Source

In a previous blog post I wrote I discussed the benefits of going to college and whether or not it was worth it in the long run. Now I’ve decided to narrow down my search to one specific topic: Ivy League Universities. When thinking of Ivy League schools we often think of the students who are the smartest of the smart; the elite. Because of this many high school students automatically feel that if they were given the opportunity to attend such a prestigious university why turn it down? It’s an automatic yes. No doubt about it. But should this actually be the case? As an undergraduate entering college, is going to an Ivy League school economically beneficial in the long run, or is it simply a fluke?

Null Hypothesis: Attending an Ivy League university has no economic advantage versus attending a non-Ivy League university.

Alternative Hypothesis: Attending an Ivy League university does have an economic advantage versus attending a non-Ivy League university.

Source

I perform an in-depth analysis as to the price of college in my previous blog but here’s a re-cap. According to Forbes, “the average cost of attending a top four-year college is rapidly approaching a quarter of a million dollars” and “…the average 2014 graduate with student loans will have to pay back around $33,000″. These are extremely hefty price tags which will have inevitable price tags on every student’s life. But what about Ivy League? Is attended such a renowned, and often times much more expensive, institution more important than the price tag that comes along with it? In the words of Malcolm Gladwell, “If you want to get a science and math degree, don’t go to Harvard.” Gladwell uses statistical evidence to support his theory. ” …if you’re a kid and you have a choice between, Harvard and the University of Maryland, go with Maryland because its SAT scores are 150 points lower on average. That means you have a 30% better chance at getting your degree.” Gladwell argues the point that if you aren’t part of the “elite” or the “smartest of the smart” you won’t make it at Harvard. It’s extremely discouraging to be successful in high school and then bumped down to the lower tier of students once you get to college. But have scientific experiments been performed on this topic to solidify that Gladwell’s opinion is correct?

The most prominent study which analyzed Ivy League Universities was performed by Stacy Dale and Alan B. Krueger. This research was based around 14,239 college freshmen (who were chosen based on their SAT score) and focused on the correlation between attending an Ivy League school and their success once they graduated college. The result of this experiment was “students who attended more selective colleges do not earn more than other students who were accepted and rejected by comparable schools but attended less elective colleges.” In other words, no correlation can be seen between how prestigious a college is versus the economic outcome of the student. Dale and Krueger also  compare their research to that of Shane Hunt stating that their conclusions are consistent with his. Hunt states, ” The C student from Princeton earns more than the A student from Podunk not mainly because he has the prestige of a Princeton degree, but merely because he is abler. The golden touch is possessed not by the Ivy League College, but by its students.” (1963; pg. 56) Both these separate statements are conclusive with the theory that attending an Ivy League has no form of financial benefit in the long run. Additionally, if a student is not in the average range of intelligence found at an Ivy League university they will rapidly decline and there is often little hope that they will become successful at such an institution as well as in the future.

Now, back to the original null hypothesis: Is attending an Ivy League school beneficial in any way towards a student’s economic outcome? The answer is unknown and the results are inconclusive. The null hypothesis cannot yet be rejected. It may appear as if there is evidence that something is going on when discussing the correlation between Ivy Leagues and economic outcome but this is not the case.

Source

The most significant research performed, which is that performed by Dale and Krueger, has three main flaws. First, their results could be blamed on the Texas Sharpshooter effect. Dale and Krueger not only based their study on SAT scores, but they also looked into impacts other factors have such as ethic background as and financial background. By looking into multiple aspects of these students’ lives they were bound to find a correlation between something. Second, the Dale and Krueger’s research is one of the only significant and substantial experiments present which measures an Ivy League education. Meta-analysis should be present in order to solidify the final conclusion Dale and Krueger present. The last flaw, and arguably the most significant issue, is that Dale and Krueger’s experiment is extremely outdated. Their experiments began in 1976. How do we know that their conclusion is still accurate today? We don’t.

Final Conclusion: Much more research needs to be performed on this topic. Simply more up-to-date research would be beneficial. Another possibility would be researching whether Ivy League schools are more economically beneficial simply due to the renowned reputation which they all possess. Nearly all high school students who strive for success work towards Ivy League level universities which proves how relatable this topic is to countless students. More research on this topic would greatly benefit those who are about to make one of the most influential decisions of their lives.

Source