do you follow admissions stats or school quality?

College Search & Selection
1

<p>in america these don't always match perfectly... even though they have a very strong correlation with one another.</p>

<p>like....the LAC hype. I don't really get their popularity among high schoolers.
or...schools like Dartmouth. I don't really understand why they are so competitive in admissions.
will they get you to great jobs? Dartmouth likely and the LACs less so, while grad schools seem to favor the latter. but does anyone other than your high school buddy or your employer know these schools? no. </p>

<p>This is not the case in other countries, like say in Asia or in Great Britain, either because of the source of pride that well-rounded schools proffer the students, or because the order of schools combining both academics and admissions is transitive, making preferences transitive also. Is this because school pride and popularity in america derived from sports rather than from the research track record or the prestige in academia? Where does school image perceived by high schoolers come from? History? Well then why did the most research-and-academia acclaimed schools historically not receive the best possible applicants to their undergraduate school? You obviously know the ones I'm talking about.</p>

<p>Also, I'm not sure whether this is wrong, but people here seem to think that admissions statistics, competitiveness and how they stand out against their peers is all that matters, instead of how the school itself is, in research and academia. At least Just based on my observations...
Why is there such a trend? Is it because of some trivial reason like the fact that most of you are attending, or have only recently graduated from, high school?</p>

<p>Also, would people agree that the aim of getting a college education boils down to four things. I do think so ...
1. you go because you need it to survive, and everyone else goes.
2. you go to learn what you want to learn, or to find out what you want to do.
3. you go so you can do what you want later on, be a lawyer, doctor, banker, whatever.
4. you go to feel proud and feel acknowledged by anonymous others also. </p>

<p>After all, let's be frank. You pay an extreme amount of money to be educated. Given the costs, all four elements should be provided to the fullest of the cost that is being paid.</p>

<p>All opinions are welcomed.</p>

2

<p>I think ultimately the only thing that selectivity adds is exclusivity. You look at selectivity because you want to go to the school that others cannot get into, and use that as a way to elevate yourself from your peers.</p>

<p>To be sure - school quality is much more important than selectivity even though there is a good correlation between the two. However, “school quality” is difficult to measure and difficult to quantify, while selectivity is much easier to quantify. Also schools that usually offer high quality education and outcomes that students want, become selective over time, so selectivity becomes your rough barometer for high quality schools.</p>

<p>For example let’s say Dartmouth has excellent teaching and great job placement, which are indicators of quality, then over time we would expect more applicants to apply there and make it more selective over time, perhaps even, make it one of the most selective schools in the country, which it is - A high school student can go in and see that Dartmouth is selective and not know anything else, but fairly assume that because of its selectivity, Dartmouth is probably also a high quality school.</p>

<p>This isn’t always the case that selectivity implies quality, but if you see a phenomenal school with a really high acceptance rate and a low yield you want to consider why other people are not seeing the phenomenal-ness in the school. Sometimes it’s because you fit and others don’t, sometimes it’s because you’ve missed major flaws / pitfalls in the university.</p>