On Elitism

"Given two people with comparable levels of intelligence and technical skills, the one with less-reputable external marks of status will be more likely to display outward signs of elitism, arrogance, and snobbery."

and the content are in conflict.

Before the first paragraph is even over Mr. Guo has provided his actual claim

"the most arrogant and academically-snobby kids in the classroom were the ones who were undoubtedly smart but not the smartest. _The smartest kids in the class had reputable externally-recognizable marks of status --- their top-ranked grades on exams and homeworks --- and thus did not need to assert their intelligence._"

I'm not really sure how much more clear that needs to be made. The parallel he then draws is:

"As adults, one common external mark of status is the reputation of one's college. Just like how there are name-brand clothing lines and electronics products, there are also name-brand colleges: What college-educated person hasn't heard of Harvard, Yale, or Stanford? Thus, I assert that given two people with comparable levels of intelligence and technical skills, the one who did not go to a name-brand university will be more likely to display outward signs of elitism, arrogance, and snobbery as a form of compensation for his/her lack of visible status."

The argument is clear and I stand by my statement. The elitism in the article is clear, and it's not the tier 1+n schooled folks. You'll have to recheck your receiver because the only signal I'm getting from this is, "hey state school, did I give you permission to talk? The grown ups can't hear each other over the racket you're making."

Just because it's couched in fancified language like "externally-recognizable marks of status" doesn't change what he's saying.

If you keep hiding the fact that you are from a top school in order to dissociate fallibility with Stanford, this sort of sentiment will continue.

Mr. Guo, your article stands in opposition to itself. On the one hand, you try to state that "given comparable levels of intelligence or skill" and on the other "only the smartest have the highest grades". Your only example is one that does not draw a comparison of comparable persons (or rather, reaches the conclusion that an A student and a B student are not comparable or equivalent). And then you directly relate this situation of grades=intelligence to the world of adults. You don't say, "only smart people get into top schools", but the implication is pretty apparent.

Over the past few decades, largely because of the rise of the Internet, and the equalization of information access this brings about, name brand schools are finding themselves greatly diminished in reputation (it probably didn't help that our last president was mysteriously from Yale). World class research now regularly comes from lesser known schools without ridiculously large endowments. I'm not sure the same could be said 50-100 years ago. Yet an attitude persists in the "adult world" that people from tier-1 schools should start their careers higher and progress faster because they have somehow received a higher quality of education from their esteemed institutions of higher learning.

I think that this attitude is demonstrably false. In 14 years I've worked with a variety of people from a variety of educational backgrounds and I've seen virtually no difference in performance across the board. In fact, in the last two years I've had to take 2 Ivy League grads off of projects because of their failure to perform.

Understandably, many grads from these schools don't turn down these unearned opportunities (when was the last time you heard of a Harvard grad asking for a smaller starting salary because it wasn't fair?). I wouldn't. But to the folks who did not, for whatever reason (grades, opportunity, money, family, immigration, etc.), attend a name brand school, this unfairness smacks of all kinds of bad.

If I choose to ignore the elitist garbage in your post and focus only on your stated central argument, you decry their only avenue of dealing with the situation -- making noise about it. Yet you offer no other alternative except for an unstated "you shoulda gone to a better school then."

You've chosen to define this state of things as elitism, if you can find me a dictionary with a definition of elitism that matches your I'll eat my hat. You do hit the nail on the head with this however,

"Such an attitude is understandable, since alumni from top-tier schools have an implicit symbol of status from the name-recognition of their diploma, but alumni from more obscure universities often get puzzled replies of "hmmm, sorry, never heard of that place" when they mention their alma mater. Thus, in order to prove themselves as worthy colleagues, they must strive to more actively advertise and demonstrate their skills and technical competence, because their peers, superiors, and outside observers are not going to give them the benefit of the doubt."

A person saying "but I'm just as good as that guy from a name branded school!" is not elitism by any possible stretch of the word. It's a desire to seek equality and be given a fair shake. Something that, being a student two name branded schools you will never ever have to deal with. For a salient example, can you guess how immensely hard it is to even get a call back let alone a job from Google if you didn't graduate a top school? Who's elitist? The Stanford grads that don't call back the folks who graduated from xyz State University, or the people who graduated from xyz State University? These people have to make noise just to be seen beyond the brick wall of tier-1 graduated middle level managers in any organization.

But to my reading of the entirety of the article, what you seem most upset about is the declining status of the elite schools, and that people should have the temerity point this out in the real world. Instead of elitism, I think you are trying to turn this state of things into a kind of victimization. It's kind of sad really, the rest of us peons have had to get by on merit, it's time that the elite did also.

Even figuring in the higher starting salary, the pay gap closes pretty darn fast for that pedigree to be worth it.

It's an absolutely accurate portrayal of what's wrong in the world with respect to the reputation that top-tier schools have and the practices of top-tier corporations. Mr. Guo, in a few areas of self-reflection attempts to strike a reasonable tone in the parts that don't sound like a brochure for these name branded schools. But then we get to the section titled, "Take-home messages if you went to a normal, lesser-known university" (actually the title, I'm not making it up) and it's a fast ride downhill from there.

This kind of trite, patronizing, condescension is hard to find out in the public arena. This honest externalization from an elite is only confirmation of all the worst fears of what these folks are really thinking about you. The joy of it is not that Mr. Guo rails against the practices he so accurately describes but that he shrugs his shoulders, utters "just accept your station in life state-school", and ends his piece with a section so unbelievably arrogant, so paternal...we get this little pat on the head "be realistic state-school, you could always open some rinky-dink business in some small town that's never heard of Google".

Here, I'll not paraphrase anymore, I'll just quote:

"If you are like the vast majority of people who didn't attend a name-brand university, then I want to stress the importance of perspective. Realize that the deck is stacked against you...To try to buck the system will likely result in disappointment and dejection."

"Another aspect of perspective is the importance of realism. It's healthy to have dreams, but you must at the same time have a realistic career plan."

"Being realistic doesn't mean being complacent, though. For instance, starting a small local business is a great outlet for those who are aspiring entrepreneurs. If you are the town expert on Topic X, then you can form a small business without fear that some Ivy League brat will infringe on your local market."

Are you kidding me with this "why even try, you'll just end up disappointed" rubbish?