New Report Challenges the Dominance of Ivy League Education in American Leadership

Public and In-State Universities Excel in Educating America’s Leaders

NEW YORK, NY – Today’s America often seems destined to have a leadership class dominated by graduates of elite private institutions in business, law, media, and other sectors. However, new research suggests that the national influence of “Ivy+”—eight Ivies plus Chicago, Duke, MIT and Stanford—may be overstated. In a new Manhattan Institute report, senior fellow Andy Smarick surveys the educational backgrounds of a wide array of public leaders and top lawyers, revealing most of them attended public and in-state colleges and graduate schools rather than private universities.

Part of the allure of the Ivy+ is that they lead to leadership opportunities. But Smarick finds across the nation that governors, state supreme court justices, attorneys-general, state legislative leaders, and state education chiefs are likelier to have gone to public universities than private, likelier to have gone to a school in their states than outside, and—perhaps most notably—likelier to have attended public flagships than Ivy+ institutions. Smarick concludes that overemphasizing Ivy+ schools can create a narrow view of what "elite" educational paths are, and ultimately discount the contributions of public and regional schools.

Smarick recommends shifting focus to recognize the value of a wider range of educational institutions so that employers, policymakers, and scholarship programs can better reflect America’s diverse landscape and tap into talent from across the country.

This report is the first in a Manhattan Institute series on policy recommendations to reform and strengthen American public higher education. Please visit here to view the forthcoming additions.

Click here to read the full report.