Suppose you are a hiring manager and have four young candidates to
choose from to work in your business. The job involves managing a diverse group of people, having a basic knowledge of economics, politics, foreign relations, education, law, and government. You need someone who is a team-player, is decisive, and has a "get the job done" attitude.
Looking at these four educational resumes*, without knowing their race or
their gender, who would you give an interview to?
Obama:
Occidental College (Los Angeles) - 2 years studying Politics and Public Policy.
Columbia University (New York) - B.A. Political Science with a specialization in International Relations.Harvard Law School - Juris Doctor (J.D.) Magna Cum Laude, Editor-in-Chief of the Harvard Law Review.
Biden:
University of Delaware - B.A. in History and a B.A. in Political Science.
Syracuse University College of Law - Juris Doctor (J.D.)McCain:
United States Naval Academy - Class rank 894 of 899.Palin:
Hawaii Pacific University - 1 semester - Business Administration.
North Idaho College - 2 semesters - General Studies.
University of Idaho - 2 semesters - Journalism.
Matanuska-Susitna College - 1 semester.
University of Idaho - 3 semesters - B.A. in Journalism.
I looked at this information about the four candidates, and
thought about the disparity that the resumes point out. The difference
between building your life from nothing, and
coming from a life of privilege where everything is handed to you. A life of privilege where you can get into one of the top military schools in the country as a
legacy, but party and brawl your way to the bottom of the class. A life of privilege
where you can flit from school to school, taking your time to check out
the scenery. A life of privilege where you know that if things get too tough academically or personally, you can just move on to another school with a less rigorous curriculum, or perhaps go back after a break. "Privilege" does not have to mean "wealth" in this case.
Compare that to the student who comes from working-class or low-income parents, who attends college and then graduate school on scholarships and student loans, the student who knows that this is their one and only chance to make something of themselves and do better than his parents.
Certainly, none of the candidates' resumes end with his or her educational accomplishments. Each has participated and served in government at varying levels, and we could argue all day about what those qualifications mean or don't mean.
But, consider this: What does it say about them, when the playing field was as level as it might ever be, how they chose to use their educational opportunities? To me, it speaks volumes about their character, and their ability at a young age to seize an opportunity or let it nearly slip away.
I have a son who is in third grade. Like most kids, he would rather play than study. How can I tell him to work hard in school so he can get ahead in life, if the top leaders in the land took school as a joke? If their example shows that anyone can be President, but not because of hard work and brains, but based on their connections or good looks?
Moreover, what does their experience with higher education say about how much they themselves value education, and whether or not it will be a priority to them that all children get a good education?
As a mom, I know who I want as a educational role model to my child. As a hiring manager, I know which candidates I would give an interview to and who would not get past the paper phase.
Hint: Their names are not Palin or McCain.
*Hat Tip to Stephen Fox, an Obama supporter, for sending this information.
When not drilling her kid on spelling words and math facts, Glennia is an attorney and hiring manager at a large educational institution, and blogs as The Silent I.
I had someone call me elitist for pointing this out. Since when is working hard, achieving and making the most of opportunities "elitist"?
I went to four colleges before I got my bachelor's degree. Why? Because I was an immature, spoiled, lazy little jerk who was unwilling to suck it up and do what was necessary to graduate. I'm just sayin'.
Posted by: Suebob | September 13, 2008 at 12:19 PM
3 grade homework is eating my shirt!! Not to knock a journalism degree, but she should be interviewing and investigating politicians, not being one.
Posted by: Debutaunt | September 13, 2008 at 12:20 PM
Look at how we're starting to get our ass handed to us around the world in terms of graduation rates, math and language competency, and economic prowess. Is it really a coincidence that for the last 8 years we've preferred our leaders to be average? that we look at "intellectual" as a bad trait? That we support "my student beat up your honor student" bumper stickers?
We have some major freaking hang-ups in this country when it comes to smart people.
