Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post - Name Brand Education in the United States

rgr22j · 08-28-2003, 08:22 AM

Why do Americans put such a high importance on the "where" one has been educated? This is something that I've never understood. I noticed that the new "rankings" of US colleges just recently marred, er, "hit," the magazine rack at my local bookstore.

In the Old World, I can see why. In England, for example, a former MP once remarked that about 90% of his colleagues were from Oxbridge. Similarly, a majority of judges, journalists, academics, etc. -- somewhat influential positions -- were staffed by Oxbridge alumni. The cachet of an Oxbridge degree apparently makes an enormous difference. Of course, one may discuss the influence of England's class-stricken (as I call it) history, the ideal of meritocracy, and so on.

However, consider the United States. There are over 2000 colleges in the United States. Of these, less than 50 can be considered "truly selective" -- as in, the applicants are typically above average (not in the Wobegone sense, of course), and they accept less than 50% of applicants. Furthermore, a study by Alan Krueger and Stacy Berg Dale done a few years ago claimed that, given similar academic profiles, where a given student went made no difference in income. Actually, they found that, given similar qualifications, the student who went to a "non-name" university made slightly more than the one who went to a "name" university.

The Atlantic Monthly writes that the wealthiest men in America are "a dropout from Harvard, a dropout from the University of Illinois, a dropout from Washington State University, and a graduate of the University of Nebraska." Interesting.

The beauty of America is its aggressive tossing aside of "name credentialism," as I call it. Bush went to Harvard and Yale. So what? He's still not considered intelligent. Americans want to see what you can do, not who says you can do it. It's this wonderful ignorance of "trophy collecting," that makes America great. Sure, it may impress the Europhiles and the elitists that you're Ivy League, but the rest of America doesn't care. It apparently doesn't make a difference on your income, after all.

The sheer number of colleges and universities in America, and the corresponding opening of higher education to the populace, is amazing. A European observer in the late 1800s once sighed, "There are two universities in England, four in France, and 37 in Ohio." (I roughly paraphrase). Americans are the most highly (and expensively!) educated in the world -- a quarter of Americans have degrees. It appears, at least to me, that the big dividing line is not "where," but "if." And the sheer availability of it means that more specifically, it's not "if you can," but "if you are willing to." Only in America!

So then, why? Why the big fuss over name brand education?

-- Alvin

08-28-2003, 08:22 AM	#1 (permalink)
rgr22j Crazy	Name Brand Education in the United States Why do Americans put such a high importance on the "where" one has been educated? This is something that I've never understood. I noticed that the new "rankings" of US colleges just recently marred, er, "hit," the magazine rack at my local bookstore. In the Old World, I can see why. In England, for example, a former MP once remarked that about 90% of his colleagues were from Oxbridge. Similarly, a majority of judges, journalists, academics, etc. -- somewhat influential positions -- were staffed by Oxbridge alumni. The cachet of an Oxbridge degree apparently makes an enormous difference. Of course, one may discuss the influence of England's class-stricken (as I call it) history, the ideal of meritocracy, and so on. However, consider the United States. There are over 2000 colleges in the United States. Of these, less than 50 can be considered "truly selective" -- as in, the applicants are typically above average (not in the Wobegone sense, of course), and they accept less than 50% of applicants. Furthermore, a study by Alan Krueger and Stacy Berg Dale done a few years ago claimed that, given similar academic profiles, where a given student went made no difference in income. Actually, they found that, given similar qualifications, the student who went to a "non-name" university made slightly more than the one who went to a "name" university. The Atlantic Monthly writes that the wealthiest men in America are "a dropout from Harvard, a dropout from the University of Illinois, a dropout from Washington State University, and a graduate of the University of Nebraska." Interesting. The beauty of America is its aggressive tossing aside of "name credentialism," as I call it. Bush went to Harvard and Yale. So what? He's still not considered intelligent. Americans want to see what you can do, not who says you can do it. It's this wonderful ignorance of "trophy collecting," that makes America great. Sure, it may impress the Europhiles and the elitists that you're Ivy League, but the rest of America doesn't care. It apparently doesn't make a difference on your income, after all. The sheer number of colleges and universities in America, and the corresponding opening of higher education to the populace, is amazing. A European observer in the late 1800s once sighed, "There are two universities in England, four in France, and 37 in Ohio." (I roughly paraphrase). Americans are the most highly (and expensively!) educated in the world -- a quarter of Americans have degrees. It appears, at least to me, that the big dividing line is not "where," but "if." And the sheer availability of it means that more specifically, it's not "if you can," but "if you are willing to." Only in America! So then, why? Why the big fuss over name brand education? -- Alvin