<p>Ah, but will those different results be BETTER or just different? For example, if I’d picked Wharton over NU, I might have wound up living in Manhattan and being a hedge fund consultant or something. I would have a very different lifestyle than what I wound up with in Chicago, but would that have been better, worse, or merely different? The same could be said of any number of decisions in life, though. If I hadn’t lived in Dorm X, I wouldn’t have met my now-husband. But … I’m sure I would have met someone else and been just as happy. Is that better, worse, or just different?</p>
<p>But again, I think there are different paths / results, and they aren’t necessarily better or worse, just different. If I’d gone to an LAC – which was not on my radar screen at the time – it’s quite possible I might have enjoyed a PhD pursuing, academic type of life. I have that quality in me. Living in the garrett subsisting on sandwiches but being deliriously happy as a bookworm. OK – is that better or worse than what I have today as a suburbanite in the business / consulting world? It would have led to different experiences. I might have been a different person. Who knows? But you can psycho-analyze those actions to death, and get absolutely nowhere, since really, you can only actually lead one life at a time.</p>
<p>^ I actually specifically said the PhD you get or which industry you work in and other such demonstrable effects of an education don’t factor in what I believe are the more intangible “results”. How many doctorates you earn or how expensive a house you live in maybe measures of the education you’ve had, but there’s something about how a particular academic environment changes you as a person, forces you think and question differently that makes the education you receive far more worthwhile than just that PhD you got or the corporate job you nabbed.</p>
<p>Ah, ok. I see your point. I guess the question is, to what extent is that the environment and to what extent is that happenstance (you happened to have signed up for Philosophy 101 instead of Theology 101 to fulfill your distribution requirement and Philosophy 101 changed your life). I would also submit that the world of ideas can exist anywhere, though I do agree they are more easily accessible in certain venues and environments than in others.</p>
<p>That’s an individual thing, Dbate. Some people work hard on their own regardless of environment, and bloom where they’re planted. Other people need the environment to be just-so in order to perform well.</p>
<p>Well, some do better as the big fish in the small pond, other’s do better as the small fish in the large pond. And others will be the big fish where ever they may be.</p>
<p>My experience in life is often mere mortals will do better when they have to depend on themselves, rather than count on others to pull them through.</p>
<p>I hear this from a lot of people- especially here, but the retention rate of Engineering majors staying engineering majors is supposed to be notoriously low.</p>
<p>Pizzagirl - As you say, it’s impossible to psychoanalyze the what-ifs of one life. My father had a choice of PhD programs; instead of living in Newfoundland, I might have grown up in Singapore or Australia.</p>
<p>But since one can’t predict the future, it’s best to choose on the basis of the present/near future. I believe very strongly in “fit” and equally strongly in not having ONE “dream” school. If you go to a school that fits you third or fourth best instead of first best, you’ll probably still be very happy; but the yearly influx of transfer students is evidence that a POOR fit can lead to unhappiness. I also know students who are unhappy but sticking it out (usually for financial reasons), and they never show up in the statistics. The latter scenario happens at elites and community colleges alike; transfer rates, however, are lower at elites, perhaps because their selectivity allows them to weed out the poorest fits (or self-selects for determined people? I speculate).</p>