Douglas Olsen
In a time of increasing economic inequality, the study of elites is undergoing a revival. While sociologists have extensively studied how affluent families position their children to compete in a highly stratified higher education system, less is known about how students themselves contribute to bolstering elite status. Researchers Amy Binder and Andrea Abel set out to explore this by interviewing 56 undergraduates at Harvard and Stanford Universities. Their findings revealed how students construct a status hierarchy among elite campuses, drawing symbolic boundaries between who we are and who they are.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Prestige differences between institutions | Harvard and Stanford students value a well-rounded liberal arts education |
| Refinement of perceptions | Students are influenced by others to refine their perceptions |
| Criticism of other institutions | Too intellectual, connected to the old-world status system, overly associated with partying and athletics, or having students too single-minded about career preparation |
| Status elevation | Students elevate their status by critiquing other campuses |
| Anxiety about selective schools | Students have anxiety about attending highly selective and competitive schools |
Explore related products
$72.82 $94.99
What You'll Learn
Students' beliefs about other elite universities
Students at Harvard and Stanford generally spoke highly of their own institutions, praising their prestige and the broad assortment of opportunities they provided. They also tended to believe that their schools' sterling reputations were deserved. However, they also engaged in implicit praise of their own schools by criticising other campuses.
Harvard and Stanford students were found to value universities that offer a "well-rounded" liberal arts education, while they criticised other selective institutions for being too intellectual, connected to the old-world status system, overly associated with partying and athletics, or having a student body too single-minded about career preparation. For example, one Harvard student drew a contrast between their institution and other schools [that] are just not going to expand your experience enough. Another praised the ability to study both biomedicine and Arabic without compromising educational quality.
Stanford students also expressed pride in their school's reputed laid-back atmosphere, with one alum describing it as "very creative and a little bit hipster". Another marvelled at "quirky things" such as students wearing bikinis at graduation.
These beliefs about other elite universities are thought to serve the purpose of subtly elevating the students' own status and position. For example, if Princeton is regarded as too stiff, then Stanford is implied to be easygoing by comparison, and thus more deserving of renown. This impulse to engage in status elevation may be driven by a broader anxiety about attending highly selective and competitive schools.
Pace University: Out-of-State Students Percentage
You may want to see also
Explore related products
How students elevate their status
Students at Harvard and Stanford elevate their status by drawing symbolic boundaries and creating a sense of "us" versus "them". This involves refining their perceptions of prestige differences between top institutions and criticising other selective institutions for being too intellectual, too focused on the old-world status system, overly associated with partying and athletics, or too single-minded about career preparation.
Harvard and Stanford students value a "'well-rounded' liberal arts education" and believe that their universities offer a unique and superior experience compared to other campuses. They emphasise the broad assortment of opportunities available at their institutions, such as the ability to explore multiple academic interests without compromising quality. For example, one Harvard student highlighted the flexibility to dive into both biomedicine and Arabic.
The students also elevate their status by praising the culture and atmosphere of their universities. A Stanford alum described the school as "very creative and a little bit hipster", while another marvelled at the quirky nature of Stanford's graduation ceremonies. These subtle criticisms of other campuses and implicit praise for their own institutions allow students to elevate their status and position in a competitive academic environment.
Additionally, students at these elite universities understand their present and future identities through interactions with their peers, faculty, teaching assistants, and administrators. They learn to signal their refinement and develop a sense of similarity with their in-group while differentiating themselves from others. This collective process of meaning-making contributes to the construction of symbolic boundaries and the elevation of their status within the elite university context.
The impulse to engage in status elevation also speaks to a broader anxiety that many of these students experience in highly selective and competitive academic environments. They have worked their entire young lives to gain admission to these prestigious universities, and this shared experience fosters a sense of exclusivity and superiority.
Utah State University: Protecting Student Data
You may want to see also
Explore related products
The role of interviews in shaping perceptions
Interviews with 56 undergraduates at Harvard and Stanford Universities reveal how students construct a status hierarchy among elite campuses. Students arrive at campus with a basic understanding of prestige differences between institutions, but their perceptions are refined by the influences of others.
