<p>“If I had been going to a drab college with an average reputation, I don’t know if it would have provided me with the inspiration to continue”</p>
<p>A terrible reason to attend a particular college and unfortunately an attitude that is not going to carry you far in life.</p>
<p>Everyone hits snags in their professional/personal life at one point or another. They won’t always be in idyllic, dream-like settings “providing them with the inspiration to continue.” When hard times come, relying on things like prestige, recognition, or other external sources of inspiration will almost certainly fail you.</p>
<p>A lot of yes and a bit of no. There are things that one does in the adult world for the sole purpose of resume building and that can be okay. If you need to give speeches to gain a higher profile in the community in order to get new business, I think it is okay to focus on the higher profile you are gaining, to get over your fear of giving speeches. In the working world, a person may need to obtain some sort of additional license or certification to put on her letterhead or business card…I think it’s okay to do it for the sake of advancing your career, even if you don’t love taking the licensing class.</p>
<p>^The “no” points don’t correlate to the point I was trying to make though.</p>
<p>I don’t have a problem with resume building or gaining a license or making a speech that will directly advance your career.</p>
<p>But only liking your job because people have heard of it, or being a doctor or lawyer because it’s “prestigious”, are more akin to the attitude OP is suggesting.</p>
<p>It’s one thing to “plan ahead” or “look to the future” but it’s an entirely different thing to base your satisfaction on such an empty thing as recognition and prestige. Unfortunately a lot of high schoolers do go down that route when it comes to college, but it just causes a lot of pain and difficulty in the end because at some point you will find yourself in a difficult situation that may not be romanticized or lined with gold. And then what will you do to get through it?</p>
<p>excellent points, umcp. in the real world, every day is not orgasmic bliss. there are pros and cons to every college setting–there is no ‘perfect’ campus. there seems to be an intense focus on the extremes on college confidential (“idyllic setting…daily positive feedback from professors”…blahblah versus campuses with ridiculously low graduation rates and daily non-stop partying). in reality, there are thousands of campuses in between those extremes–and people seem to manage fine who graduate from those schools.</p>
<p>I’m befuddled by equating physical beauty of the campus with ranking/selectivity. I went to a third tier flagship state you, and the campus truly was breathtaking beautiful (It was actually listed as one of the most beautiful college campuses in the country in a national magazine a few years ago, and it was definitely well deserved, IMO). By the contrast, the much better ranked, more selective state u I’m attending for grad school is much more militaristic and almost spartan in its architecture and design and mostly brown, as opposed to lush green or snow-covered pathways. It’s not ugly per se, but it definitely doesn’t have the visual “awe” of my undergrad campus.</p>
<p>^I think people may have been equating the two because OP mentioned both - “something beautiful” and “something with recognition/the best school I could get into.” </p>
<p>Of course, people also equate the two outside of this thread (which is off topic, but I’ll muse on it anyway). I think that is because campus beauty and prestige ARE correlated, albeit loosely. Obviously there will be prestigious, selective schools that are ugly and utilitarian, and not as prestigious schools that are beautiful. But run down the USNWR rankings and ugly schools in the Top 25 universities are slim pickings I think a lot of people who get into selective colleges have this two-pronged excitement about it - it has that traditional college look, with great halls and grassy quads and all that, and also the academic powerhouse reputation. Certainly some good colleges don’t fit the mold but there is also certainly that traditional “Ivy league” stereotype…it didn’t come out of thin air.</p>
<p>Though that was off topic that does lend to my point about romanticizing and how trivial it can be.</p>
<p>"there seems to be an intense focus on the extremes on college confidential "</p>
<p>AGREED. I think teenagers/young adults in general think in extremes. Unfortunately that really doesn’t help when they are choosing schools, or don’t go to a school they wanted to go to. Either “I’m going someplace where I can continue feeling gifted, privileged and all tingly and special for being smart enough to get into it” or “I’m going someplace third-rate”.</p>
<p>I think the point is akin to what I’ve told my kids about employment. Life can be tough and most people have to work hard at their jobs. You can toil long hours for little pay, little prestige, and in less-than-desirable working conditions (like at a fast food joint or cutting lawns). Or you can toil long hours for a good salary, some prestige, and in a nice environment. The latter scenario is more easily attainable if you go to a decent college and earn a marketable degree. </p>
<p>Similarly, most kids nowadays go to college because there aren’t many decent jobs for which a bachelor’s degree is not a prerequisite. Students have to put in about 4 years, give or take, to graduate. Now you can put in that time at a nice school that commands some respect, or you can put in that time at dismal Podunk College that few people have heard of and no one is impressed by. Frankly, when the going gets tough, having a reasonable hope of future reward is more easy to muster if you’re at a well-respected school. </p>
<p>Of course, there are plenty of choices in the middle, but one reason we see this extreme scenario cited often is because Podunk U is more likely to offer a good student a lot of money than a better school, since the student would already be attracted to a good, well-known school and thus less financial enticement is needed. Some students are influenced by the better financial package to select the lesser school.</p>
<p>If you have an interest in being an investment banker at Goldman et al, or if you have an interest in working for Google in a position other than being the guy who brings in today’s catered lunch you’ve got about 10-12 colleges/universities that you better have attended.</p>
<p>"You can toil long hours for little pay, little prestige, and in less-than-desirable working conditions (like at a fast food joint or cutting lawns). Or you can toil long hours for a good salary, some prestige, and in a nice environment. "</p>
