<p>bluedog, you have to make a distinction that harvard may or may not have a slight advantage over duke, and duke over michigan, or else you end up in an endless string of comparisons where you could say harvard is essentially the same as, say, Rutgers in terms of upper level recruitment.</p>
<p>MBS students don’t really have to quit working for two full years - it’s more like one year and nine months. (They start school in the fall, and graduate in the spring.) Most of them have summer jobs between the two school years, so the opportunity cost really amounts to about 1.5 years of pre-MBA salary. If they’re working part-time while attending school, it’s less than 1.5 years of pre-MBA salary.</p>
<p>
And I would be the happiest person on Earth if I got accepted to either…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Many of my responses nowadays have been flippant. But I’m going to be serious once more Alexandre. I probably won’t respond to your comment to this comment. But you have to understand, Alexandre.
Among high school students, private schools are considered “better” than public. Partially they think this way because of what their parents or counselors or fellow students think.
The USNWR also plays a huge role: pretty much every high school counselor shows this rankings to their students. It’s the most popular and uptodate rational one. They really do believe Michigan is in the 30s while Duke is 9. </p>
<p>Secondly, Duke does have a regal name around it. It’s commonly associated and even confused for an Ivy, I’ve seen it multiple times with people back in California when my brother tells someone that he goes to Duke. Probably not as much in east coast, but definitely in the west. In California, people DO know Duke not only because of basketball, but for its excellent academics. When you say UMichigan, people do know its in Michigan, but that’s pretty much it. It wasn’t a popular alternative partially because Berkeley is already near us.
Alexandre, don’t get me wrong, both are very great universities. But you need to draw the line somewhere, just like bronovan pointed out.</p>
<p>Me personally, I believe in 3 tiers.
Tier 1: HYPSM
Tier 2: Caltech, Columbia, UPenn, Duke, UChicago, Dartmouth
Tier 3: Brown, Cornell, Northwestern, Berkeley Engineering</p>
<p>They’re all pretty much the same to me. </p>
<p>If you’re addressing an employer’s point of view, then yes, Duke and Michigan are essentially the same. But then again the concept of HYPSM shouldn’t exist as well. My father works at Yahoo! and used to have worked at Cisco and my uncle recruits for Morgan Stanley.
Father actually says he hires equal amount of people from San Jose State and Stanford. In the end, it really depends on how you can code. If you can’t code, he doesn’t care if you’re from Harvard and MIT with dual degrees.
Uncle says he doesn’t see the difference in the capabilities of a Harvard student and a UNC student. As long as you get the job done, he doesn’t care. He hires the same number of people from each college…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I would agree with this tier; although I would retract Berkeley from Tier 3. Also note, schools like Caltech and UChicago are niche schools and largely are unheard of among the general public.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is a good point. But note though, incoming MBA students, had they chosen to stay at their jobs, could be working on building up their job-related skills and may be on a track to promotion at their jobs, which should be factored into the opportunity costs that MBA students face. 5 years into the workforce after college and leaving it to go to MBA “in order to improve your job prospects” is a risky proposition. (And, a quarter of Harvard MBAs didn’t get ONE OFFER at the time of graduation)</p>
<p>^Why would you eliminate Berkeley engineering? It’s one of the best places to get educated for engineering. I was actually considering to move it to tier 2.
