
Poison Ivy: Are Élite Colleges Bad for the Soul? - jseliger
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/09/01/poison-ivy
======
econnors
"Learning is supposed to be about falling down and getting up again until you
do it right. But, in an academic culture that demands constant achievement,
failures seem so perilous that the best and the brightest often spend their
young years in terrariums of excellence."

In my experience, this couldn't be further from the truth. I'm a current
Dartmouth student with an Engineering/Computer Science concentration, and in
my hardest classes the curriculum is set up to help you persevere through
failure. There are optional TA/Professor office hours for when you fall
behind, and if you completely fail at an assignment, most professors allow you
to add an explanation to why/where/how you failed, and they'll generously take
this into account for the assignment grade.

I've read about the benefits of a "growth mindset" many times here on HN, and
I couldn't be happier with how Dartmouth encourages this school of thought.
I'm not sure if this is universal in the Ivy League, but this part of the
article really bothered me because my experience is drastically different.

~~~
jonnathanson
The quote very much applied to my experience at Yale (and, just as aptly, to
all of my experiences preceding it). But it really depends on the kinds of
students you're observing.

The students this article talks about are the traditional, career-track types:
the future lawyers, consultants, and bankers of the world. The people for whom
the phrase "Choose any career you want, so long as it's one of those three"
elicits a resigned sigh and a nervous chuckle. Failure is not an option for
these kids. Their career paths, and future employers, do not understand,
forgive, or tolerate failure. If you're aspiring to those paths, your GPA is
your life's destiny. You're always minding your permanent record. Life is a
series of hoops to be jumped through and numbers to paint by, and that mindset
starts young. As young as junior high for some people, and as young as
elementary school for others. You get on the treadmill, and you run.

I was on that treadmill for most of my life, and I hopped off _in_ college, to
pursue a career in arts and entertainment. I might as well have announced that
I was leaving to join a commune in rural Alaska. That's about what my friends
and peers thought of my decision (and many still do).

There were (and still are) some wonderful ways to lose oneself at Yale, to
grow personally, and to take classes for the love of learning. A lot of
students are probably there for those reasons. Just as many are there to check
the necessary resume boxes and slide onto the right tracks. The pressure is
largely self-applied and peer-exacerbated. The school itself doesn't do
anything to encourage it, and to its credit, tries to encourage the opposite.
But it's too late by the time kids even show up for freshman orientation.
They've been minding their careers since they were old enough to read.

I don't really blame colleges for this problem, and I find a lot of that blame
misplaced. The blame lies somewhere deeper in our culture. Colleges are just
catering to the problem; they're not causing it.

------
guard-of-terra
I've read this story where a girl noticed her granny really likes watch
sports.

This puzzled her a bit until once she heard granny watch pole vault and
muttering "oh it's so nice". When she asked her granny - what's so nice, and
why does she enjoy sports?

Her granny replied: "I'm just so happy _I_ don't have to jump with the pole".

Stories about modern education always spring this emotion in me. I'm so happy
I don't have to "study" anymore never!

------
rgbrgb
> The collision of old and new ideals is clearest when it comes to the gnarly
> socioeconomics of collegiate education. The professors at the old university
> were, with few exceptions, white, male, trained through direct lineage, and
> self-selected for an interest in the Western canon. The students at the
> élite schools were mostly patrician, also white and male, and, owing to
> these and other factors, not terribly anxious about their post-graduation
> circumstances. Deresiewicz is right that today’s college students are more
> risk-averse. That’s partly because there’s much more risk to be averse to. A
> Yalie of the Nick Carraway generation could afford to “stand outside the
> world for a few years,” as Deresiewicz puts it. It cost nothing: a Wall
> Street job awaited.

Today's idealism is often grounded in the realities of a generation past.

~~~
kelukelugames
Booth did a survey to see how risk averse their students were. There was a
giant gap between the white and non-white students.

The question was: Imagine how it feels to lose a dollar. Now imagine winning x
dollars. What does x have to be for the feelings to be equal.

I think the median result was 2 for white students and a ridiculous number
over 10 for Indians and Asians

------
like_do_i_care
Having attended a top Uni and a not-so-top Uni (long story; two different
degrees), the single reason people aim and attend for the top Unis is the
attached prestige, the network of contacts you will make (and hit up via
alumni), and the doors it then potentially opens. The best tutors by far, who
made themselves more available, who seemed more grounded than pure ivory tower
academic, were in the less-than-top Uni.

My experience, ymmv.

------
throwaway000002
That needless affectation on _elite_ is what's bad for the soul. But perhaps
that's the point. Oh, well done! «clap, clap, clap»

These articles are the elite navel-gazing at themselves and despairing their
tragic circumstances.

There are problems with higher-education. This problem, however, is not the
most pressing.

------
cafard
Evidently, if they make you use French accents on words long since naturalized
in English.

I have at this point in my life read so much about education, enough of it
about the high end, that though I imagine William Deresiewicz's book is
interesting, I will not read it. Let's quit worrying about the Ivy soul. Tell
me how things are at Auburn or Colorado School of Mines, and maybe I'll pay
attention.

~~~
MaysonL
It seems to be a recent affectation, vide this from 1925: [0], although note
that it isn't enforced on the sports pages: [1] or on Malcolm Gladwell: [2]

[0][http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/1925/09/19/st-
elite](http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/1925/09/19/st-elite)

[1][http://www.newyorker.com/news/sporting-scene/kevin-wares-
gri...](http://www.newyorker.com/news/sporting-scene/kevin-wares-grisly-
injury)

[2][http://www.newyorker.com/news/sporting-scene/complexity-
and-...](http://www.newyorker.com/news/sporting-scene/complexity-and-the-ten-
thousand-hour-rule)

------
adam12
That header on The New Yorker site needs a minimize button.

