My latest study was just published. I worked on it for a year so I’m excited to have it released into the wild. I’ll write about different aspects in various places. But I wanted to share 7 findings here.
There’s been endless talk about the importance of “Ivy+” schools, especially how their graduates dominate leadership positions. I was dubious and dig in. I looked at five key state leadership positions as well as the leadership of each state’s top law firms: The list includes governors, legislative leaders, supreme court justices, attorneys general, and education chiefs, and then managing partners, practice leaders, and similar roles in prestigious firms.
I identified more than 3,000 individuals and where they went to college and grad/law school.
1. Go Public. Not Too Far. Mostly Flagship.
Of the public officials I studied: More went to public colleges than private; more went to an in-state school than a school elsewhere; more went to public flagships than Ivy+. This was true overall and for each of the five offices. And for undergrad and grad.
2. The Major Role of Flagships
A flagship university is a state’s most influential (and typically highest rated) public university (e.g., Cal-Berkeley, UNC-Chapel Hill, University of Wisconsin-Madison). For each of the offices studied, flagships educated significantly more leaders than Ivy+ schools at the undergraduate level.
One of my favorite findings: Across all public leaders, the 12 Ivy+ schools educated 75, and the top 12 flagships educated 76. Texas, Arkansas, Georgia, Mississippi, and Wyoming each educated more than Stanford; Auburn, Indiana, LSU, Michigan, and UVA each educated more than Princeton; Arizona State, Kentucky, Montana, Tennessee, Utah, and Washington each educated more than Brown, Columbia, Cornell, Penn, MIT, or Chicago.
3. A Few State Really Like Privates, Ivy+
In most states, most public officials went public. In 13 states, it’s at least 70%; in half of states, it’s at least 60%.
But in a few states, few public leaders went public.
In a handful of states, more than 30% of leaders went Ivy+.
But in most states, Ivy+ influence is negligible: In 18 states, zero public leaders went to an Ivy+ college.
4. Red States Choose Public Grads; Blue State Choose Ivy+
The more a state votes GOP, the more likely it is to have public-college leaders. The more it votes Democratic, the more likely it is to have Ivy+ leaders.
5. State Supreme Courts VERY Different than Federal Courts
All SCOTUS justices went to private colleges; 7/9 went to Ivy+ colleges; 8/9 went to an Ivy+ law school.
I also looked at all 291 federal appeals court judges. They’re also much likelier than the national average to have gone to private and Ivy+ colleges. They are also likelier to have gone to a private law school and an Ivy+ law school; indeed 41% have an Ivy+ law degree.
State supreme courts are very different. For undergrad, more went to public than private; more went flagship than Ivy+. The results are even more striking for law school. Only about 1/7 state justices have an Ivy+ law degree. Far more went flagship.
In a handful of states, Ivy+ law degrees are prominent. But in half of states, not a single state supreme court justice has an Ivy+ law degree.
6. Leading Attorneys Mirror State Officials
I wanted to make sure these findings weren’t limited to public officials. I identified each state’s top law firms and where the leaders of those firms were educated. The results looked just like the state leaders. I identified the top college for these lawyers. In almost all cases, it’s an in-state public school. In most cases, it’s a flagship. Only in MA and NY are Ivy+ tops.
7. Appreciating the Under-appreciated Schools
Which schools deserve more attention? First, flagships. Other non-flagship publics, too, such as Arizona State, Auburn, Iowa State, Michigan State, North Dakota State, Purdue, and UCLA.
Many non-Ivy+ privates deserve more recognition: Baylor, Boston College, BYU, Creighton, Denver, Drake, Georgetown, Gonzaga, Marquette, Millsaps, Seton Hall, St. Olaf, Suffolk, Willamette.