I wonder if anyone has seen this YouTube of Malcolm Gladwell speaking to Google about elite institutions and what it means for kids in college. Just Malcolm being his usual outrageous self for about 20 minutes:
2 Likes
Just watched it. Thanks for sharing. What did you find outrageous about it?
Sorry, but I should have said provocative.
What did you think about what he had to say?
I couldn’t get the url to work for me, but is it “Why Did I Say Yes…?”
1 Like
Yes
I agree with him to an extent. I do think a lot depends on the student, but it’s not always known starting out how the student will react to not being the big fish anymore. Some also can’t imagine that they will not be the big fish at the top school. I knew for my DD that being a big fish was the better option given her personality. I was right.
One comment on hiring. He mentioned IB, and is correct that they focus on brand name regardless of rank. The same isn’t true for another career path that people equate with being career obsessed: consulting. I hate when I see students choose a top school based on the belief that the school will get them a position with a top firm only to realize that only the tippy top at that school have that option in which case they should have gone to a slightly lower ranked school to improve their odds.
3 Likes
Sorry that it wouldn’t open. I’ve edited the link and it should open now. Please try again. My apologies.
Yeah, Gladwell is a very entertaining lecturer and I really find his commercials with Kevin Hart charming and self-deprecating. But, he strikes me as more of a satirist than a scholar. He cherry picks his subjects and in this case, he isn’t defending his own work but using someone else’s study as a jumping off point to poke fun at a big target, in this case, Harvard. A more critical analysis would want to ask where those STEM dropouts ended up (I’m betting they did more than just wind up in Brooklyn earning $15K a year?) And does it really make sense in this day and age to hold up all STEM subjects as equally remunerative when we know that people today pretty much use it as shorthand for CS?
1 Like
His point is valid though and not income-driven. You seem to assume that having highly qualified STEM drop outs is a good thing for society simply because they may find an alternative career path that is lucrative. I don’t think that it necessarily is. Nor is it necessarily a good thing for the individual student.
TL;DR: Makes the case that the Class Rank (“relative positioning”) is very important for successful outcome
4 Likes
I also had areas of disagreement with him and with his use of statistics to support his main argument.
But I think his larger point that confidence, motivation, and self-advocacy are the most important things for making your way in the world and that these traits are defined by your relative standing within your peer group - at least during adolescence, the most vulnerable time in your life - is something that is often missing from discussions about picking a college. I agree with Gladwell on this point. It’s not even about being a big fish in a small pond but being one of the biggest fishes in whatever pond you find yourself in. This is probably more important than facilities, campus, course selection, quality of professors, caliber of students, and all the other things we look at to identify the best colleges.
The good news about picking a college where you’ll be one of the top kids means that you’ve also dramatically increased your chances of getting a merit award or scholarship to bring down the cost. Good news all the way around. 
6 Likes
Agreed. “Small pond” is usually a misnomer. It really just refers to ranking near the top of the school no matter what school it is. Many students incorrectly assess their odds of being a big fish at a particular school. My D’s school is 25k students with thousands of elite school level students. So not a small pond but we knew she had a better chance of being a big fish there than at Harvard. Confidence in that was key to her college experience and tremendous success.
2 Likes
Is posting something like that at an elite obsessed place like this a violation of the ToS? LOL
4 Likes
Agreed that Gladwell is a satirist. After all, that’s what makes him so much fun to listen to. But here’s the thing: he still has a point to make.
Harvard did the landmark study on this 50-60 years ago that the #1 factor in determining success in life is how badly do you want it. Motivation. If you want something badly enough, you’ll work hard to go after it. This finding has been replicated numerous times.
If Gladwell is right and that relative standing among your immediate peers determines your sense of confidence, motivation, and self-advocacy, then we’re doing kids a terrible disservice if we place them somewhere wherein they’ll likely feel like a loser. In this situation and at the stage of life when any of us is most fragile, says Gladwell, we’re putting even some of our most brilliant kids in a position to have their confidence, motivation, and ability to self advocate shattered.
It’s not just about STEM although that’s the example he uses to make his point. It’s a serious issue he raises, and it’s something to think about long and hard.
7 Likes
Itsgettingreal, it sounds like you were very discerning about what might be in your daughter’s best interests. Nice job. 
1 Like
IMHO, this is what we sometimes call, a paradox. Harvard graduates sometimes wind up driving taxi cabs; their confidence and self-advocacy wasn’t enough to stop them from making some pretty poor life decisions. I don’t see this as a macro-economic threat to society.
1 Like
LOL. Speaking of taxi drivers, Jim Ignatowski, the stoned out ex-hippie in the classic sit-com, Taxi, was a Harvard alum. Sounds like you’re onto something. 
3 Likes
It’s this same feeling that illustrates why it’s usually better for pre-med wannabies to go somewhere where they are in the Top 25% (maybe Top 10%) of their incoming class. I’ve seen students with a 1200 (or so) SAT make it in to med school and do well, but I doubt they ever would if they went to a reach school where they were below the norm foundationally in academics. They can be quite capable, but they don’t see that when comparing themselves to their peers who had a better foundation in school. I’ve also seen many students go to match schools (where they are in the middle of the bell curve) and drop pre-med thoughts due to “not being smart enough” once they encounter their classmates in Bio 101 (or similar). I’ve come to the conclusion most need to see/feel self confident when they look around or many give up.
That said, for students who would be in the Top Whatever % anywhere they went, top schools can be fine. It’s still all on them motivationally.
3 Likes
One would think that, by this time, people would have had enough Malcolm Gladwell. He has raised pop-psychology to an art form, and his talent is in simplifying complex issues and providing unsupported but plausible scenarios.
Since most people are convinced more by anecdotes than by data, something with which Gladwell is very familiar, he bases his theories and idea on anecdotes, and does not actually ever support them with anything approaching the rigorous analysis of reliable data.
He is an interesting person with interesting ideas. His points are often worth testing and studying. However, his points are generally not supported by any really evidence or data, even though he tends to present them as though they have been proven beyond reasonable doubt.
Basically, his points are great for discussion at a party or at a bar. On the other hand, it is a very bad idea to base policy or life decisions based on points that Gladwell presents.
7 Likes
Did you even listen to the video?