William Deresiewicz graduated from Columbia University in 1998 with a Ph.D in English, a masters in journalism and a B.A in psychology and biology. Deresiewicz was a professor at Yale University from 1998 until 2008 when he stopped teaching to focus on his writing career. In summer of 2014, Deresiewicz published an essay article, “Don't Send Your Kids To The Ivy League”. In his article, Deresiewicz criticizes Ivy League institutions for creating students who have issues with socialization and establishing themselves as real people in the world. He gives his insider view and argues that the Ivy league schools are essentially feeding pools for the rich and elite to send their children and that the children are bred to be overachievers in every aspect of life including academics, languages, sports and extracurriculars. He exposes through hands on experience, statistics and reliable sources that the majority of students actually end up struggling with important things like being anxious, timid, lost or having little curiosity.
Since the young age, the children who attend the Ivy Leagues have been taught to exceed standard in all aspects possible. They are the elite of their generation and outshine all of their peers in grade point average, standardized testing scores and extracurriculars. The Ivy children have been bred by their parents and are privileged to have all the resources they need in order to succeed. Although it may seem picture perfect for someone to attend a prestigious Ivy League, the reality falls far from that. Although these kids can ace almost any test, these kids withhold no true passions or complex social skills needed to succeed in modern day society. These universities do not promote the growth of the individual in a creative or inspiring way. Deresiewicz portrays this concept as he writes, “Look beneath the facade of seamless well adjustment, and what you often find are toxic levels of fear, anxiety, depression, of emptiness and aimless and isolation” The rationale behind this idea is because of the immense pressure to be admitted into a school that the student would deem prestigious enough, they would defy all norms in order to be “well rounded” which essentially ends the child's social life. The criteria in order to receive admittance into the Ivies becomes more and more difficult each year as they look for the most versatile applicant. Deresiewicz recalls, “ One young person, who had piled up a truly insane quantity of extracurriculars and who submitted nine letter of recommendation, was felt to be ‘too intense’. Id been told that successful applicants could either be “well-rounded” or “pointy” – outstanding in one particular way – but if they were pointed, they had to be really pointy : a scientist who had won a national award”. This causes strain on the developing brain of the student because the prospect of not being successful terrifies them to an extreme and does not promote good mental health.
Deresiewicz himself comes from a background of private schooling and and Ivy League Education, as he is a primary source for the culture and scholarship that occurs at these prestigious institutions. Deresiewicz refers to himself as a “sleepwalker” when he entered college and recalls that at the time he enrolled in Columbia University as a student he chose the most prestigious place that let him in regardless of what it actually meant to get an education and the reasoning behind that. Deresiewicz recalls, “ It was only after twenty-four years in the Ivy League – college and Phd at Columbia, ten years on faculty at Yale – that I started to think about what this system does to kids and how they can escape from it, what it does to society and how we can dismantle it.” This quote established credibility because it is clear that he has seen the Ivys from both sides as a student and as a professor. Deresiewicz goes more into depth when he ridicules the Ivys, “Elite schools like to boast that they teach their students how to think, but all they mean is that they train them in analytical and rhetorical skills”. In his essay, he makes it very clear that the Ivys only serve the mere purpose of teaching kids how to ‘walk, talk and think like the rich’ as it is all based on privilege. He mentions several times that around campus all he sees are the children of white businesspeople and professionals playing alongside the children of black, Asian and Latino businesspeople. Deresiewicz recalls that, “Kids at schools like Stanford think that their environment is diverse if one comes from Missouri another from Pakistan, or if one plays the cello and the other Lacrosse, Nevermind that all of their parents are bankers or doctors”. This is because the ivies are rooted in wealth and status. Deresiewicz shares some justifying data and statistics for example “The numbers are undeniable. In 1895, 46 percent of incoming freshman at the 250 most selective colleges came from the top quarter of the income distribution. By 2000, it was 55 percent. As of 2006, only about 15 percent of students at the most competitive schools came from the bottom half.” This quote shows that the data is undeniable that families are using their wealth to essentially buy their way into top colleges with donations, tutors and more.
In Diane Ravitch's Novel, “A Nation at Risk” she discussed her detest for standardized testing in children and why she believes it stunts children's creativity and personal growth. One similarity that Ravitch and Deresiewicz have right off the bat is that they both used to be in favor of what they are both picking apart in their articles. Ravitch recalls that she used to be in favor of standardized testing before she saw how negatively they impacted kids learning. Deresiewicz states that he taught for the Ivy for 10 years and even attended an Ivy himself and he is not in favor of that type of education anymore. Ravitch says, “They will pin an A label on a school that gets high scores, even if its students spend all day practicing to take tests in mathematics and reading. But such a school is really not a good school, even if it gets high scores and the state awards it an A”. This concept is similar to what Deresiewicz says about the kids who go to the Ivys who can ace a test and get high marks and rankings for the school but don't have much depth or individuality to them. Deresiewicz says “I taught many wonderful young people during my years in the Ivy League—bright, thoughtful, creative kids whom it was a pleasure to talk with and learn from. But most of them seemed content to color within the lines that their education had marked out for them. Very few were passionate about ideas. Very few saw college as part of a larger project of intellectual discovery and development. Everyone dressed as if they were ready to be interviewed at a moment’s notice.”. Both Ravitch and Deresiewicz highlight that Schools starting all the way at elementary level that pride themselves with awards are showing that they don't have high levels of intellectual discovery and development and that is clear when a student attempts anything other than test taking and examinations.
Deresiewicz highlights many times that the Ivies and top universities are all based around status and opportunity given at birth, which is exactly what Jean Anyon established in her article “From Social Class And The Hidden Curriculum Of Work”. In this article she goes into depth about all the different types of elementary schooling. She she talks about how research could help close the gap between the wealthy and lower income families regarding education. She says, “Such research could have as a product the further elucidation of complex but not readily apparent connections between everyday activity in schools and classrooms and the unequal structure of economic relationships in which we work and live.” Deresiewicz also relays similar opinions regarding class when he says, “ This system is exacerbating inequality, retarding social mobility, perpetuating privilege, and creating an elite that is isolated from the society that it’s supposed to lead. The numbers are undeniable.” It is very clear that both Deresiewicz and Anyon feel strongly that an enriching and valuable education comes with status and would be much harder to receive if your income level was low or if the public schools in your area were not up to par.
Deresiewicz does a phenomenal job in getting his argument across and shedding light on how the American schools system needs to alter themselves for the better. Anyon and Ravitch also bring awareness to the different levels of education in the country and inform the public that research should be conducted in order to create equal opportunity for kids of all incomes. America's government leaders and board of education need to take the step in order to improve schools and education so that we can better society and compose more productive citizens. If more people read the compelling arguments of Anyon, Deresiewicz and Ravitch, we can come closer to equality and more opportunities for all.