<p>Iderochi, since your info on politics is incomplete, I can't really judge whether or not elite colleges make a difference at political levels below President (although I did notice Stanford showed up several times). </p>
<p>However, a quick look at this list <a href="http://www.answers.com/topic/list-of-u-s-presidents-by-college-education%5B/url%5D">http://www.answers.com/topic/list-of-u-s-presidents-by-college-education</a> reveals that five Presidents went to Harvard, three to Princeton, three to Yale, and one to Stanford. In recent years, the elitism is strong: both Bushes went to Yale (and Bush the Younger went to Harvard for the B school), Clinton went to Georgetown and Oxford. Ford and Clinton both went to Yale for law school. Carter went to USNA (and Eisenhower to USMA); Kennedy to Princeton and Harvard. (Reagan and Johnson stand out as exceptions; they both went to "ordinary" colleges---at a time, however, when most people didn't go to college at all.)</p>
<p>Given how few people out of the overall population graduate from these schools, it's clear that their influence is out of proportion to their numbers. (Why isn't MIT represented, for example? I'd argue it's because generally MIT's elite end up as advisors to those in politics--as both Vannevar Bush (no relation) and Jerome Weisner did.)</p>
<p>Personally, as long as there IS an elite, I want to be part of it. And I want my kids to be, too.</p>
<pre><code>has your family become episcopalian? only 2.3 million in the country, but they represent the greatest number of presidents including 3 of the last 5(Bush 1, Bush 2 and Ford). Bush 2 later took his wife's denomination. If you want to be elite, might as well go all the way.
</code></pre>
<p>Wanting to be part of the "elite"....??? What kind of value system does that represent? If being a politician is the goal ....oh boy!!! BY the way the high number of IVys represented in one of the posts, although countered in others that I agreee with more, may be partially due to the old boys club from the recent and not so recent past. In this new diverse age I wonder if attending a so-called elite school may be a disadvanatge because of all the sterotypes that go with it, deserved or not. Since IVYs still have an affirmative action program for wealthy white males---called legacy staus---it can make sense that a skew could exist for US Presidents. I agree with most of the posts in that this whole college scene has become crazed although no doubt CC posters are a sliver of the college bound population. Here in the NE you see parents driving around in cars with their child's college name emblazoned across the back windshield. I've been told you don't see this in the South or mid-West. Perhaps we can learn a little from these folks who may have a better pespective on what really matters in life and what makes a successful human being.</p>
<p>I'm sorry I didn't make my point clear. I'm using the academic-elites-for-President as an example of the most public way in which our populace claims it disdains elitism but still supports it.</p>
<p>I am in favor of academic competition, of excellence in education as a primary goal, of having lots more knowledge than the next person, of correct grammar and pronunciation, of a large vocabulary---and all of these are things that I have been told (over and over and over) make me a snob and an elitist. Yes, those things matter to me. Why? Because while it's true you can't buy happiness with money, you can sure prevent a lot of misery with it. And I truly believe it's easier to make enough money (however you define it) when you have a good education.</p>
<p>DMD, I think you're shortchanging yourself. You're obviously quite bright, yet you seem to think that an Ivy education will somehow make it easier for you to make a lot of money. It just ain't so. </p>
<p>And I notice that you've watered down your argument pretty substantially, from taking a position that it's important to go to an "elite" school to arguing that it's important to have a good education. Are you arguing that only the elite schools that your mentioned earlier are where you can get a good education? Surely not.</p>
<p>I think this thread was meant to challenge some of this "over the top" emphasis on academic performance since your type of concerns seem to doiminate so many CC threads and there is a need for balance. Hence, I will stand up and be counted as a parent that probably did put too much emphasis on academics, reinforced by some parts of this board, but who also "got a grip" and stepped back to consider what our values represent and what type of message we want to send. When I see 8th graders posting on here and worrying about SAT scores.....I can't help but wonder if that isn't a very sad state of mind to be in and one that our generation of parents may have helped to create. So thank you original poster for initiating this dialogue.</p>
<p>"Given how few people out of the overall population graduate from these schools, it's clear that their influence is out of proportion to their numbers. (Why isn't MIT represented, for example? I'd argue it's because generally MIT's elite end up as advisors to those in politics--as both Vannevar Bush (no relation) and Jerome Weisner did.)"</p>
<p>Herein lies your answer. The power does not rest with the college at all, but with the families surrounding the politicians who go there.</p>
<p>Iderochi---perhaps you haven't noticed my previous posts. I'm an MIT graduate, my son goes there, my D is at Reed. Yeah, I think I'm pretty bright, and at age almost-50 (very traumatic), I have noticed that money corresponds very nicely with amount and quality of education. </p>
