Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This thought occurred to me in regards to the cheating admission scandal. Has some universities become a status brand? Clearly these students would not have measured up to regular admission standards for these universities but they most likely could have been accepted to other lesser known universities. It doesn’t seem like it’s about academic achievement nor a brighter financial future. It seems as if it’s another brand or status ideal for these types of people.
What do you think? Have you ever encountered brand snobbery in regards to universities?
Of course, who hasn't. Even back "in the day." Even when I was growing up there was a snobbery pecking order within the local colleges that few had heard of outside the area. It was led by the private liberal arts colleges ahead of the public universities. Back the Furman carried the same cachet among the region as Harvard does nationally. Followed by Wofford (men) and Converse (women). Winthrop was the teacher's college. And of course there was the perpetual fight between University of South Carolina and Clemson. This was a status fight among people whom if you went to he next state over would say "Wofford who?"
There's another side to this coin however. And that is there is often a reason why certain colleges carry the status they do. Graduates from those schools really are better in their respective fields. I can see that just in the number of resumes I've read and interviews I've conducted. Which are better however is field dependent and those in that field know where the programs stack up.
Of course, who hasn't. Even back "in the day." Even when I was growing up there was a snobbery pecking order within the local colleges that few had heard of outside the area. It was led by the private liberal arts colleges ahead of the public universities. Back the Furman carried the same cachet among the region as Harvard does nationally. Followed by Wofford (men) and Converse (women). Winthrop was the teacher's college. And of course there was the perpetual fight between University of South Carolina and Clemson. This was a status fight among people whom if you went to he next state over would say "Wofford who?"
There's another side to this coin however. And that is there is often a reason why certain colleges carry the status they do. Graduates from those schools really are better in their respective fields. I can see that just in the number of resumes I've read and interviews I've conducted. Which are better however is field dependent and those in that field know where the programs stack up.
But merely being accepted and attending the university doesn’t mean you’re going to enjoy the sale level of success after college if you don’t apply yourself nor if you didn’t actually earn your place at the university nor the grades. One who started in a local community college, worked hard and moved up to the local university, actually studied and put in the time in and out of class to excel stands a better chance of success than one whose parents paid their way into the high ranking school only for them to party and skip on classes.
It's not just about status; it's about better access to jobs. In academia, Harvard and Yale grads (for faculty-level jobs) routinely get chosen over others. If there are no Harvard or Yale applicants, Berkeley and Stanford are the next choices.
But students with those institutions on their resume aren't necessarily better. I've seen several Harvard/Yale hires skate on their school's reputation, and make no effort to be productive. I watched one of them make no effort to publish anything at all in the few years after being hired, and then act like she was hit from left field, when she was denied tenure. Another one did the required publishing, but rolled over and died after getting tenure, only publishing an occasional book review for the remainder of his career. OTOH, grads from the next tier or two down on the totem pole can be prolific, out-publishing most of the faculty combined.
I think it's time for hiring committees to look for the best match, not whoever is from the most prestigious, and presumably academically rigorous, institution.
But merely being accepted and attending the university doesn’t mean you’re going to enjoy the sale level of success after college if you don’t apply yourself nor if you didn’t actually earn your place at the university nor the grades. One who started in a local community college, worked hard and moved up to the local university, actually studied and put in the time in and out of class to excel stands a better chance of success than one whose parents paid their way into the high ranking school only for them to party and skip on classes.
Bingo! Some of the grads from those schools turn out to be slackers on the job.
But merely being accepted and attending the university doesn’t mean you’re going to enjoy the sale level of success after college if you don’t apply yourself nor if you didn’t actually earn your place at the university nor the grades. One who started in a local community college, worked hard and moved up to the local university, actually studied and put in the time in and out of class to excel stands a better chance of success than one whose parents paid their way into the high ranking school only for them to party and skip on classes.
