<p>Because of the rankings, the existence of CC in itself, and the competitive nature of students today, do you believe students are more prone to stress and suffering?</p>
<p>No (10 chars)</p>
<p>Your thread title and the body of your original post seem to ask two different questions.</p>
<p>Are students generally under more pressure to attend top universities than in the past? I don’t think so. I do think it’s gotten ridiculously hard to get into HYP and similar schools, but one by-product of this phenomenon has been to enhance the experience for students at schools that were once thought to be a notch or two down the scale. If anything, I think there are more “top universities” to choose from now than there were a generation ago. In this sense, I don’t think there’s more pressure than there used to be.</p>
<p>On the other hand, for students who really aspire to the most selective colleges and universities, I think the pressure is greater. I came to this conclusion while I was doing alumni interviews for my HYP alma mater. These colleges have become so selective that they have (unwittingly, I hope) created a need for students to specialize and to define themselves at an ever younger age. If you don’t start plotting a course for your teen years by the 8th or 9th grade, it’s very hard to rack up the kind of accomplishments it’ll take to get into these colleges. And I think this push toward early, goal-driven specialization has probably done a lot of smart, ambitious teenagers more harm than good.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, I agree.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Probably not, at least in the long run.</p>
<p>I agree that there are serious problems with students getting stressed and ending up suffering. Observing this happening to someone very close to me (the sheer psychological suffering) is deeply saddening. As several of my professors (with top notch degrees from top notch schools) at a local college I also attend have put it, where you went to college matters most for the first job you get. From then on, you’re judged by the quality of your performance, not just the name of your school. The college admissions process shouldn’t be so brutal, especially when most young people lack the emotional maturity to put things into perspective (there are many things in life and in the world more important than what school you attend).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So true; lack of perspective is a significant problem. After covering in detail all the aspects of competitive college admissions and tearing the SAT apart, I felt compelled to close my guide thus:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>IMO, it’s branding. Look around. Kids wear labels on their clothing. You can watch the trends run through the schools. Everyone wears a certain brand of skate shoes. Then it’s another brand and a different style shoe. GAP is in; then it is some other store. </p>
<p>I think that it is worse on the coasts than it is in the middle of the country, but many Americans are so in to brand names. Many students and their families feel as though if a child applies and is admitted to “Top Brand School” that the child should matriculate there at all costs. Many families are making very poor financial decision to make their little angels’ dreams come true.</p>
<p>It’s not that the top ranked colleges aren’t good schools, but they are not the best option for everyone, nor is everyone drawn to them.</p>
<p>^ Several good points there. I completely agree with the label/brand bit you prefaced that with, but that’s in large part due to my disdain for corporations. As for the part about bad financial decisions, I would say that I know of too many people who rack up massive debt to go to certain schools (I seem to recall an article about a girl who said she wanted to give her NYU degree back to get rid of hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt). And yeah, many people don’t focus on what schools fit them best, but just shoot for “HYPSM” (this website is the only place I’ve heard that, and this is the first time I’ve typed it, and it feels dirty). And, sadly, these are just a FEW of the intense issues young people put themselves into that they are usually not able to handle.</p>
<p>Sorry, I was typing fast, but I hoped yall understood my question. I hear very good points. Thanks everyone.</p>
<p>
Uh oh… sounds like me. I keep trying to convince my parents that attending Columbia for example, is definetely worth 30k a year in our financial situation.</p>
<p>
Well top ranked colleges are ranked well for a reason. I’m not saying that USNWR rankings are accurate, but universities with prestige usually have better financial aid, better programs, and basically better schools. You might argue that money is better at a state’s honors program, but I have seen that assumption prove wrong with 4.2/ 2320 kids. You could also say that the engineering programs at state colleges are better than Yale, but highly ranked schools like Stanford and MIT usually outdo them.</p>
<p>ripemango,</p>
<p>Your comments tend to provide evidence that (some) high school students are swayed by the idea of going to a “name brand” university at all costs.</p>
<p>Yes, the very tippy-top schools tend to be much more generous with need-based FA to students who they decide have financial need. But the typical upper middle class student’s parents may still have legitimate financial concerns about forking over $30K (or more) per year because Dream U decided that their family could afford that much and does not award any merit awards to their students (because their students are all top-notch.)</p>