<p>This is the most ridiculous analogy to college I have ever heard in my life and I think it’s part of the logical fallacy a lot of high schoolers succumb do. The vast majority of colleges, from Duke to Flagship State Uni, are comfortable living and will pay off well (you might have significantly more loans to pay off from Duke though). For a very small minority of students, extra prestige does pay off (such as those students going into i-banking). But for most smart kids, they’d rather go to law/med/grad school, work for a nonprofit, build bridges or invent things, do scientific research, etc. And they can prepare for these things at a vast number of colleges that don’t necessarily have “prestige” in the same sense a school in USNWR’s top 20 would.</p>
<p>So, absolutely UNLIKE the mowing lawns versus nice office job scenario, there is MUCH less of a difference in EVERYTHING besides prestige. And MUCH MUCH more in between - including financially, so I believe your argument about why people might think in extremes despite all logic is also incorrect (selective unis give good fin aid, flagship state unis are usually already affordable, high-ranking state schools are slightly more affordable than expensive privates without finaid, some fairly high ranking schools give a lot of scholarships, etc). </p>
<p>FINALLY, only being motivated when you are “comfortably recognized” is going to get you in a lot of trouble. What if you don’t get that prestigious job or position you were hoping for? What if you lose it? What if you come across family problems, medical problems and suddenly you aren’t capable of it anymore? What if you have to pick up a job on the side that’s not so “comfortable”? I think it’s really dangerous to rely on feeling special or recognized. Most of us learn we’re not that special at some point or another.</p>
<p>Also, the Google thing is BS. I know like 5-6 people who got jobs with Google and I’m pretty sure they weren’t attending one of the “12” schools you are arbitrarily thinking of :p.</p>
<p>The google thing is completely wrong. Go to a state flagship and you’re fine. Actually, probably just about any school would be fine as long as you have requisite work experience.</p>
<p>There’s a great scene in “Annie Hall” where Woody Allen overhears some pompous fellow talking about Marshall McLuhan (hope I’m spelling his name the right way). Allen complains that the fellow is completely misinterpreting McLuhan’s work. The fellow overhears and loftily replies that he is a professor specializing in McLuhan’s work. Allen listens, then says “Well, I have Marshall McLuhan right here,” at which point he brings out Mr. (Professor?) McLuhan, who then informs the fellow that he’s been misinterpreting McLuhan’s work and doesn’t understand his central tenets at all. </p>
<p>Subbing for Marshall McLuhan in this thread, we have evil_robot. </p>
<p>“[It’s not just a back up…]It’s a living, breathing place with myriad opportunities just waiting for some creative individual like yourself to search out and find. And in the end, if you can save yourself the stress and worry and pain and agony of having the name, you’ll find you can make a life for yourself better than it’s ever been. I am happy to say that here, I am the happiest I’ve ever been. And that’s all I could ever ask for.”</p>
<p>Well, browninfall, there’s more to life than being an I-banker at GS. Maybe – gasp – there are even kids for whom that’s not a life goal. Hard to believe, eh?</p>
<p>my friend who has a wonderful job at Google and seems to be promoted every time she sneezes, graduated from SUNY Oneonta… </p>
<p>I did not think OP was talking about prestige as much as about a cohesive sense of place, and a sense that truth and beauty have a home there. I have that feeling about D’s backup options as well as her reaches.</p>
<p>With all their thousands of employees, I’m sure there are many Google employees who graduated from undistinguished colleges. But evil_robot’s story is not an example of that. He went to Vanderbilt - a highly-ranked, highly-selective, prestigious university.</p>
<p>I know we have a bias against anecdotes here, but we know a handful of young people who are attending or just graduated from colleges of poor quality because they got a free ride or a lot of money due to their academic or athletic talent. Guess what? Two kids are going to transfer because they realized their respective schools are “a joke” or “lame,” and several others are now realizing that after 4 years they are woefully underprepared vis a vis graduates from better schools with the same major. So now they have to go back to school, spend more money, while their friends are getting jobs with a bachelor’s degree. I’m talking about schools like DeSales in PA, though–not less expensive but good options like a state flagship where they could have gone instead had they not been lured by the price tag.</p>
<p>coureur, I entirely agree with you about Vanderbilt. I just kinda suspected that Vanderbilt wasn’t on the list of 10-12 approved colleges for Google employment. ;)</p>
<p>Only on CC do you get the sort of obnoxious that a Top 20 school like Vanderbilt – or even, in one thread, the University of Chicago! – are just so “second-rate, leftover, I suppose if you MUST go there, but you’re still doomed to a life of inferiority” compared to HYPSM.</p>
<p>^I actually think people on CC have more respect for schools like Vanderbilt than the average person. The average person probably hasn’t even heard of Vanderbilt/doesn’t know that it is selective. So, in that context evil_robot’s post makes a lot of sense (Yale carries a lot more “name” weight than Vandy, definitely).</p>
<p>It makes me think back to Winter 2007 when I got my Northwestern acceptance…my parents really had no idea it was any good. They had vaguely heard good things about its journalism program, but weren’t impressed because our state school also has a good journalism reputation. They had no idea it was a Top 15 school ranked above certain Ivies. I don’t think they even knew colleges were “ranked” so they also weren’t very impressed by that fact either haha. Their immediate thought about it was “eh. Cold. I know someone who graduated there and he’s working in some podunk town. He also said it was kind of snobby and you probably wouldn’t like it. Not very impressive.” I think it would have been different had the school been Princeton or Yale, obviously :p. Clearly Northwestern didn’t conjure the image of an intellectual, special environment to them…I think people who don’t know a lot about colleges and OR don’t care a lot about college prestige will be less likely to give a damn about Vanderbilt or UChicago.</p>
I think a lot of people who get into selective colleges have this two-pronged excitement about it - it has that traditional college look, with great halls and grassy quads and all that, and also the academic powerhouse reputation. Certainly some good colleges don’t fit the mold but there is also certainly that traditional “Ivy league” stereotype…it didn’t come out of thin air.</p>