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?

DP. It’s deflection.
It’s a recycle of the same DCUM mantra: ivy students must not have any fun, ivy/elites filled with strivers, my janey would never go to one and is picking a relaxed school with sports etc. Thus when articles come out discussing the (small, at the margins) boost ivy+ provides in getting to the top fields the response is a predictable lament on how those fields have no work-life balance anyway thus who wants them.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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

Except it’s not an opinion dipshit. There is no line of work or career or workplace that doesn’t value competitiveness.

Off the top of my head, healthcare workers, research scientists, and teachers are jobs that don't value competitiveness.

This is nuts…a relative is a top research scientist and one of the most competitive people you will ever meet. Tops in her field and she knows how hard it is to get research dollars…has zero problem ousting junior researchers who can’t “cut it” because hustling and competing for grants is a tough business. It’s a problem because junior researchers don’t really understand the career path they have chosen many times.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Neither me nor my DH attended an ivy league school. We both have flexible well paying jobs with good work life balance. We have a great life and it's what we want for our kid. Not a crazy high pressure job that will destroy their health.

Another low iq person exposed.

DP. Nothing about that post is low IQ. It is simply stating a different preference.

Low IQ is not being able to understand the difference.

Trying is inference using anecdotal instead of statistical evidence IS low iq.

Except, again, that’s not what that poster was doing.

This whole discussion seems to be going over your head so you may want to bow out gracefully.

I am the PP with the flexible well paying job. I often encounter Ivy League grads with attitudes like the "low IQ" poster. They don't do well and don't last in my sector.

I doubt the “low IQ” poster attended an Ivy League school. More likely a striver parent on the low end of the Dunning-Kruger curve.

Someone who attended an Ivy or knew enough people who attended an Ivy would be less likely to believe that the Ivies (or Ivy+) are the only golden ticket.

Definitely not in my experience with Ivy League grads. Even the ones that do relatively well in the workplace have narcissistic traits that hinder their ability to lead effectively

Why would they need to be narcissists when they so clearly live rent free in your head in perpetuity?

I’m sorry you feel so disrespected in comparison but then you likely haven’t done anything to warrant the respect of others.

Only people like Donald Trump, Rick DeSantis, Brett Kavanaugh, Elon Musk, Ted Cruz and their ilk have achievements significant enough to warrant the respect of others.

Anonymous wrote:Do top LACs like Swarthmore and Pomona count in this scenario? Or Rice and JHU? Or are they count as a level below? It’s a hard sell to suggest that students at Brown are smarter than students at Rice or Pomona, esp when so many freshmen nowadays are hooked and didn’t get in for having the tippy top academics. Even HYP are adding remedial, pre-calculus, college writing skills type classes to help freshmen who are not up to speed.

There are many schools where the student profiles are virtually identical. At least 20 R1s and 10 SLACs and probably closer to 30 R1s and 15 SLACs.

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.

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

Except it’s not an opinion dipshit. There is no line of work or career or workplace that doesn’t value competitiveness.

Off the top of my head, healthcare workers, research scientists, and teachers are jobs that don't value competitiveness.

Do top LACs like Swarthmore and Pomona count in this scenario? Or Rice and JHU? Or are they count as a level below? It’s a hard sell to suggest that students at Brown are smarter than students at Rice or Pomona, esp when so many freshmen nowadays are hooked and didn’t get in for having the tippy top academics. Even HYP are adding remedial, pre-calculus, college writing skills type classes to help freshmen who are not up to speed.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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

Except it’s not an opinion dipshit. There is no line of work or career or workplace that doesn’t value competitiveness.

Prove it, cite your source(s). We’ll wait.

So, you want a source on a fundamental tenet of how the world works? That’s honestly what you are asking?

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

Total BS from someone who has no idea how these fields work. As a professor-doctor couple and a sibling who went to a different ivy+ who is an engineering professor-tech industry VP couple, along with the majority of my friends from ivy+ who have one of the careers you mention yet also have kids, we are happy, make plenty of money to have had flexibility in hours when kids were young and/or retire early. And can be full pay at ivy types. We knew we could “have it all” in part because we had professors and mentors along the way who made top careers plus family work. The late 90s in college had plenty of work life balance—are some of you from the 1960s pre feminist era of college?

My kids go to different schools in the ivy+ list. They have even more mentors with balanced lives than I did. It is a normal perspective at these places to be confident that you can become a researcher or lawyer or whatever else you want to do and find a spouse who shares the desire for family as well as chasing dreams.
Maybe that is what my ivy undergrad and top grad/med school gave my spouse and I. The tools to see what was possible, be able to compete and make it happen.
It was never about the money but the money has been a nice side effect.

Anonymous wrote:The only real information I glean from this study is how opportunity and inequality work at the very top of higher education and that these schools do not admit students based purely on merit. Nothing surprising.

Define merit?

They all admit on merit. Their definition of merit may not align with yours but the do not admit unqualified students.

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.

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

Except it’s not an opinion dipshit. There is no line of work or career or workplace that doesn’t value competitiveness.

Prove it, cite your source(s). We’ll wait.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I think one exception might be Cornell.

If you say you went to Cornell, you are signaling that you are smart but nobody thinks you're bragging.

I actually think Cornell says "I'm a slave to the Ivy brand but this is the best I could do." It's kind of embarrassing.
This describes many kids I know who are there.

It wasn't always that way and I hope it gets fixed. I think that's more true of students ts from certain regions and DMV is one of them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?"

Again, I don’t understand. What jobs are you describing that provide work/life balance? I assume an Ivy grad could decide to work such a job if they wanted.

I also bet at the exact same job that you think has great work/life balance, there are higher ups who are driven and competitive and want more.

Like a great example is say becoming an actuary…you can decide to go work for an insurance company and never manage people and top out at a nice/decent living…but there will be others that want to manage people and maybe run the insurance company some day.

DP here. Are YOU an Ivy grad? Because you can’t even follow a simple conversation. I really don’t see you functioning at any of these higher, more competitive levels you keep yammering about.

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.

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

+1 That PP has no idea what they're talking about

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.

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

Except it’s not an opinion dipshit. There is no line of work or career or workplace that doesn’t value competitiveness.

Anonymous wrote:

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?"

Again, I don’t understand. What jobs are you describing that provide work/life balance? I assume an Ivy grad could decide to work such a job if they wanted.

I also bet at the exact same job that you think has great work/life balance, there are higher ups who are driven and competitive and want more.

Like a great example is say becoming an actuary…you can decide to go work for an insurance company and never manage people and top out at a nice/decent living…but there will be others that want to manage people and maybe run the insurance company some day.