Peihao Peng Professor Simon Essay 2 Final Draft Sep 19, 2015

Peihao Pengprofessor Simonessay 2 Final Draftsep 19 2015esl 53celite

Peihao Peng professor Simon essay 2 Final Draft Sep 19, 2015 ESL 53C Elite vs. Non-Elite Institutions In the chapter “Caroline Sacks” by Malcolm Gladwell from David and Goliath: Underdogs, Misfits, and the Art of Battling Giants, Caroline Sacks and the Impressionists face different choices between Elite and Non-Elite Institutions. Caroline Sacks chooses to attend an elite institution, Brown University, whereas the Impressionists made a decision to pursue their art outside the traditional elite art establishments. Both choices reflect their perceptions of success and their abilities, leading to contrasting results. This essay explores these choices, their underlying reasons, and whether attending an elite institution is genuinely worth it.

Paper For Above instruction

Caroline Sacks grew up in a suburban area of Washington D.C., demonstrating early signs of academic excellence and a strong interest in science. She was consistently at the top of her high school class and was eager to pursue her ambitions at a prestigious university. After visiting several campuses, she fell in love with Brown University, an Ivy League institution known for its exclusivity and beauty, and decided it was her first choice, with the University of Maryland as a backup. Brown University’s reputation as an elite institution, with its resources, accomplished faculty, and network, heavily influenced her decision, as she believed it would provide her with unmatched opportunities (Gladwell, 2010). Conversely, the Impressionists historically challenged the traditional notions of fine art by depicting ordinary life with visible brushstrokes and indistinct figures, which was considered amateurish at the time. Their decision to exhibit independently rather than seek acceptance from the prestigious Salon was a revolutionary act that defied conventional standards. The Salon was the dominant authority in the art world, and acceptance would have meant conforming to its rigid standards, but the Impressionists opted to forge their own path.

The concept of “big fish in a small pond” versus “small fish in a big pond” underpins their decisions. Caroline chose to pursue her education at Brown University, a small pond with more competition and higher expectations. She believed that being a “little fish” among the brightest students in such a prestigious institution would propel her further academically and professionally. She thought that the prestige of Brown would open doors and offer more opportunities (Gladwell, 2010). However, this decision also brought immense pressure, and early struggles in her chemistry classes led her to doubt her abilities. The intense environment made her compare herself constantly with other gifted students, which diminished her confidence. Despite retaking the course, her grades remained low, and her self-esteem was affected, illustrating that the environment of an elite institution is not always supportive of every student's needs.

In contrast, the Impressionists chose to be “big fish in a small pond” rather than adhere to the traditional art establishment. Their decision to hold independent exhibitions allowed them artistic freedom and authenticity, which earned them significant recognition and success. Their first exhibition attracted 157 visitors, but after a month, more than 3,500 people viewed their works, and critical acclaim followed. Gladwell (2010) notes that their independent exhibition became one of the most famous in modern art history, exemplifying that success does not always stem from institutional acceptance. Their risk paid off, and their approach ultimately revolutionized the art world, highlighting that unconventional choices can lead to extraordinary achievements.

The outcomes of these choices challenge the assumption that attending elite institutions always leads to success. Caroline’s experience exemplifies that the pressure and high expectations in prestigious universities can hinder some students' performance, leading to frustration and dropout (Gladwell, 2010). Meanwhile, the Impressionists’ decision to operate outside the traditional gallery system allowed them to maintain creative control and build their reputation from the ground up. This underscores the importance of aligning one’s environment with personal abilities and needs, rather than solely chasing prestige. Both examples suggest that success depends more on individual suitability and resilience than on the reputation of the institution or the familiarity of traditional pathways.

In conclusion, choosing between elite and non-elite pathways involves weighing opportunities, pressures, and personal strengths. Caroline Sacks’ story warns that elite institutions may impose challenges that not every student can overcome, while the Impressionists’ experience illustrates that alternative routes can also lead to greatness. Ultimately, individuals should consider their abilities, aspirations, and mental resilience when making such decisions. While prestige can open doors, it does not guarantee success. Personal compatibility and perseverance are often more critical for achieving one’s goals.

References

• Gladwell, Malcolm. “Caroline Sacks.” David and Goliath: Underdogs, Misfits, and the Art of Battling Giants. Little, Brown, 2013, pp. 63–96.
• Guo, Philip. “The Advantages of Attending a Prestigious Name-brand University.” Philip Guo, 2015. Web. 1 Dec. 2015.
• Leonhardt, David. “Revisiting the Value of Elite Colleges.” Economix, 21 Feb. 2011. Web. 1 Dec. 2015.
• Long, Katherine. "'Big Fan' of State Universities Says Elite Schools Don't Ensure Success." The Seattle Times, 30 Apr. 2015. Web. 1 Dec. 2015.
• Steinberg, Jacques. “Is Going to an Elite College Worth the Cost?” The New York Times, 18 Dec. 2010. Web. 1 Dec. 2015.