<p>And yes, I really do believe that "elite" schools (such as MIT and Harvard) do provide a better education than other schools. Why do I think this? Well, in part because I've seen what passes for "demanding coursework" at other schools. As one example, my 4-unit Solid State Chemistry course at MIT (which I took as a freshman) is considered (by Washington state) to be the equivalent of two 4-unit courses at Western Washington University, one of which is limited to upper-class chem majors and the other of which is a graduate-level course. </p>
<p>Do you really mean to say, ohnoes, that you think the only way to become politically powerful in this country is to be born into the right family? At least I believe that education can change the destiny of your birth!</p>
<p>The fact that a disproportionate number of presidents graduated from Ivy League schools doesn't justify the Academic Performance Cult. Out of a quarter billion Americans, only 4 have experience at being president, which is less than one in 60 million. That's less than the odds of winning the Lottery! Now let's get back on-topic for this thread.</p>
<p>I vow that if I have kids, I will not send them to those elite private K-12 schools or magnet schools given what several of you have said about the academic pressure there.</p>
<p>The Academic Performance Cult is just as repressive as the Religious Right. Evolution, abortion, and sex are taboo to the Religious Right, and free time to do such sinful things as eat lunch and sleep at least 7 hours per night is taboo to the Academic Performance Cult.</p>
<p>dmd, I think you are somewhat over the top here - your insistence on "my dog's faster than your dog" is become irritating. </p>
<p>Intellectual achievement is a lifelong endeavor. If one attends an "elite" college and never picks up a book again, what gain has been attained? One danger in attending an elite school is the possibility of developing of a sense of superiority and/or entitlement simply based upon that fact. It is the case that with respect to the traits, skills, and determination that lead to worldly success, it is 99% what one achieves after college that counts. </p>
<p>You sound like you're spoiling for a brain-to-brain IQ comparison with the other posters in this forum. Seems like the next step.</p>
<p>dmd, I think you are somewhat over the top here - your insistence on "my dog's faster than your dog" is becoming irritating. </p>
<p>Intellectual achievement is a lifelong endeavor. If one attends an "elite" college and never picks up a book again, what gain has been attained? One danger in attending an elite school is the possibility of developing of a sense of superiority and/or entitlement simply based upon that fact. It is the case that with respect to the traits, skills, and determination that lead to worldly success, it is 99% what one achieves after college that counts. </p>
<p>You sound like you're spoiling for a brain-to-brain IQ comparison with the other posters in this forum. Seems like the next step.</p>
<p>dmd, sorry, didn't mean to take 30+ years off of your life -- though if someone could do that for me in real life . . . I misread your use of the present tense in your message and jumped to the conclusion that you were in the student-age category. </p>
<p>But I still think you're selling yourself short! You have had a successful career, but I think you're wrong to think that it would have been more difficult to have that career had you not attended a school such as MIT. I'm obviously never going to change your mind, but study after study has shown that the benefits of the elite education you're talking about has a short shelf life in the real world. </p>
<p>Education that challenges you and teaches you lessons to be successful in life can be found in many places, not just elite colleges. Elite colleges can be incredible experiences, I'm sure. And people who attend elite colleges are uniformly bright. All I'm saying is that there comes a point where the benefits of that experience is not worth the "Academic Performance Cult" that is the subject of the original message. </p>
<p>For the record, I declined to attend an Ivy league school for financial reasons and attended a third (or fourth, I forget) tier large state university. I'm hard pressed to see any difference that it made in my life and my career. I've met graduates of the elites that are remarkably bright and very successful. But I can match anybody, anecdote for anecdote, when it comes to incredibly bright and/or insanely successful people who attended "lesser" schools versus complete morons who are still trying to ride the fact that they attended HYPS, etc. (I forgot the whole acronym)</p>
<p>Hey, I'd bet my dog is faster than your dog, too ;-)</p>
<p>I think I'm failing to make my point. Last try.</p>
<p>I went to "elite" schools all the way through, and a third-tier school for graduate school in education. There is a real difference in how the elite schools approach education and learning. MIT aims, for example, at teaching the next generation of entrepreneurs; UMassLowell (where I went to graduate school) aims at teaching the engineers who will work at those companies. It's a different approach.</p>
