one at a good public or good LAC to see it. It is night and day.

You can’t seriously believe that Cornell, Brown and Dartmouth kids are smarter or more ambitious than kids from Williams, JHU and Swarthmore.