I Hate the Ivy League: Riffs and Rants on Elite Education
3.9 3.9 out of 5 stars | 12 ratings
Price: 13.65
Last update: 01-11-2025
About this item
From Malcolm Gladwell’s hit podcast Revisionist History comes a compendium about one of his greatest obsessions: education.
Malcolm Gladwell has long relished the opportunity to skewer the upper echelons of higher education, from the institution of U.S. News & World Report’s Best College rankings to the LSATs to the luxe Bowdoin College cafeteria. I Hate the Ivy League: Riffs and Rants on Elite Education, upends the traditional thinking around how education should work and tries to get to the bottom of why we often reward the wrong people. The higher education system follows a hierarchy that was created to primarily benefit top-tier, elite, well-off students, but Gladwell wants to find out how we can do a better job at educating the middle and make education more affordable, fair, and open to all.
Why is Gladwell so obsessed with American education? The foreword and afterword of I Hate the Ivy League explains, framing this carefully curated selection of Revisionist History episodes. If you’ve never listened to Revisionist History, this collection is a thoughtful introduction to the long-running podcast, and if you’re already a fan, it allows for careful re-examination of the important issues at hand: how do we really determine what matters most when it comes to educating our children?
Please note: This collection includes content that has been released in the podcast series.
Top reviews from the United States
First, Malcolm is a great writer. He voices all of this himself, so you can sense his passion and commitment to the issues. He is a great communicator, I think you’ll come away with what he’s trying to say. Overall, it’s a pleasant experience and I am glad to have listened to it.
My main issues are in terms of the content. My first criticism is that I do not believe he was as evidence-based as he could have been. He tells stories and examples of students, as well as educational institutions, a style which is compelling and relatable; however, he could’ve done more to look at more academic, rigorous evidence here. He hints at the fact that most educational outcomes are the result of non-school factors. For example, the most prestigious schools select the best students, so that the apparently good post-graduate outcomes these schools get are illusory, not caused by educational quality but rather by pre-selection. Malcolm acknowledges this as a possibility but never fully explores it.
He remains convinced that schools, or educational quality in particular, makes a big difference in student’s life outcomes, but he doesn’t explore much what “educational quality” would entail. He seems to think it’s not on-campus luxury food or housing. But is it small class sizes? Higher teacher pay? A certain style of teaching? He never really gets to what happens in the classroom itself.
Second, some of the solutions proposed would prove problematic. His “don’t ask don’t tell” idea behind asking where people got their degree seems problematic to me. What about autodidacts, should they be eligible to say they have some sort of degree? If so, employers will have to come up with another way of quickly evaluating candidates which is not a test, which Malcolm seems to oppose. If not, then what schools count in this system? Could anyone open any law school and have their graduates compete on a level playing field with those from Yale? It’s hard to say what would happen in these situations. It’s possible getting a job could become even less meritocratic and more based on who you know, under Malcolm’s proposal, a consequence I don’t think he intended.
Overall I had a good time listening to it. But content-wise I think I would go elsewhere for ideas of education policy.
On another note, was pretty surprised to find Hollywood insiders like Eisner who have their own highly exclusive 2 Triangle Ivy League talk about inequalities. Its comical that Malcolm who sees through all sorts of BS does not see through the biggest joke in Eisner's industry. That Hollywood is basically a Members Only (Ivy League equivalent) industry that excludes others from participation. Eisner should focus on the inequalities within his own industry 1st than whine about similar inequalities elsewhere. Ridiculous.