Posted by: Mom101 | September 13, 2008 at 12:34 PM
Didn't your last guy brag about being a "C" student. I can't believe you are on the verge of doing that fiasco again.
Posted by: Mystified | September 13, 2008 at 01:23 PM
Where is discussion on the National-International Issues? Palin is not the issue!
Sarah Palin, the 2008 Republican vice presidential candidate, is a beautiful lady. What else can you tell me about her? Is she qualified to be the President of the United States?
In contrast to many very highly qualified Republican ladies, such as Dr. Condoleezza Rice, Sarah Palin has equivalent high school knowledge in some fields, and not at all in the others. In 1984, Palin won the Miss Wasilla Pageant, then finished third (second runner-up) in the Miss Alaska pageant, at which she won a college scholarship and the "Miss Congeniality" award. Palin admits to trying cannabis as a youth, during the time Alaska had decriminalized possession though she says she did not enjoy it.
Palin spent her first college semester at Hawaii Pacific College, transferring in 1983 to North Idaho College and then to the University of Idaho. She attended Matanuska-Susitna College in Alaska for one term, returning to the University of Idaho to complete her Bachelor of Science degree in communications-journalism, graduating in 1987.
Did Senator McCain think choosing a family advocating separation of Alaska from the United States would buy my vote?
I am disappointed with Sen. John McCain’s selection; he chose such a feather weight person to represent the Republican Party. Did he think that American women would vote for him because he selected a female rather than a male for the ticket? Senator McCain, please stop insulting the American women?
As you have stated yourself, you had voted 95% of the times in the Senate along the President Bush's policies. Senator McCain, the issues during this election are: job, economy, medical insurance, infrastructure, education, and failed policy of the President Bush. As President Ronald Reagan once stated: Are we better now than 4 years ago? No, my family is worse than 8 years ago.
Should I vote for Bush-McCain policies once more? Why should I vote for Bush-McCain? Please tell me about the issues that affect my family and the nation. Senator McCain, Sarah Palin and Paris Hilton are not the issues.
Posted by: Saint Michael Traveler | September 13, 2008 at 06:06 PM
Falin er Palin is the GOP's Paris Hilton. Dumb as nails, and half as useful. Kind of shameful that McDumb tried to fling this celebrity stuff onto Obama then seeing how that failed, tries to get some crooked Alaskan loser to appeal to the IQ-challenged GOP women and their adulterous counterparts. One thing is for sure, the GOP needs to lay off the issue of values. Between John and Sarah, we have a lot of bad behavior in the closet with the cheating, divorces, teen pregnancies, drub addiction, etc etc. They have no platform to run on. This is simply a term to cover up the crimes of the Bush regime and to expose americans to oil corporations and their gouging.
Posted by: tiito | September 13, 2008 at 06:34 PM
st. michael, you are obviously trolling. the entire point of this discussion was who is most qualified through their academic records, not affordability nor funding. you must also keep in mind that giving money to "terrorists" is all about who's side you're on. we've been and are still "terrorists" to others as others are to us.
Posted by: volote | September 13, 2008 at 07:01 PM
Palin was obviously a poor student. I know, because I was a horrible student too, and did exactly what she did....switched colleges to stay 1 step ahead of the dean.
Posted by: Monkey Man | September 13, 2008 at 08:13 PM
One thing you forgot to mention was Biden's class rankings. At U of Delaware he ranked 506th of 688 in his class and then at Syracuse where he got his J.D. he was ranked 76th of 85 students (-wikipedia). But, the fact of the matter is he has a J.D. which means I'd trust him with my shit a more than I'd trust Palin or McCain.
