Trigger Warning
She anxiously sat in the workshop, trembling as the girl next to her read her essay aloud—a mortifying tale of losing her home in a wildfire and rebuilding her life from ashes. Everyone in the room hung onto every word as their faces filled with shock, while she stared at her own draft of her essay, a summary of summer internships and volunteer hours, just like every other applicant. Her chest tightened with the realization that for college applications, overcoming grief stories win, and all she had was a list of achievements that now felt meaningless. Did all these grueling hours spent building the perfect resume matter?
Every year, thousands of students across the United States compete for a coveted spot in the most prestigious universities, driven by the promise of gaining “ooh’s” and “ahh’s” from merely hearing the name. Behind the ivy walls, a culture unfolds in which success is measured not by knowledge from attending these universities, but by exclusivity. For many students, the pressure to keep an institution’s image can overshadow students’ personal growth. In Canada, a different narrative unfolds. Universities emphasize academic rigor and the idea of sharing knowledge beyond campus gates. This shift—from exclusivity to inclusivity—creates an environment where students feel valued for their contributions rather than their status. The contrast between these two approaches shows the impact of college culture on students’ mental health and identity. Although the prestigious culture of U.S. colleges prioritizes exclusivity, it ultimately undermines students’ mental health and contributes to economic stagnation. In contrast, Canada’s emphasis on sharing knowledge and contribution to the community offers a more inclusive approach, challenging the U.S. to rethink true academic success.
While U.S. colleges are often praised for their status, they tend to create “innovation silos,” where knowledge gets stuck in these colleges and becomes less accessible to others. According to the Arizona State Press, “higher education is too important … to be held hostage to exclusivity thinking, which hinders collaboration and limits broader societal progress” (Moulton). Colleges prioritize maintaining their reputation over inclusivity, which restricts the flow of ideas that drive economic innovation. By limiting access to knowledge and opportunities, these institutions limit different perspectives that industries like technology and healthcare can draw from, ultimately delaying or even stopping advancements and progress. In contrast, Canadian colleges emphasize “education for the public good,” allowing collaboration and people having the desire to share their education and knowledge with the rest of the community. This inclusive approach encourages graduates to take part in community projects, making sure ideas can benefit countless people rather than remaining confined to inside these high-level colleges.
By breaking down barriers, Canadian institutions create an environment where knowledge flows freely, allowing new inventions and cures for diseases to be tested and created. Highlighted in Yale’s article, collaborating and “Hearing diverse perspectives can enrich student learning by exposing everyone to stimulating discussion, expanding approaches to traditional and contemporary issues, and situating learning within students’ own contexts while exploring those contexts” (Yale University). In turn, Canada’s way of education demonstrates how accessibility and collaboration can help boost the economy. By prioritizing shared knowledge, Canadian colleges not only learn new ideas but also have greater growth in their society. This stark difference shows how U.S. colleges’ exclusiveness slows down innovation, while Canada’s more open system creates more chances for everyone to move forward together.
Building on the economic challenges posed by exclusivity, the culture of U.S. colleges also creates significant mental health pressures for students, making these institutions “cultural pressure cookers.” The high expectations to keep elite status forces students to prioritize image over well-being, resulting in what Christine J. Oh and Nadia Y. Kim describe it as a “success paradox,” where “there is an inverse relationship between levels of achievement and students’ perceptions of their success” (Oh et al.). This “pressure cooker” environment makes students too scared to seek help, because they fear jeopardizing their image, which can lead to long-term emotional consequences. According to Sasha Aslanian and Alisa Roth in APM Reports, “Colleges are struggling to meet the surging demand for mental health services on campus, and some schools are wrestling with how much care they owe students” (Aslanian et al.). By contrast, Canadian institutions encourage working together in their community, causing a supportive environment where students are valued for their contributions rather than status. This difference from U.S. universities shows students can have much lower levels of anxiety and a healthier sense of self-worth. As Gary Bunch observes, “Inclusive education is philosophical and practical approach intended to assure equal access for all students to educational programs offered in regular classroom settings” (Bunch 4). This approach shifts the focus from ranking individual success to creating an environment where every student feels they matter. By valuing all students equally, Canadian universities create a sense of belonging that helps students support one another, reducing the isolation and pressure found in competitive systems. This difference shows how changing the idea of success in colleges can help with mental health problems and help students grow.
