This article relies on some generalizations, so we need to be careful. Chemistry majors are probably much different than graduates in the social sciences. And every student should be judges on his or her own merits, not on the Zeitgeist of their school.
That said, I’m now wondering whether corporations are changing their views on the plusses and minuses of hiring ivy league graduates. Here’s an excerpt from R.R.Reno’s article: “Why I Stopped Hiring Ivy League Graduates.” The author is concerned that ivy league graduates have been “socialized to panic over pseudocrises.” Here’s an excerpt:
Haverford is a progressive hothouse. If students can be traumatized by “insensitivity” on that leafy campus, then they’re unlikely to function as effective team members in an organization that has to deal with everyday realities. And in any event, I don’t want to hire someone who makes inflammatory accusations at the drop of a hat.
Student activists don’t represent the majority of students. But I find myself wondering about the silent acquiescence of most students. They allow themselves to be cowed by charges of racism and other sins. I sympathize. The atmosphere of intimidation in elite higher education is intense. But I don’t want to hire a person well-practiced in remaining silent when it costs something to speak up.
Harvard is still the gold standard for management consultants, but the Woke nonsense won’t cut it. McKinsey will not hire someone who is likely to have a meltdown in front of a client and cry because the client hurt his feelings.
25 years ago I was mentoring a young man at Booz Allen; the firm was going to pay for his MBA and he asked me what to do. He had been accepted at Harvard and at Kellogg in Chicago, and spent ten minutes explaining to me that Kellogg was just as good as Harvard. I told him to go to Harvard.
Why?
Then you don’t need to give the speech.