<p>College is largely what you make of it: For most American high school students, a local public college is both what’s semi-affordable and a match for their academic interests. And a few of these kids do have 4.0+ GPA and 2300+ SATs, but for a whole lot of reasons have decided to not try to shoot for the tippy-top schools. Sometimes the choice is because there’s a specialized program that’s top-notch at the state flagship; other times the kid (as well as the parents) can’t see any sense to forking out $120K or more for an undergraduate education (assuming an EFC of $30K per year). Some kids just aren’t into brand names and prestige for whatever reason. And some kids quite frankly just didn’t want to participate in what they regarded as an admission lottery.</p>
<p>Now, yeah, there are a whole lot of kids who want to go to a tippy-top school—again for a whole lot of reasons, some good and some not-so-good. It’s true that the average student at HYPSM etc will have higher admissions stats than students at other colleges. That does not automatically mean all of those students are more seriously interested in learning, particularly for learning’s sake. And it’s true that there may be more opportunities for some students at tippy-top schools, but that doesn’t mean all their students take advantage of those opportunities. And being enrolled in a tippy-top college does not mean that college is going to automatically change your life in a meaningful way. [Indeed there is evidence that schools with less stellar students may effect more change in their students’ lives.]</p>
<p>So can you articulate * why * you feel that you must go to Columbia—other than the fact that it’s an Ivy?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, since ripemango’s location leads me to believe that s/he has not yet applied to colleges, perhaps the “30k” figure s/he forecasts will end up being much lower. </p>
<p>But that aside, I do agree with robinsuesanders. About a month or so ago, there was a thread by someone named “Julian” in the NYU forum, and though he did not have the means to attend, he was willing to get himself into astronomical debt just to have the NYU name on his transcript. </p>
<p>That thread ended rather sadly.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>CC is not necessarily the canary in the mine shaft for all things college-related, though it can serve as a microcosm of the activities of a small cohort of students.</p>
<p>I don’t believe today’s students are more prone to stress and suffering because of competitiveness - perhaps it’s just a bit too much insulation from reality for some (i.e. you will lose at some point).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>For the big bulk of today’s college bound students (i.e. those who are NOT graduating in the top 5% or 10% of their high school class), the stress inducer is not Will I get into a tippy-top school? The big stress points are How will I and my family afford to send me to my in-state public university? And will I get the courses I need in order to graduate in four (or five) years?</p>
<p>But for that tiny group of extremely high achieving students who are aiming for the top 10 schools that have admissions rates of less than 15% (and less than 10% in many cases), I think the stress is more apparent. And here on CC, that group of students is vastly over-represented compared to size of their numbers relative to the population of high school planning on going to college.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, this is true. Perhaps I should have said “students on CC.”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yup, I agree. (as I posted before…;))</p>
<p>
No, I am not swayed by the idea of going to a “brand name” university, just a good one. That doesn’t mean I want to go to college just so I can drop the H-bomb. Caltech isn’t a “brand name” university, regular people have never heard of it. But obviously it gives so many research oppurtunities, provides a rigorous education, blah blah. I was only saying that more prestigious schools tend to offer better educations which will give you an edge in work, grad school, or whatever you are doing in life.</p>
<p>
No, not automatically, but for the most part a better education leads to better success with money and “contributions” to society. Also, please elaborate on this evidence.</p>
<p>
Boy, that’s offensive. Why do you assume that one of the reasons I’d like to attend Columbia is the fact that its an Ivy? I was only using Columbia as an example of one of the colleges on my list. Anyways, if you must know, I want to attend Columbia SEAS because I like how the engineering program also emphasizes liberal arts as well, to make you a well rounded engineer. Many engineering degree graduates from SEAS go on to other fields, such as business, politics, medicine and economics. This is really appealing to me, because while I am interested in engineering, I would like to broaden my horizons and become an “engineering leader” as Columbia says it. It sickens me when I see how politicians can have so much more influence over scientists (as we saw with the Bush administration and even now), and I not only want to be the typical engineer but something more than that. I tried making a change in my school this year, with no result - because I didn’t belong to the Student Association. I had never thought about running for something like that before - but now I severly regret not doing so. Don’t worry, my why Columbia essay? (if they have one) will be much better than this spiel.</p>
<p>ripemango,</p>
<p>I apologize if you found my question offensive. I can think of all kind of things that * might be * a draw; but I just wanted to know if you could articulate what the draw is to you. Particularly since you know that your parents are worried about whether they can afford it. Seems to me that you can do that, and quite well, I might add! 