Posted by: Joel Sephy | September 13, 2008 at 09:21 PM
This is why it drives us nuts to hear stuff about how Palin is "more qualified" than Obama because she was a governor. Having a law degree from Harvard is a qualification in our opinion. So is being expert enough on constitutional law to teach it to others. Could Sarah Palin even pass the courses that Barack Obama used to teach? (Of course, we also think that being a community organizer is valuable experience, so we're clearly morons in the eyes of the McCain campaign anyway.) It's ridiculous that we've gotten to the point where candidates are slammed for being "elitist", when elitist is code for "highly educated", and that's supposed to be a bad thing. Guess it's kinda like McCain slamming Obama for being a "celebrity", because Obama dared to be popular and have lots of people like him.
Posted by: EvilSlutopia | September 13, 2008 at 10:36 PM
This is ridiculous. The only reason you all are turning to education, which by the way they went through when they were ohhh about 22 or around there, is because the democrats have NO experience as senators or governors like the republicans do. Call me crazy, but 88 % of the 990,000 Alaskans love Palin, and you think it's just for her good looks, your crazy. And John McCain has been in the senate for 22 years, but again no experience, right? Where as your oh so beloved Barrack Obama has been in senate all of 3 years. And it appears the ONLY one with any sort of experience is Biden, who has unsuccessfully ran for president twice himself. So keep falling back on something that happened early on in their lives because that's all you've got. If you want an argument, go back to actual leadership and what they have done for the government, weather it be for a state or the country. This site is ridiculous, worse then little kids.
Posted by: zggill04 | September 14, 2008 at 06:11 AM
Obama also did his senior research paper in college on Russian nuclear proliferation. But that apparently makes him less versed in Russian matters than someone that could see the Russian coastline from their porch.
Posted by: Don't Forget | September 14, 2008 at 07:50 AM
Zggwhatever - probably about 99% of Cuba loved Castro and it doesn't make him qualified to be President of the US. What's good for Alaska--and that in itself is very debatable from what I'm reading--is not necessarily good for the rest of the country.
We might have better leadership if Americans demanded more of their candidates, instead of trying to defend their stupidity in a shallow attempt to "win."
Posted by: Mom101 | September 14, 2008 at 01:29 PM
Please read Tim Wise's article on White Privilege in America. (I've posted it on my blog).
Racism and pure ignorance can be the only reason that people negate the obvious facts.
Posted by: LadyA | September 14, 2008 at 03:06 PM
Looks like Obama padded his resume also. Interesting read.
http://sweetness-light.com/archive/did-obama-turn-down-a-wall-street-career
Posted by: Victoria | September 14, 2008 at 09:47 PM
As Glennia said, "Certainly, none of the candidates' resumes end with his or her educational accomplishments." The topic of the post is EDUCATIONAL background and how that reflects on how the candidates value EDUCATION, and how we, as employers, would evaluate these job candidates on that basis.
Posted by: Donna | September 15, 2008 at 08:55 AM
I have interviewed individuals for a job,and in my eyes it would be no contest McCain.Yes Schooling is important,but experience is the best teacher.In my opinion John McCain's experience plus his education gives him a huge advantage.
Posted by: Michael | September 16, 2008 at 11:14 AM
@Michael: George W. Bush had executive experience in governing Texas and he graduated in the bottom third of Yale. Look how well he's done running our economy into the ground and sending over 4,100 honorable servicemen and women to fight and die in a pointless war.
Is that your idea of the "experience plus education" that qualifies McCain?
If so, could I interest you in voting for Ron Paul instead?
Posted by: cynematic | September 16, 2008 at 12:02 PM
THANK YOU FOR THIS REAL INFORMATION.....
WE MUST PUT OUR COUNTRY IN ORDER BEFORE WE LEAVE THE PLANET.
Posted by: Gail Page | September 16, 2008 at 07:33 PM
I think people are smart enough to realize John McCain is his own man!!!! I would hope when people interview individuals,they base the decision on that person's qualification's not somebody elses!! That would be bias and sterotypical,and i thought liberals are suppose to be open minded!?