<p>As for whether, 30 years out, the MIT diploma still makes a difference....yup, it does. I've gotten several interviews specifically because they want the MIT diploma. I don't say that it makes me a better teacher (although I think it does)---but lots of other people do. Elitism is alive and well, even here in the hinterlands. (Actual conversation when I showed up to sub recently: "Our regular math teacher is really good. He went to Princeton. Where'd you go?" "MIT" "Ooooh, I bet he'll be frosted, he thinks he's better than every other teacher out there.")</p>
<p>What I've been trying to say is that a) the academic elites got there by providing a real and measurable product, and b) people respect that product. Therefore, they work hard to gain access to that product----which, ultimately, I think is a good thing.</p>
<p>"
Do you really mean to say, ohnoes, that you think the only way to become politically powerful in this country is to be born into the right family? At least I believe that education can change the destiny of your birth!"</p>
<p>No, my point was that your background in education is largely irrelevant in gaining political power. Reagan and Johnson (although far from my favorite public figures) went to colleges nobody has heard of, but they managed to rise to the presidency; Ford went to Michigan, which although an elite college in terms of academics, does not have the elitist tradition of HYP; Nixon went to Whittier College, and so on. As a more recent example, had Kerry won, Edwards would have been elected Vice President after "merely" attending NCSU. Clinton did go to Yale Law, but he "only" went to Georgetown as an undergrad. If you want to be a politician, you either have to have skill, connections, or appeal, not a degree from Harvard.</p>
<p>Ahhh, the Academic Performance Cult. I live in that strip of Washington State that is unproportionally afflicted with this illness. I've been told several times that "I'm selling myself short by only taking 8 AP classes". However, the big offender in this area isn't actually my home HS (which, compared to the other schools in my supremely competitive district is well regarded as "too laid back) but the HS I take Advanced Calculus and Teaching Academy at. This school is almost scary. I once looked up the AP statistics and the "average" kid takes 8-10. Most of the kids I've talked to have "never met the ones who take less than 5". Grade comparisions are very insane and the entire environment reeks of stress. And, something I discovered the other day, the majority of the school population has "tutors". I was shocked, these are A students who have very expensive tutors just to keep them at a 4.0. </p>
<p>An off hand note, this school has also had more deaths and incidents (one with a gun on campus) in the past few years than my school has had in the past 15 years (or more). </p>
<p>Looking at that school makes me glad my home school is so "laid back". I mean, the average person ONLY takes 5-6 AP classes here. ^_~</p>
<p>Dmd77's comment "it's also true that graduation from the "right" university can make a huge difference in one's lifetime prospects. Or didn't you notice the colleges in our last presidential race?" is an example of a classical logical fallacy. </p>
<p>Because a lot of presidents went to Yale, or anywhere else, may not be because of Yale. Rather, the same traits that led them to Yale were the traits that led them to the presidency. </p>
<p>This logical fallacy is the pervasive problem with Ivy mania, and the issue that started this thread. Because the academic superstars can take 15 AP exams, aceing all, without having even taken most of the courses does not mean that taking 15 exams and doing well makes you an academic superstar. </p>
<p>Academic performance, rigor, pushing the envelope and so forth should come from within, not whithout. And, indeed, much of the admissions disparity we observe no doubt stems from the efforts of adcoms to distinguish between these two, not always successfully.</p>
<p>Sometimes I think the APC comes from parents who, in their success in the business world, found most things have their price. Want the best lawn in the neighborhood? Hire the right lawn firm. Want the biggest vehicle? Buy it. Nicest house? Hire the right decorator. Smartest kid? Hire the right tutors, consultants to get into the most expensive schools...</p>
<p>There is ample (perhaps even a surfeit of...) scholarly research that shows that, above a certain level, referenced against peers, income does not buy happiness. There is some research that shows that so many of the values we hold regarding academic performance suffer a similar fate - a little bit is good. More does not matter.</p>
<p>"I vow that if I have kids, I will not send them to those elite private K-12 schools or magnet schools given what several of you have said about the academic pressure there."</p>
<p>hahhaaha. Do you own your kids? My son applied to those prep school and we told him that we can not shell any money. He received full financial aid and left for the school despite we were not very enthusiastic about it. So wehn kids wants to do something. How Do you stop them as we do not own them. Let kids make their own choices. But I would agree that do not push kids for any place, let them make their own choices.</p>
<p>I am SO relieved after reading this thread! Even though my son will have only 4 or 5 APs by the time he graduates, THERE IS HOPE. We're Episcopalian!
On another note, my law degree from an elite school still opens doors for me- which I think is somewhat stupid after 29 years of being a lawyer.<br>
My goal for S is that he attend a college/university where he will be intellectually and athletically challenged and will be around like-minded peers. This could be Penn- or Colgate- or Indiana honors. We shall see.</p>