</p>
<p>
This is silly. Caltech is most certainly a brand name university.</p>
<p>Note: as you’ve previously posted, brand name universities are well respected as well as known. In fact, I’d add they are well respected both in and outside of academia. And folks lucky enough to get into them and who can afford them should rightfully be thankful for the opportunities they can provide. My only quibble with your previous post is that you seem to believe that non-name brand universities are automatically inferior for all students.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>An education is what you put into it, not what others (no matter how talented they are) put into it. Yes, quality professors help. [But note: Best researcher is not always the best teacher.] Yes, a certain minimum intellectual quality in your peers in the class helps. [But note: peers don’t do the learning for * you*.]</p>
<p>For evidence, I suggest that you start with Colleges that Change Lives and Harvard Schmarvard. While both books have a clear, open and obvious anti-ivy bias, they both do mention studies that have been done that indicate folks who attended non-prestigious colleges, but who had admissions statistics that were high enough to make they competitive for gaining admission to an ivy tend to do just as well 10–20 * years * after graduating from college as the ivy grads themselves do in terms of both income and contributions.</p>
<p>If you look through CEO biographies, you’ll see that many, many more of them graduate from Podunk U’s than the Ivies. It’s not that the Ivies are under represented amongst CEOs; it’s rather that somebody with the drive to become a CEO of a company has the drive to do what it takes to get the best education anywhere they are likely to go.</p>
<p>If you look at professor’s vitas, you’ll see plenty of them graduate from colleges you’ve never heard of for their undergraduate degree. And plenty of the best, top-notch researchers in the sciences did their graduate work at land-grant universities in the midwest instead of the ivies, Caltech, MIT, Standford and Berkeley. And there are plenty of Ivy PhD’s teaching at Podunk U’s as well—sometimes because they really like teaching and sometimes because the job market for PhD’s in anything is really, really tight and you consider yourself lucky to get a tenure track position anywhere.</p>
<p>I’m not saying a degree from a prestigious university makes no difference. I am saying that the difference it makes for most students is far less than they may believe.</p>
<p>Ok sorry about that, thanks for the compliment too! Although I will admit that for some schools like Princeton, where money is one of the main reasons I might apply, it will be much harder to talk about why I want to go there.</p>
<p>I was thinking that a brand name university was one well known outside of academia, and Caltech definetely isn’t. But a better example might be Rice, which is pretty underrated I think. But you’re right: brand name universities aren’t automatically better in all areas. But I’d like to know, what would you call a non brand name university that has superior qualities to tippy top schools?</p>
<p>“…what would you call a non brand name university that has superior qualities to tippy top schools?”</p>
<p>This would include those schools that have programs that are the best in the country. Take a look at the book “Colleges That Change Lives” by Loren Pope. Many schools in that book, most of which you have not heard of, have higher acceptance rates to both medical schools and other graduate schools than any Ivy League school.</p>