The interviews conducted by researchers Amy Binder, a sociologist at the University of California, San Diego, and Andrea Abel, a graduate student, shed light on how students shape their perceptions of elite universities. One key finding is that Harvard and Stanford students value a "well-rounded" liberal arts education. They criticise other selective institutions for being too intellectual, connected to the old-world status system, overly focused on partying and athletics, or having students too fixated on career preparation. By critiquing other campuses, students elevate their own status and position. For example, if Princeton is seen as too stiff, then Stanford is seen as more relaxed and thus more worthy of acclaim.
The interviews also revealed that students at these elite universities understand their present and future identities through conversations with their peers. They learn to adopt styles that signal their refinement. The findings suggest that students justify their privileged positions and contribute to ongoing status distinctions among social elites.
Furthermore, the interviews highlighted that students at Harvard and Stanford believe their universities' sterling reputations are well-deserved. They praised their institutions for providing a broad range of opportunities and a well-rounded education. For instance, a junior at Harvard shared that during an admissions interview, she was advised that other schools might not offer the same expansive experience. A Stanford alum also boasted about the school's laid-back and creative atmosphere.
While the interviews provided valuable insights, it is important to acknowledge that they may not capture the generalisations made by all students at highly selective colleges, including those at Harvard and Stanford. The researchers noted that the beliefs of the 56 students interviewed were largely consistent across gender, race, and socioeconomic background. However, the sample size may not be representative of the diverse student populations at these elite universities.
University Students and ACA: What's Covered?
You may want to see also
The influence of peers and faculty
Harvard and Stanford students tend to value universities offering a "well-rounded" liberal arts education and often criticise other selective institutions for being "too intellectual" or overly focused on partying, athletics, or career preparation. These criticisms subtly elevate their own status and position, contributing to a broader status hierarchy among elite campuses. This impulse to engage in status elevation reflects a deeper anxiety about attending highly selective and competitive schools.
The boundaries drawn between "us" (students from Harvard or Stanford) and "them" (students from other elite universities) are influenced by the collective processes and intersubjective meaning-making within their peer groups. Students learn to inhabit styles that signal their refinement and develop a sense of similarity with their peers and difference from others. This sense of similarity and difference is shaped by their interactions with faculty members and administrators, who contribute to the collective understanding of the university's culture and reputation.
While the research focuses on Harvard and Stanford, the findings are historically specific and organisationally contingent. The themes discovered are attuned to today's social class anxieties and may vary across different educational systems. For example, in nations with flatter and less horizontally stratified higher education systems, such as Germany or Canada, acute boundary-drawing between institutions may be less prevalent.
JMP Software Availability for Students at the University of Michigan
You may want to see also
The impact of economic inequality
The selectivity of elite universities contributes to economic inequality by influencing future earnings. Graduates from elite institutions earn significantly more than those from less selective colleges, with a lifetime earnings difference of up to $450,000. Additionally, the choice of college major further exacerbates inequality, as certain majors are associated with higher earnings. Students from disadvantaged backgrounds often face barriers in accessing the highest-paying majors, perpetuating income inequality.
The study by Binder and Abel sheds light on the symbolic work done by students to uphold their elite status. They found that Harvard and Stanford students value a "well-rounded" liberal arts education while critiquing other selective institutions. This criticism serves to elevate their own status and justify their elite positions. However, it's important to note that this form of status distinction is not universal and varies across different educational systems.
Economic inequality among college graduates is also linked to the choice of college major. Recent studies have shown that students admitted to certain lucrative majors, such as STEM or economics, can earn significantly more than similar students who were rejected. This inequality is further perpetuated by the concentration of lower-income students in lower-paying majors, hindering social mobility. While students may choose majors based on personal fulfillment, the financial implications of major choice contribute to the overall earnings inequality between advantaged and disadvantaged graduates.
To address these inequalities, universities ought to increase transparency in admissions standards and make lucrative majors more accessible to all. By doing so, universities can fulfill their mission of educating a diverse student body and mitigating the impact of economic inequality on access to elite institutions and the subsequent economic returns.
International Students at Georgia Southern University: A Growing Population
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
Harvard and Stanford students value universities that offer a "well-rounded" liberal arts education. They critique other selective institutions for being too intellectual, connected to the old-world status system, overly focused on partying and athletics, or having students too focused on career preparation.
Students come to campus with a working knowledge of prestige differences between top institutions. They are then influenced by others to refine their perceptions. Through these interactions, students collectively shape their feelings of similarity with one another and difference from others.
By critiquing other campuses, students subtly elevate their status and position. This impulse speaks to a broader anxiety about attending highly selective and competitive schools.