Posted by: Michael | September 18, 2008 at 11:42 AM
Resumes can be good but reality??? Reality is past behavior predicts the future, history proves this, behavior patterns prove this. You want book knowledge about the law/about social issues/ about life, then hire the person to write you books about those subjects. If you want the best lawyer to represent you in your case, you hire the best your money can buy. How do you know this? success, that person has performed and won!
Being a hiring and training manager and having been successful in the corporate world, i would have to respectfully disagree with the thought process of only looking at the schools/GPA/class rank on the resume!
Its experience and past record/accomplishments/experiences that i gleam off of resumes. Some of the best workers I've hired were the trench folks that had life experience, good work ethic, a willingness to roll up their sleeves and get things done! Proof was in the interview when they gave me SUBSTANCE of what they have accomplished. To say you would only look at the resume with the top honors or best degrees/schools, is to say that status means more than ability and competence.
Posted by: Laurie | September 24, 2008 at 11:09 AM
@Michael: John McCain is his own man to the extent that he voted with W. 90% of the time.
That's quite some "independent" streak McCain's got there.
@Laurie: wow, you McCain campaign trolls must get paid by the word. Anyway, what do you have to say about the record numbers of scandals that Governor Palin has amassed in her short 22 months in office? It seems she has a lot of experience NOT supporting women's issues in Alaska, and a lot of experience CHASING PORK--nabbing millions in the very earmarks her partner on the ticket has said he's against.
Plus, I'm not all that comfortable knowing that Todd Palin gets cc'd on gubernatorial business. What is he, the shadow governor?
Posted by: cynematic | September 24, 2008 at 12:08 PM
A Harvard law degree don't mean crap .
Posted by: John | September 26, 2008 at 03:43 AM
To cynmatic: American peolpe are smarter than that,that arguement,hasn't work and won't. Also calling people trolls just because they don't agree with you is"quite mature" of you! I guess being open minded means only if we have the same views as liberals!
Posted by: Michael | September 30, 2008 at 12:53 PM
Do you know how each of these people paid for their education? Did someone fund anyone's various college or university studies? Just wondering.
Posted by: maril | October 05, 2008 at 12:41 PM
Wow, great research. I will be sure to pass this around.
Posted by: Joefucious | October 07, 2008 at 12:02 PM
You fail to remind us about the affirmative action that was and in place for minority students attending colleges. What would Obama's chances of attaining half of what he has accomplished if he had to compete with whites.
Would he be seen as a "Celebrity" candidate if he was simply white? Thank you
Posted by: Christine | October 21, 2008 at 11:37 AM
What were Senator Obama's grades in college? What was his rank?
Posted by: Leisa | October 22, 2008 at 09:36 AM
A comment was made that 88% of the people in Alaska love Sarah Palin. Well, I live in Alaska, and I can tell you that if that percentage is even anywhere close to that, it's because she gave every adult Alaskan an extra $1200 in September for 'energy relief,' which most promptly went to spend at Costco on TV's, etc. My feeling is that she kinda tried to buy our votes - mine is not for sale, thank you very much.
Posted by: Linda | October 22, 2008 at 10:36 AM
It is amazing to me, that only in America is education is a bad thing. To the world for us to elect a intellectally challenge individual to the highest office in the land does not speak well for us. The fact that Limbaug and Hannity. one is a drop out and one was a barely... are more popular than George Will and other conservatives demostrates how truly dense the republican party has become. Only those who are un-educated find comfort in dumbness, and have no inititave to strive for better. The problem with Joe the Plumber is that he lied... he has no hope at 40k and no license, of buying a company. But he is held up as a symbol for the republican party. That is sad. I am what is consider an educated american, I read for knowledge although I have been out of school for serveral years. I also research my opinions and listen before forming and opinion. I have respect itellectual agurments from conservative people. Buckly and Goldwater are true intellectuals, and can arguea point and give reasoning to substaniate their point. This is what college teaches you, that emotion made be fine for some decisions, but reasoning and rational thought and justification should rule your major decisions. Just think, if Bush had any of the aforemention traits... he would have given thought and weight to argurments given against invading IRAQ, he would have consider the ecomonic theories of overspending... he would have understood the historical perspective of the region he was invading... since this is documented in the history of IRAQ for more than 200 years. Any knowledge of these things or the good old college. Would have help us from running the country in the ground. People who do not study history are bound to repeat it ... Also a lesson I learned in college...