I refuse to comment on other areas Berkeley offers.</p>
<p>Caltech and UChicago are actually VERY well known to the public.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I highly doubt this. Literally all my high school teachers hadn’t heard of Caltech, and I am from California.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If you are going to include Berkeley Engineering department along with likes of Brown or Cornell for its merit in engineering program, then try to be consistent and include UIUC, Michigan, Georgia Tech engineering in that tier too.</p>
<p>Berkeley engineering has its own selection/app process. Others don’t I believe (Correct me if I’m wrong).</p>
<p>lol at all the state schoolers dismissing this even though it is widely known and the article is right in front of them. </p>
<p>Hilarious.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Each college handles admissions separately according to different divisions. (i.e. liberal arts vs engineering) I thought you might know this if you go to MIT.</p>
<p>^Insulting my intelligence? How does that have any correlation to me being at MIT? That division thing certainly wasn’t the case when I applied to Stanford and Duke…</p>
<p>@informative: Take your debate up with Alexandre and RML. Not with me as I’m not a state schooler. I was simply defending Berkeley engineering. To me, it looks like a brand of its own kinda like Wharton and Penn.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Having applied to MIT in the past, assuming that the individual would know how admissions are handled at colleges is legit.</p>
<p>Past 4 Presidents:
Barack Obama : Columbia -> Harvard Law School
George W. Bush : Yale -> Harvard Business School
Bill Clinton : Georgetown -> Oxford / Yale Law School
George H.W. Bush : Yale University</p>
<h2>The past 4 presidents have either attended Harvard or Yale or both.</h2>
<p>Supreme Court Justices:</p>
<p>John G. Roberts : Harvard -> Harvard Law School
Antonin Scalia : Georgetown -> Harvard Law School
Anthony Kennedy : Stanford -> London School of Economics/Harvard Law School
Clarence Thomas : Holy Cross -> Yale Law School
Ruth Bader Ginsburg : Cornell -> Harvard Law School / Columbia Law School
Stephen Breyer : Stanford/Oxford -> Harvard Law School
Samuel Alito : Princeton -> Yale Law School
Sonia Sotomayor : Princeton -> Yale Law School
Elena Kagan : Princeton -> Oxford/Harvard Law School</p>
<h2>Every Supreme Court Justice has either attended Harvard Law School or Yale Law School. In addition 6/9 received their undergraduate degree at either HYPS.</h2>
<p>The same trend continues at some of the most prestigious private equity/hedge fund firms. </p>
<p>The only time you’ll ever see this extreme elitism, the one mention in the article, is only at the creme de la creme of financial firms and law firms. The more prestigious the firm is the more elitist it becomes. At Big Banks like Goldman Saches, Morgan Stanley, or JP Morgan Chase they don’t care if you want to Harvard or Duke or Brown or USC. As long as you have over a certain GPA, attend a top 20-25 school, and whatever other criteria they look for. At Bain Capital Private Equities I think it’s something like over 60% of the employees have their MBA from Harvard Business School. (The more prestigious the company is, the more elitist the company is).</p>
<p>[The</a> Ivy League, on Wall Street or the Supreme Court | The Atlantic Wire](<a href=“http://www.theatlanticwire.com/opinions/view/opinion/The-Ivy-League-on-Wall-Street-or-the-Supreme-Court-3387]The”>http://www.theatlanticwire.com/opinions/view/opinion/The-Ivy-League-on-Wall-Street-or-the-Supreme-Court-3387)</p>
<p>MrPrince, is Haas not as good as engineering at Cal? What about CS, Math and economics? </p>
<p>Did you know that Berkeley is arguable the best school for Chemistry? The periodic tables was arranged there. A handful of elements were discovered by Berkeley alumni. And one element was named after it – Berkelium.</p>
<p>Speaking for Brown University, although I won’t be able to do it for much longer, what is it then with all my friends and upperclassmen going to mckinsey, goldman sachs, harvard medical school, harvard law school, and so on? Have I been meeting the best of Brown or is this article simply all too false? the current BOA CEO is from Brown. Up to 2004 the CEO of JP Morgan Chase was from Brown. Ira Magaziner is from Brown. What in terms of employment on Wall Street or Main Street do you see that as second-tier? The ratio of people that do get employed in select areas? I doubt that that has any significance if you don’t consider the number of people from each school that actually do choose to go into business, politics, or law. A lot more art/social work/teaching is seen post-Brown relative to the other Ivies.</p>
<p>MrPrince, I agree with your post 104. Among high schoolers and college students, on average, Duke has is considered more desirable than Michigan. </p>
<p>And as you stated, corporate recruiters (and graduate school admissions committees) approach Duke and Michigan students alike.</p>
<p>I personally never really cared for what 16-25 year olds think, although on my part of the World (Western Europe and the Middle East, Michigan is at least as well regarded as Duke, if not more so, by the younger crowd). I was far more interested in getting the best college experience possible and get a degree that opened whatever professional and graduate school door I could want.</p>
<p>[on the topuniversities ranking] Which I can’t believe you still believe to have any validity. (that ranking…is so flawed.)</p>
<p>Also might I add that freakin Tony Stark, an MIT grad, hooked up with Christine Everhart from Vanity Fair, a Brown grad. </p>
<p>So much for the article claiming that no one cares about MIT and Brown…</p>