Proponents of college exclusivity in the U.S argue that it helps create better academic performances by putting all top students in organized places and push limits and inspire new discoveries. For example, “clear and organized instruction is associated with learning gains in various domains such as mathematics and critical thinking. Since then, studies have shown that clear and organized instruction is related to a range of outcomes from grades and persistence to learning and well-being” (Roksa, Josipa et al. 3). These institutions often boast new resources, faculty expertise, and collaborative opportunities that attract students who want to do well, reinforcing the argument that exclusivity drives innovation. However, this focus on exclusivity often comes at a significant cost. The same study reveals those selective admissions policies favor students from wealthier families, due to “The meritocracy…. [sorting] people according to how rich their parents are,” limiting access for less wealthy people (Brooks). This practice not only reduces the mix of ideas in these schools but also makes it harder for ideas to spread and be shared widely. Furthermore, the competitive culture within exclusive colleges often increases mental health challenges for students, as they struggle with anxiety and the pressure to maintain an image of perfection. While exclusivity may boost the knowledge of students at these colleges, it raises questions about accessibility and the true purpose of higher education in society.
Understanding the differences between U.S. and Canadian college systems raises questions about the true purpose of higher education. We don’t realize, but “This schooling system that we have all grown up in… focuses on progress and rationality over care and compassion” (Meneghetti). The contrast between U.S. and Canadian college systems shows a truth: success in education should not hurt students’ mental health, innovation, or accessibility.
U.S. colleges may offer developed resources, but their exclusivity creates barriers that make it difficult to collaborate and place pressure under college students. On the other hand, Canada’s inclusive approach shows how shared knowledge and community impact can lead to growth in the country and with overall development. This difference forces us to reconsider what higher education should stand for in the society overall. Do we want institutions that focus on individual status, or those that prioritize society progressing and students’ well-being? The answer matters because it shapes how we approach challenges across medical and mental health fields. By redefining success to focus on contribution, we can build an educational system that benefits everyone—one that benefits from people sharing their insight to people below them in education, rather than simply attending an Ivy for the name and the head turns it may bring.
Returning to the young girl sitting scared in her workshop, perhaps the girl with the list of accomplishments: If success can be more about shared ideas, then every student’s story—can genuinely make an impact despite the picky college admissions committees and our flawed education system.
Works Cited
Aslanian, Sasha, and Alisa Roth. “Inside the College Mental Health Crisis.”
Apmreports.org, APM Reports, 19 Aug. 2021, www.apmreports.org/episode/2021/08/19/under-pressure-the-college-mental-health-crisis?utm_source=. Accessed 22 Nov. 2024.
Brooks, David. “The Atlantic.” The Atlantic, theatlantic, 14 Nov. 2024, www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2024/12/meritocracy-college-admissions-social-economic-segregation/680392/?utm_source=.
Bunch, Gary. “An analysis of the move to inclusive education in Canada. What works.”
Revista Electrónica Interuniversitaria de Formación del Profesorado 18.1 (2015): 1-15.
Meneghetti, Aurora. “Bettering Our Education System.” The Chanterelle 1.1 (2024): 6.
Moulton, Alexis. The Exclusivity Problem. 3 Feb. 2022, www.statepress.com/article/2022/02/the-exclusivity-problem-asu-barrett-the-honors-college#. Accessed 22 Nov. 2024.
Oh, Christine J., and Nadia Y . Kim. ““Success Is Relative.”” Sociological Perspectives, vol. 59, no. 2, 14 July 2015, pp. 270–295, https://doi.org/10.1177/0731121415587115.
Roksa, Josipa, et al. “Facilitating Academic Performance in College: Understanding the Role of Clear and Organized Instruction.” Higher Education, vol. 74, no. 2, 2017, pp. 283–300.
JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/26448775. Accessed 22 Nov. 2024.
Yale University. “Inclusive Teaching Strategies | Poorvu Center for Teaching and Learning.”
Yale.edu, 2010, poorvucenter.yale.edu/InclusiveTeachingStrategies.