Elite University Students: Constructing Boundaries And Maintaining Prestige

In a study by sociologists Amy Binder and Andrea Abel, 56 students from Harvard and Stanford were interviewed about their perceptions of their own and other elite universities. The study found that students from these two universities tended to view their schools as offering a well-rounded, liberal arts education while criticising other elite institutions for being too focused on specific areas such as vocationalism, technical training, intellectualism, or social scenes. These perceptions contributed to a sense of status hierarchy among elite campuses, with Harvard and Stanford students subtly elevating their own status by critiquing other universities. The study also suggested that this boundary-making among elite universities may be a way for students to bolster their confidence and address anxieties about their position in a highly competitive educational landscape.

Students at Harvard and Stanford value a 'well-rounded' liberal arts education

Students at Harvard and Stanford value a well-rounded liberal arts education that exposes them to different histories and perspectives. They believe that a broad curriculum allows them to explore their interests and passions, in contrast to other universities that are too vocational or narrow in their focus.

Harvard and Stanford students view their institutions as offering a prestigious, well-rounded education that encourages intellectual exploration. They criticise other elite universities for being overly focused on specific areas, such as business or engineering, at the expense of a broader learning experience. This differentiation helps them justify their privileged positions and elevate their status above their peers.

Harvard and Stanford students also express a desire for a diverse educational experience, both academically and socially. They seek a balance between rigorous academics and a vibrant social life, avoiding universities that are perceived as either too intense or too focused on partying and athletics.

The well-rounded liberal arts education valued by Harvard and Stanford students is seen as a key factor in their development as elites and contributes to their sense of entitlement and confidence in occupying elite social circles.

They criticise other institutions for being too intellectual

In a study conducted by sociologists Amy J. Binder and Andrea R. Abel, 56 undergraduates at Harvard and Stanford were interviewed to explore how students construct a status hierarchy among elite universities. The students were asked about their perceptions of their own and other institutions, as well as their reasons for choosing their university.

The findings revealed that Harvard and Stanford students valued universities that offered a "well-rounded" liberal arts education while criticising other selective institutions for being "too intellectual". They believed that a purely academic or intellectual focus limited their intellectual and social development. The University of Chicago was frequently mentioned as a university that offered a more classically rigorous curriculum than their own schools. However, it was also seen as lacking in social opportunities and was described as "where fun goes to die".

Harvard and Stanford students felt that their universities provided a better balance between academics and social life, allowing them to explore different interests and passions. They believed that their institutions offered the ideal college experience and that other universities could not live up to this standard.

Through these nuanced perceptions and criticisms of other universities, Harvard and Stanford students justified their elite positions and contributed to ongoing status distinctions among social elites.

They also criticise other institutions for being too connected to the old-world status system

In a study conducted by sociologists Amy J. Binder and Andrea R. Abel, 56 undergraduates at Harvard and Stanford were interviewed to explore how students construct a status hierarchy among elite campuses. The study found that students come to campus with a working knowledge of prestige differences between top institutions but are then influenced by others to refine their perceptions.

Harvard and Stanford students were found to value universities that offer a "well-rounded" liberal arts education while criticising other selective institutions for being "too intellectual" or "connected to the old-world status system". These criticisms were used to justify their own elite status and contribute to ongoing status distinctions among social elites.

The old-world status system refers to the traditional social hierarchy that is based on factors such as family wealth, social connections, and legacy. Students at Harvard and Stanford believe that universities that are too connected to this old-world status system prioritise legacy students and favour the admission of students from elite backgrounds, rather than solely on merit. This perception contributes to a sense of meritocracy and justification of their own rarefied positions.

Harvard and Stanford students also criticised other institutions for having a student body that is too single-minded about career preparation. They value a well-rounded education that exposes them to different histories and perspectives, allowing them to explore various interests and passions. They believe that universities that are too focused on career preparation limit their intellectual and social development, which is detrimental to their goal of becoming well-rounded individuals.

They believe some universities are overly associated with partying and athletics

Students at Harvard and Stanford believe that some universities are overly associated with partying and athletics. This perception contributes to the construction of boundaries among elite universities, as students differentiate their institutions from others based on specific characteristics.

Harvard and Stanford students value a "well-rounded" liberal arts education and often criticise other selective universities for being too focused on specific areas, such as partying and athletics, or for having a student body that is too single-minded about career preparation. They believe that a liberal arts education exposes them to different histories and perspectives, allowing them to explore various interests and passions.

For instance, students at Harvard and Stanford may view other universities, such as Duke University, as having too much emphasis on social life and "typical college" partying. They may characterise Duke as a "frat party" or a "Southern school" with a strong Greek life and a sporty, rah-rah culture.

By contrast, Harvard and Stanford students see their universities as offering a balance between academics and social life. They believe their institutions provide a well-rounded course of study while still allowing for a vibrant social scene and extracurricular activities.

These perceptions of other universities as being overly associated with partying and athletics contribute to the hierarchical status distinctions that Harvard and Stanford students make among elite universities.

They believe some universities have a student body too single-minded about career preparation

In a study conducted by sociologists Amy J. Binder and Andrea R. Abel, 56 undergraduates from Harvard and Stanford were interviewed to explore how students construct a status hierarchy among elite universities. The study found that students from both universities valued institutions that offered a "well-rounded" liberal arts education while criticising other selective institutions for having a student body too single-minded about career preparation.

The University of Pennsylvania, particularly its business school, Wharton, was frequently mentioned as an example of a university that was too preprofessional. Students from both Harvard and Stanford believed that a university that was too focused on career preparation limited students' exposure to different histories and perspectives. They argued that a well-rounded liberal arts education was important for aspiring elites to develop cultural competency and a sense of eliteness.

One Harvard student criticised Wharton, saying:

> I think people who pursue just an undergraduate business degree, it's like a signalling effect saying, 'I don't value learning for learning's sake; I value education as a means to an end.'

Another Harvard student, who was on a path to a career in investment banking, expressed a similar sentiment:

> I think it was following this linearity and this kind of security, or set course, on how you would get to your eventual career position.

The study concluded that through constructing these nuanced perceptions of elite universities, students justify their rarefied positions and contribute to ongoing status distinctions among social elites.

Frequently asked questions