<p>PG I am not trying to be argumentative nor do I think you are silly. I am trying to understand. Since you agree the bias exists, do you believe HYPSM graduates have an advantage in certain cultures?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You might want to ask architects how relevant school prestige is in hiring the field, for both new graduates and experienced architects. There is considerable variation in different industries; investment banking and law are said to be very brand conscious, while engineering and CS are much less so, especially for experienced people.</p>
<p>" I am trying to understand. Since you agree the bias exists, do you believe HYPSM graduates have an advantage in certain cultures?"</p>
<p>Of course they do.</p>
<p>So in a nut shell, HYP etc worth it because 1) great education
2) great endowment so limited debt, and
3) Great name that does to one extent or another open doors.</p>
<p>Beyond that all scholls including LAC needs to be viewed within the lens of the family. Can you afford it? Is it a good match for the student? Will it help on the life path of grad school or job? </p>
<p>My secretary and her son went into enormous debt for a school that will do none of these three things because they believed the LAC would be more prestegious than the state university. They are paying for it now (and will continue to pay for it for the next 20 years).</p>
<p>“You might want to ask architects how relevant school prestige is in hiring the field, for both new graduates and experienced architects.”</p>
<p>From what I have gathered schools are important for new grads, though with regional variations. Less so for experienced architects. Of course it will vary from firm to firm. Both in how much school matters, and which schools are favored. Relevant factors, AFAICT, include both the firm judgement of the quality and style of arch ed, the school as filter, and the value of the school name on CV’s that go to clients (who generally know more about arch schools than the man on the street, but less than practicing architects)</p>
<p>This thread sure has moved around topic-wise. But I’ve learned several things -</p>
<ol>
<li><p>There are several countries where everyone thinks alike and there are posters on this board who know exactly how all these people think.</p></li>
<li><p>There are about 2,000 international students who chose their US university based on prestige, and they are sensible. These are the students attending HYPSM. Attending all other schools, including Caltech and Cornell for example, there are about 675,000 other international students wasting their money or hoping for a visa. They were forced to attend the schools they attend to score those immigration credentials, and are not really expecting anything out of their education here.</p></li>
<li><p>I would say I learned what a gerund was, except I already knew. Of course, I only already knew because I read it on another CC post.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>PG I am not trying to provoke but since you agree that HYPSM have an advantage, I don’t understand why you frame some of your post in terms of “impressing Joe the dryer cleaner” or choosing a school to impress ignorant people or cultures. I think students with a world view choose HYPSM to transcend cultural bias and to be competitive with other top 10 world universities.</p>
<p>If by “transcend” you mean “capitalize on,” then yes, I agree.</p>
<p>I like capitalize on better!!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Mister B, you might want to refine your categories a bit. Not all those students attend an undergraduate school. With changes such as going from 4+1 (UG/Master) to a 3+2 in Europe, many students see the value of attending a US school for a graduate degree. </p>
<p>Students of other parts of the world find the combination of learning English and getting a TA position eminently attractive. Others are attracted by the experience of spending a few years in the United States. </p>
<p>Just as it is true for the students in the US, the international students come with vastly different backgrounds, qualifications, and … expectations.</p>
<p>
Yes, not sure exactly what you object to, or if you object. In fact, the number is taken from an article cited in a post of mine a couple pages back, which specifically states that the division is about 50-50.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Again, of course. Not sure you understand that my post is intended to be facetious.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I am simply “objecting” to point out that, for an international, the economical proposal to attend a UG school for 4 to 6 years is quite different from attending a graduate school for one or more years.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So therefore, the disappointed seniors who don’t get into HYPSM (but do get into other good colleges) should, indeed, feel like total worthless losers – their parents are right, they’ll never make anything of themselves, they might as well prepare to flip burgers the rest of their lives. Their parents’ disappointment and anger is completely justified and they should feel ashamed of not having made it into schools with single-digit admissions rates. Got it.</p>
<p>PG- I absolutely agree with most of what you say but now you are being purposefully obstinate. There was a sad thread here a few years ago from a kid overseas who had been admitted to the top U in her own country and was angry at her parents who were refusing to pay for NYU (apparently they were able to) once she had a “better option” at home. Lots of us were trying to explain to the kid that her parents had good reason for their thinking.</p>
