<p>I read an Inside Vandy debate about a bumper sticker that read "I hate Vandy Kids." I am curious why the Vandy kid stereotypes still linger depite the school's increasing diversity and prestige. I feel very sorry that those stereotypes actually hurt the school's otherwise excellent reputation.</p>
<p>Hmmmm. Well maybe they are UT (Tennessee) fans. :)</p>
<p>Doesn’t that just happen with lots of private schools though, especially the most prestigious? And often it is a regional and state thing. I’m sure many people feel the same way about places like Harvard and Duke and they certainly aren’t “hurt”. There are always stereotypes associated with many of these elite private schools. It hardly hurts them so no need to feel sorry (really, you feel sorry for schools that have huge endowments, solid student bodies, and amazing facilities?). Also, my opinion seems to be supported by the fact that the comments (I went and found the article) suggests that, for whatever reason, higher standards are set for “selective private school” kids when it comes to behavior. People in the region seem to get more upset (there was mention of property obstruction or something) when say, a frat acts up from the big private school, than when it happens at the less selective schools (they like to tell themselves things like: "well they just do it because they feel they can get away with it. Seriously? Imagine the things that things like frats get away with at many of the state flagships). I mean, this pattern is actually even noticeable in the national media. When somewhere like Yale is found to have an issue with the conduct (or dealing with it) of the student body (their sexual assault issues), then the press is really all over it, even the exact same things happen almost all of time elsewhere. Those comments reflect the things often said about the most selective schools and were stereotypical in and of themselves.</p>
<p>Go read bumper stickers between Duke and UNC, USC and UCLA, UM and OSU.</p>
<p>We couldn’t really figure out why someone had that bumper sticker on campus, though we did discover it was just a custom sticker and a regularly printer product. We assumed it was a Belmont or UT student/fan, both of whom are severely overshadowed by Vandy in reputation and now sports.</p>
<p>Anyways, that stereotype remains just because some people are stubborn and ignorant. People who have never visited the campus or talked to student still assume it’s the Vanderbilt of 1950, filled with just wealthy and primarily white kids whose parents bought them a ticket in.</p>
<p>Don’t say all of that (seriously, that sort of thing is likely why people have bumper stickers like that). It may reflect more of some sort of in-state “rivalry” or general cleverness. The people with the bumper stickers may not actually believe that thing, but think its kind of funny to rub it in (as in the historical stereotype of the school). Kind of like how Tech and UGA in Georgia are completely different schools (also different caliber. I mean, people who love UGA know that Georgia Tech is of higher caliber academics, but love UGA for the balance that it offers and the fact that its academic caliber has improved quite a bit, and so will defend and support it regardless) yet still trash each other. The big 3 prestigious (UGA, Tech, and Emory) in Ga. have their own sayings about each other, even though the 3 technically do not really compete with each other that much (not really too much cross-apps, excel in different academic areas at both grad. and UG level. Tech and UGA have the sports rival, but in normal years, not including this one, UGA is usually in a different ballpark and would be outperforming them). </p>
<p>Also, I know we like to paint selective schools in the best light possible, but we need to be honest, some stereotypes are partially true. Yes, most are now a meritocracy in terms of admission (and they are quite diverse demographically), but one cannot deny that despite the extremely generous fin. aid policies, these schools get an overwhelming number of students from families WELL above the median household income of the U.S (places like Harvard, for example, have been studied and it’s been shown that a 40k household income puts you near the very bottom of the distribution at Harvard, and Harvard’s fin. aid policy is VERY generous, perhaps even moreso than places like Vandy). In addition, private schools are often viewed as bubbles full of outsiders (from those in-state), and this is somewhat true. Most have less than 20% from their own state. For people who like these educational environments (those who attend and instruct/do research there), these are great things, but one can imagine many who don’t find all of this desirable. </p>
<p>For example, businesses in the city occupied by the private U may want that intellectual capital to stay in-state, but this won’t necessarily be the case when most students aren’t even from the south. You can, on the other hand, count on the selective public schools in the state to help (many more of them will be willing to stay in-state) and thus loyalty may be higher to some of these places though the place would no doubt snatch up any selective private school student that applies. For many, it just won’t be their “base” (why would some of them try that hard when they are competing for students w/more appealing options in other regions?). </p>
<p>I personally call all of this stuff “good fun” though the differential bitterness over the behavior of students is silly.</p>
<p>Jealousy is a very unappealing trait.</p>
<p>I’m sure some people hate the idea of “Vandy Kids,” but the Vanderbilt stereotype from the 80s and 90s are no longer accurate. Does the school still skew towards the more privileged? Of course, as do all elite schools. But are Vandy students any less aware than, say, Belmont students? I don’t think so.</p>