That wasn't your original question. And even within this reframing, the answer will depend greatly on who is being discussed. For example, everyone seems to postulate the stereotypical way you did -- kid at CC who works hard, studies, etc vs slacker party animal at big name university. Of course those are there; you always have the tails of the distribution. But the real comparison is two similar kids who go to class, study, socialize, take part in the community of opportunities offered, get the same grades, etc, (IE the typical graduate from each school), the one from the objectively better school with have more starting opportunities than the other.
Right from the get go, the smaller, local school won't see as many top recruiters as the top school. The kid who attended the top school will have more prospects and more contacts at top prospects. What they make of it is up to them, but the starting opportunity is there.
That's one of the reasons the wealthy aim for their kids at tops schools -- the contacts to be made. It's not about impressing Jane and Bubba next door that their kid went to X. They don't live next door to Jane and Bubba. And most of those kids aren't party animals, any more than they typical college kid is. They are hard workers because they've been raised that way. The are bred and raised from infancy to succeed.
Absolutely! For the uber rich where money is NOT a factor, chasing expensive PRIVATE colleges instead of just as good more affordable PUBLICS only for name, prestige, and status while flaunting wealth is all that matters. I see it everyday here in wealthy So. Cal!
Received a top notch education at a much more affordable price in the University of California System and am glad not to have attended USC. Was accepted there without scholarship...father went there also, but preferred I attend the University of California System. Was the right fit for me...so glad I listened to him...especially with the never ending scandals adversely affecting USC on a regular basis!
Absolutely! For the uber rich where money is NOT a factor, chasing expensive PRIVATE colleges instead of just as good more affordable PUBLICS only for name, prestige, and status while flaunting wealth is all that matters. I see it everyday here in wealthy So. Cal!
Received a top notch education at a much more affordable price in the University of California System and am glad not to have attended USC. Was accepted there without scholarship...father went there also, but preferred I attend the University of California System. Was the right fit for me...so glad I listened to him...especially with the never ending scandals adversely affecting USC on a regular basis!
What is it about USC that's such a big deal? (I mean--prestige-wise, not scandal-wise, haha). I'm from NorCal, so I'm out of the loop. Why are people (apparently) paying Bega-bucks to get into USC??
But merely being accepted and attending the university doesn’t mean you’re going to enjoy the sale level of success after college if you don’t apply yourself nor if you didn’t actually earn your place at the university nor the grades. One who started in a local community college, worked hard and moved up to the local university, actually studied and put in the time in and out of class to excel stands a better chance of success than one whose parents paid their way into the high ranking school only for them to party and skip on classes.
True but also not true. A lot of companies and government agencies will recruit only from select universities, and have zero care in the world for anyone else. A lot of these companies are gateways to lucrative careers. A person getting hired at McKinsey at age 22 is going to have a large jump start on their career over someone who had to gain years of experience and jump through hoops to finally get employment at McKinsey, if they even bother hiring.
Same with the State Department, they have specific schools they recruit from, and their ranks are full of people from these schools.
Even the Supreme Court has a handful of law schools being represented, with the current justices, all but one being from Yale or Harvard, and one having their JD from Columbia.
There are just numerous examples of this. Sure, a person can obtain career success from any school in theory, but it will be a lot more difficult, and the probability will be higher they will encounter barriers to achieve their career goals due to their school. Good luck to the University of Tennessee law school grad on ever getting to the Supreme Court, lol.
Name matters, matters a lot, that is why there is such a fight to get into these schools.
What is it about USC that's such a big deal? (I mean--prestige-wise, not scandal-wise, haha). I'm from NorCal, so I'm out of the loop. Why are people (apparently) paying Bega-bucks to get into USC??
Not certain other than they are a big sports (I do like USC Football...will see if keeping Coach Clay Helton was right soon enough), and "rah-rah" school with a big greek/party scene. Also, very close to Hollywood with many Uber rich people at the campus in that "Top 1%". It does of course have some solid academics, however, many wealthy go there just to flaunt their prestige, status, and wealth.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