<p>That doesn’t mean that a US kid who gets into NYU shouldn’t go there. It does mean that the marketability of an NYU degree in her own country might limit her career options down the road. NYU is a fine institution. Both of those statements are true.</p>
<p>I think that foreign nationals who are prepared to send their 18 year old kids halfway around the world for a better opportunity are justified in trying to make sure their kids are truly getting a “better opportunity” here- at a university which is clearly better than the at-home option. That doesn’t mean that Denison or Conn College or Lawrence or Bates are not fine institutions where a kid (regardless of where he or she is from) would thrive. But in the same way that I would not have encouraged my kids to apply to Leeds but might have supported Oxford or Cambridge (had they been so inclined), I think it’s disingenuous to think that a European or Asian or African parent wouldn’t feel the same way.</p>
<p>The fact that first and often second generation immigrants to the US bring those perceptions with them just reflects reality on the ground. In most of the world, only the elite is going to college in the first place. Period full stop. And so kids from immigrant families have to help educate their parents that they are not “settling” by going to a college that the folks back home haven’t heard of. Again, that’s reality.</p>
<p>What point exactly are you trying to make? That a family in Asia should send a kid around the world, see the kid once a year (if that), make whatever financial sacrifice is required, have a few quick Skype sessions a week, and go to bed happy that the kid is at a college they’ve never heard of? Especially if that same kid could be heading off to the elite university in their own country either with low or heavily subsidized tuition?</p>
<p>I do get that. And I totally get that it would be unrealistic to expect an international family to be delighted with paying full freight at Lawrence, etc. if the student was coming back home. It’s the extreme narrowness of the “acceptable” options that gets me, though. When it’s truly HYPSM, UCLA/UCBerkeley, and <em>maybe</em> the other Ivies (sigh, if you HAVE to settle) - I do think that is too narrow of a range. There’s a lot of gray in between “HYPSM or bust” and “any American university will do.”</p>
<p>PG- that reflects the fact that in most parts of the world there is one or two elite universities. Look at the UK- Oxbridge, then the “red bricks”, then the Polytechnics. Parents in the UK understand that the US is significantly larger, so they’ll have a set of 8 or so schools they consider elite. And then everything else. How are you going to explain to even savvy professionals in the UK that Bowdoin or Grinnell are considered fine colleges? When they are in states they can’t locate on a map, and they’ve never met anyone who graduated from there, and the size of each entering class might be the size of their kids HS?</p>
<p>I don’t think that’s narrow, I think that’s reality. </p>
<p>After 9/11 the news media was filled with stories about kids from overseas who were either stuck at home and couldn’t get back to the US due to new “no fly” regulations, or foreign students here who were worried about their visas. Frankly, I was amazed by how many out of the way and not high profile colleges had managed to amass a student body from so far away. I think that’s remarkable and shows how robust our educational system is- that doesn’t mean that Quinnipiac offers the same educational experience as Yale down the street, and I don’t fault a family overseas for being willing to pay for one and not the other.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>But again, you’re stretching the argument too thin. I agree Quinnipiac doesn’t offer the same educational experience as Yale down the street, and heck, I wouldn’t be willing to pay for Quinnipiac - I’d send my kid to the state flagship first. I’m not saying “every American university is worth paying full freight for, if you’re from overseas.” It’s not splitting hairs to suggest that Yale >>>>> Quinnipiac. It is splitting hairs to suggest that Yale >>>>> Williams, IMO.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Somehow they managed to do it with Brown and Dartmouth - can they find Rhode Island and New Hampshire on a map?</p>
<p>OK PG you win.</p>
<p>I went to Brown. Believe me- nobody (native born or otherwise) can find Rhode Island on a map.</p>
<p>I work at an obscure California community college and we usually have about 300 International students every semester. They are generally happy to be here and appreciate the opportunity, because 1) frankly, there are not enough spaces in HPYSM for everyone, international or American citizen 2) there are not enough spaces at colleges/universities in their home countries, especially for less-than-stellar-in-high- school students (China, Korea, etc), and 3) they can transfer to all kinds of wonderful institutions. And believe me, they are usually thrilled to get into places like UCLA, UC Irvine, Cal Poly Pomona, and USC and become teachers, doctors, dentists, researchers, film makers, etc. Although they are not HPYSM, they are very fine institutions that grant accredited degrees that are recognized internationally. The doctor who graduates from UC Irvine is still a doctor, the engineer from Cal Poly is an engineer. Maybe it’s a case of having lowered expectations. I never expected my D to get into HPYMS, as the odds were against her, and I am perfectly willing to pay for her UC education knowing that she will do fine with it.
BTW, I graduated from the Australian National University (long story)- never heard of it, eh mate? I had my best uni educational experience there by a long shot, compared to the unis I went to in the U.S. No name recognition, except the USC theoretical physics professor in my neighborhood who is an alumnus remembers it. And it was free.</p>