If you turn down an elite school or couldn’t get into one, some doors will close to you. Look at the charts in this article. Among “Forbes powerful men”, from the magazine’s list, and “Davos academia”, there is very little representation of people from non-elite schools:
There are plenty of non-elite school graduates in some other sectors of the US elite, as per the charts in the article, so if a person’s inherent abilities, even without an elite school diploma, open doors in some other sectors, why don’t “Forbes powerful men” and “Davos academia” have larger numbers of people from non-elite schools? Perhaps people from non-elite schools just are not interested in being part of “Davos academia”, but I doubt it; academia probably does pay a lot attention to your diploma when deciding whether or not to hire you.
Academia is known to be school-elitist, but more specifically in terms of eliteness of the specific subject PhD program.
But most of the lists referenced in the link are so exclusive that few elite school graduates (or anyone) will come anywhere near getting into those lists.
@ucbalumnus, of course very few people make it onto any of those lists. But the point of the article is that of those who do, some lists (particularly the Davos academic elite and Forbes most powerful men) are almost exclusively composed of people from elite schools.
Thus at least some things- such as Davos- will be off-limits to you unless you’ve graduated from an elite school. It thus does matter for some things if you go to an elite school.
Bogus. The author includes elite graduate schools in his calculation, but admission to these schools is often the result of success in the business world, not the cause.
The same is true of undergrad stats re. billionaires. Although there are some Bill Gateses and Mark Zuckerbergs out there who attended elite schools and then built their fortunes, I’d be willing to bet that a large percentage of the billionaires who attended elite schools were admitted because they were bright but not exceptional students whose families had the capacity to build the school’s next athletic complex.
Yes, for being someone as smart as this man claims to be in his “about me” blurbs, he seems to confuse correlation with causation.
Further, his list of “elite” schools is based on SAT scores… again, it takes very smart people to get into those schools.
A better study would be to do some kind of matched case study. Take students who had similar SAT/ACT scores, GPAs, SES backgrounds, etc and follow them through college- one group going to “elite” colleges and the other to “non-elite.” THEN you can more adequately talk about the opportunities afforded to you because of the name on your degree.
@romanigypsyeyes, you explain this: of the various graphs of the US elite in that article, some parts (such as judges) have plenty of non-elite school graduates on them, and even Fortune 500 CEOs are mostly non-elite school graduate.
Other graphs in the article have almost no non-elite school graduates on them.
If two students of equal aptitude pick different schools- one elite, one non-elite, it looks from those graphs as though the non-elite graduate would be excluded from some of those sectors of the US elite. Why?
@sue22, same point for you: the issue for me is not success coming from an elite vs. a non-elite school overall, but the near-exclusion of non-elite graduates from some parts of the US elite, such as the Davos academic elite. Why?
Maybe they weren’t focused on getting jobs in those sectors and thus chose a school accordingly.
Maybe there was something about the culture at the school that made them interested in those careers.
There are literally hundreds of possible explanations- one of which is, yes, that the schools themselves made those careers possible. However, that is far from the only possible explanation.
DH was admitted to an Ivy League school but couldn’t attend for FA reasons, and so did his undergrad at a school not on the author’s list. He was successful in his post-college career, and based on that fact and his high test scores and excellent recommendations, was admitted to an Ivy League school for his MBA. After a few years post-MBA he took over a large family business (my side), which he has been running quite ably for the past dozen years or so.
IOW, his “elite” degree had nothing to do with either his early success nor his later career as a CEO.
@romanigypsyeyes, anyone with half an IQ point would love to be on the Forbes’ Most Powerful Men list. So would anyone, for the Davos Top Academics list. Non-elite school graduates are excluded from those sectors, though–most likely not by their own choice.
Well, just personally, I don’t think I could ever get on Forbes’ Most Powerful Men list
Further, I’d never heard of it before today to be honest.
Nor have I heard of the Davos Top Academics list.
Guess I must not have even half of an IQ point!
(But psst: no one should tell the elite institution that I’ll have multiple degrees from. They can’t know they made a mistake in admitting and graduating me!)
@romanigypsyeyes, I hadn’t heard of those two specific lists either, but Forbes magazine and the fact that it compiles various lists are well-known, and Davos is well-known as a place for the elite. I think that a typical person would love to be listed among them, and the fact that non-elite school graduates are excluded from them just indicates that for all the people on this board who say that were you go to school doesn’t matter…to the contrary, it most certainly does, for some things.
There are plenty of other examples. For example, if you go to a non-elite law school, you aren’t ending up on the Supreme Court these days, no matter how smart you are.
Just a speculation here (I do not have data to support this): In some area, it allows only so many players to succeed. (An analogy here: I once heard that in this society, we only need one violinist (as a professional performer) among one million people.)
As such, only a small number of participants from some established “network” have the odds to make it in this field.
Since the elite privates (and the few elite public as well) were in the network earlier (those in the controlling class in this society historically came from such an elite private), they continue to be in the dominating position.
The father of my colleague once said: The reason why the people in academic fight so much in their circle is because they collectively have so little. This father’s job is the dean of some department at some college. Maybe the root of the problem for favoring those in the institute already in the network is that the pie is always not large enough (only a limited number of them can have a share?)
Just thought of this: This could also partly explain why med school admission does not favor those graduated from elite private college so much. The majority of med schools are not only public ones, but also established at the same time as the appearance of those more “trade”-focused schools which have their root on the “agricultural and mine” (which focus on the management of (agricultural) business, or engineering in their later evolutions of these public colleges.)
When did going to Davos replace membership in the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, the Institute of Medicine, or the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in importance?
The author is going after Frank Bruni’s book, because it contradicts his own research.
Sorry @Gator88NE, but experience shows that posts like the rest of what you said will result in this thread degenerating into a political nightmare. That’s why we don’t allow it per the Terms of Service. Another time, another place perhaps. - FC
Why don’t you keep projecting your own personal desires on everyone else, why don’t you?
I love elite educations. I think it’s important where you go, I went to an elite school and my kids are currently at elite schools. Having said that, I really couldn’t GAS about ever getting on Forbes magazine list. Being wealthy-beyond-belief just isn’t a life goal for me. I’m solidly in the 1% and I know I’m comfortable enough to have financial security for myself and my family, and to get to do a lot of fun things (travel, etc.). But being at that level of wealth and / or power? It’s just not interesting or motivating to me, at all. Moreover, when you’re at that level, you’re publicly “known.” Yuck. If I’m going to be that level of wealthy, I want to be quiet and under the radar – very Millionaire Next Door. Not have it touted on a public magazine list or otherwise made known to the general public.
As for Davos, I know darn well what it is, but again, it’s just not my life goal.
I have to wonder how “bright” someone truly is if they don’t get that certain measures of success are not everyone’s measure of success. Some of my elite-school-graduate friends are stepping off career paths to do things that interest them. One’s a fiction writer. One owns a yoga studio. One is now doing ministry. Why are they “less successful” than my other elite-school friends who are making big-time bucks in the law or business? They make less money. So what? How tacky, to consider money and power the end goals in life.
“There are plenty of other examples. For example, if you go to a non-elite law school, you aren’t ending up on the Supreme Court these days, no matter how smart you are.”
Plenty of lawyers are happy just making money hand-over-fist and aren’t interested in the SC at all.
@Pizzagirl, I’m not projecting my own desires on people; I’m simply stating the truth: that notwithstanding the numerous people on this board who claim that where you go to school doesn’t matter, to the contrary, for some things, where you go to school most certainly does matter, and that doors may be closed to you without an elite school degree, no matter how smart you are. The Supreme Court example just shows the point.
