I’ll look at those, that would be very interesting. I’m assuming that they turn out just as successful, right?</p>
<p>
That’s true, but I’m pretty sure that’s for the undergraduate education. I thought that most CEO’s got graduate degrees at top universities, like that Google founder guy who went to some state school and then Stanford.</p>
<p>
Yes, so when Ivy league university makes you pay 30k and state school wants 25k, isn’t it worth it? Also, you really sound like my mom when it comes to this so forgive me if it just sounds like I’m against everything you say.</p>
<p>The guy who is rumored to be taking over as the BP CEO went to Illinois for undergrad and SMU (I think) for grad school. I don’t envy his position.</p>
<p>Another thing that you may not have seen on here yet, ripemango, are some of the threads about what top academic kids are offered. The cost of higher ed is skyrocketing and for the upper middle class, it is not as easy as it once was to write the check. So while students who are financial aid eligible may pay less, the full pay families are really getting hit. My point? Some top kids are getting full tuition scholarships at nice state schools, so the bill is about $10K for room and board per year. As full pay families, they get to pay $55K, so the difference is quite dramatic. </p>
<p>For a hard working student who loves to learn, most families just don’t see choosing the bigger price tag school as a wise financial decision.</p>
What constitutes a “good” education is highly debatable. Unless you have any evidence suggesting that certain characteristics are prerequisites to quality education, I’m inclined to drop that topic given its subjective nature.</p>
<p>Exit opportunities are far more cut-and-dried, although there are few controlled studies available. If you want to work at Goldman Sachs, you would do well to attend a top-ranked school. There are some other programs that feed in as well, but in general the name brand will help. If you want to be an accountant, recruitment will be largely regional and attending the best accounting school in the region where you want to work would be the best idea. If you want to be a doctor or lawyer, save as much money as possible.</p>
<p>EDIT: As an engineer, you have a number of potential tracks available. Major engineering employers recruit at many places.</p>
<p>
I can’t say for sure without knowing your situation, but I would hesitantly say “yes” because the difference is so small. However, someone capable of gaining admission to the Ivy could almost certainly find a reputable public school costing less than 25k thanks to merit awards.
Even if we accept your premise as true, it is irrelevant. We are talking about undergraduate education, correct?</p>
Yes, but you have a better chance to get into a good graduate school with a better undergrad.</p>
<p>
Sure, that’s what I thought too, but I know a kid who was only offered half tuition at UConn with a 2320 SAT + 4.2 GPA. I have lower stats in both. And then, the more money you get the less reputable the public school is.</p>
<p>Any teenager who aspires to attend an Ivy League school and states that the “name brand” has nothing to do with it is kidding themselves. Certainly we may have alterior motives for attending: strength in particular programs, incredible research opportunities, unparalleled experience among faculty. When it all boils down to it though, I doubt Harvard’s acceptance rate would be at or near 7% if the Harvard name wasn’t so incredibly prestigious. Just saying it aloud makes me quiver. Schools that are “name brand schools” such as Harvard, Yale, and Stanford are so desired mainly because of the title attached to their institution. Be offended all you want; subconsciously, it’s true for all of you to a certain extent, myself included.</p>
Yeah, Princeton is usually regarded in academia as having a better undergraduate program than Harvard, yet Harvard has a lower acceptance rate because of all those kinds of people applying. Kids at my school apply to Harvard because their parents want to see if they “have a shot”.</p>
<p>
You have a very good point, most people are like this, yourself included. But some, this desire for title only comes in the college search. Kids with high stats of course are going to look at top schools. But when finalizing their college list and applying to schools they definetely see themselves being at, the alterior reasons can become the sole motive for applying. I was attracted to Harvard and Yale a couple of months ago, but now I know those schools are not for me. The title of an institution also has a lot to do with its strength and the other reasons for attending that you listed, so prestige and the true reasons for applying can usually become mixed together.</p>
<p>I agree that for the strongest applicants, it’s almost always a mix of the prestige of the name and the strength of the program.</p>
<p>But I have seen far too many a number of people on CC posting chance threads to Harvard when, clearly, the only reason they want to go there is because “It’s Harvard.” I don’t think anyone should be patronized for using that kind of logic. But if, as you said, it becomes the defining factor of why someone is choosing an institution, there is a very good chance that their college experience will be a disappointing one, no matter where they end up.</p>
<p>There are a few common themes in the above lists: top engineering schools (MIT, Stanford, GT, Cornell, Texas, etc.) are common targets. Schools in close proximity to a firm’s major offices will also receive attention.</p>
<p>Now, you might ask whether campus recruitment is equal at all schools. That’s a fair question. However, I think a school that is consistently visited across the board probably offers fairly good opportunities.</p>
<p>In the film Good Will Hunting there’s a quote I always remember:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>After talking to a bunch of kids on CC I realized that most people apply to top schools for the brand name and the “idea” of a great college. Most of the overachieving kids here are aiming for HYPSM + the other great schools. They’re not great fits everywhere - that’s impossible because schools are too different. If you find people applying to multiple Ivies and explaining how they fit into each environment, I bet you most couldn’t.</p>
<p>There definitely is more pressure to attend top schools, at least among the students aiming for those. I had a bunch of interviews and all of them spoke of how you just woke up one day and took the SAT - nobody studied for it. Now there’s a whole industry for preparation. Overall more kids are funneled into college, and competition to get into the best schools is ridiculous. I feel like such an old person but the stuff about kids being delusional is often true - going to a USNWR top20 school doesn’t mean people will bow down to your very presence.</p>
<p>The only thing better now than before is that top universities have built excellent financial aid programs, and that really opens up the doors for high achieving middle class kids. Yale costs less for me than my state flagship [University of Florida]. That wasn’t true in the past.</p>
<p>Precisely. For example, Columbia and Dartmouth. They couldn’t be more different! Yet both have the Ivy status attached at the hip, so you’re obviously going to have a large amount of overlaps in applicants.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>College admissions has become… an “industry”, as the above poster stated. I feel like the cutthroat competition, ridiculously high standards, and incredibly low acceptance rates all fuel the notion that, if admitted to a USNWR top20 school, you’ve hit the big time and your life will be a success from there on out, which is in no way the case. I mean, An0maly, you’re going to Yale so you can’t really talk, but… :P</p>
What I was saying was that an Ivy caliber student only got half tuition at a decent (UConn) state school, which is how much financial aid he would get at an Ivy. At a more reputable state school like UMich, he wouldn’t even get more than what he got at UConn, so no, Ivy caliber students can’t always find reputable publics schools giving them more aid than they would get at an Ivy.</p>
<p>Not at my school! Half the graduating class goes to community college, 25% goes to SUNY schools, and about 15% go to small, nonselective, catholic LACs.</p>
<p>^Ours was worse when I attended high school. In fact, its still the same as my cousin is attending it.</p>
<p>55% to community college, 40% to “mid-tier” UCs (7 out of 11 who got into Berkeley went to mid-tier UCs and LACs while 1 went to Harvard, 1 to Duke, 1 Columbia)
1 going to Berkeley, and 4% going to the army/jobs</p>
Since the price tag is lower to start, they don’t need to offer as much. If I’m looking at Texas A&M, they start out much cheaper than MIT. Granted, the situation is different if you have financial need. I believe I qualified my original statement along those lines.
I don’t see a causative relationship here. WSJ hasn’t controlled for the aptitude or motivation of students to attend grad school, and as such the data doesn’t prove much. If Harvard enrolls kids who are predisposed to attend top grad programs, do they end up doing so because they went to Harvard?</p>