Posted by: Tperky | October 30, 2008 at 12:32 PM
This is a very interesting discussion, and I agree with many viewpoints. Clearly, education is not the only measure of someone's preparedness, and past experience and behavior does give you a good idea of someone's potential performance in the future.
But I think the important distinction we need to make in this discussion is the fact that the offices we're asking these people to fill have to do with upholding and applying our laws, both domestically and internationally.
For example, some presidential duties include (from www.procon.org):
- Commander in Chief of armed forces
- Head of the Executive branch of federal government
- Signing Congressional bills into law or vetoing them
- Making treaties with foreign governments (with 2/3 approval of Senate)
- Appointing federal officers, ambassadors, and federal judges including Supreme Court justices
- Granting pardons or reprieves
- Using the power of his/her office to shape public opinion
I believe that for this role, a proven understanding of U.S. and international law and our justice system gives you an edge over someone who does not have that same understanding. In addition, the study of law teaches you how to measure evidence objectively, hear both sides, and leave value judgements out. It also requires that you be able to justify, in detail, the specific reasoning behind your arguments, forcing you to question yourself when your argumentation is weak. When you are the person who has to represent and balance the interests of 300 million different people, uphold their rights, and communicate your decisions clearly, this is a pretty useful skill to have. Finally, when you consider the difficulty of law school, I can't help but be impressed and have confidence in Mr. Obama. It is no small feat that he got his law degree and graduated magna cum laude from Harvard. It's not the name dropping, or the title; this is an education program that is top in the world, which means that the quality and content is the best of what our education system has to offer. The fact that Obama not only got his training there but excelled, gives me the confidence that he is ready to tackle the job, and do it well.
Posted by: Isabel | October 31, 2008 at 05:50 PM
These educational records are an indication of each candidate's
1) Raw intelligence
2) Will to succeed
3) Respect for education
4) Mastery of relevant subject matter
5) Character
These are meaningful things to know when judging a candidate's suitability for office. If a candidate didn't have the raw intelligence in the past, that person won't have it in the future. If a candidate shows little respect for or experience with education, how can we trust that person to improve our country's educational system? If a person was ranked near the bottom of the class, was a brawler and a bully, and would have been expelled but for parental connections, what does that say about that person's character? I for one wouldn't want that kind of person negotiating for me in matters of war, trade disputes, or anything that could get emotionally tense and intellectually demanding.
In short, this is great information. I would love to see it broadcast repeatedly in the mainstream media. I would love to see it broadcast in the right-wing media too. These are hard facts, relevant facts, and facts which every reasonable voter should have the opportunity to consider. Is that too much to ask?
Posted by: Patrick | November 01, 2008 at 02:07 PM
SEO, Web Marketing, Internet Marketing, Online Marketing, Web Design, SEO Company, Web Traffic, Low cost SEO, Low Price SEO, Online Advertising, Web Advertising, Internet Advertising, Search Engine Optimisation, Search Engine Optimization, SEO Firm, SEO New Zealand, Discount SEO, Cheap SEO, Affordable SEO
Posted by: SEO | March 30, 2009 at 04:31 AM
Low cost SEO, web marketing, internet marketing, web design & online advertising. Best SEO company for traffic.
Posted by: SEO | March 30, 2009 at 04:32 AM
I for one wouldn't want that kind of person negotiating for me in matters of war, trade disputes, or anything that could get emotionally tense and intellectually demanding.
Posted by: Usher Tickets | September 21, 2010 at 04:44 AM
I kinda feel sorry for Sarah Palin in a way......
Posted by: wood floor drying | December 06, 2010 at 09:20 PM