<p>Of course not. I’ve always been wary of Ivies and similarly prestigious schools. I suspect many come to CC with dreams of prestige, but also that the many that do end up applying to an Ivy have researched and thought it through. CC provides a very skewed perspective.</p>
<p>I am applying to 1 and that is UPenn. One reason for why it really makes sense for me to apply is because I qualify for a lot of financial aid (like full tuition) so why would I pass up the opportunity to maybe go to a GREAT school for practically nothing? I have the stats so why not just see what happens? In choosing Penn as my sole Ivy application, I used Ohio State University as my benchmark rank wise as I am in state at OSU. If the school wasn’t ranked better in my major then it was off the list. Then the usual factors like distance and atmosphere eliminated the rest. Now I have reached what I call my “College App List Equilibrium!!” B-) </p>
<p>the Ivy League brand can’t really be beat by any school. Some names on level are MIT, CalTech, Stanford, U Chicago, Oxford/Cambridge, LSE, IIT, Insead</p>
<p>Says the Wharton student… ^ No conflict of interest there…</p>
<p>@intparent I’m actually a rising senior trying to get in. Just giving my view here.</p>
<p>Having graduated from one Ivy this spring and starting at another for my doctorate, I think people just need to realize that there are a lot of pros and cons that come with attending a top school and not everything is cut and dry. I loved my educational experiences in courses, my major, and research and had many great mentors. The close friends I made were great and I will keep in touch with them.</p>
<p>What I didn’t love was the excessive materialism and obsession with prestige. There were a lot of hoop jumpers who only care about making it to the next big thing (law school, med school, finance, consulting) and can even be condescending towards those who are not focused on the most practical things. When I mentioned to one kid that I wanted to go into academia, he said something like, but what are you actually going to do that’s useful. Obviously that’s not what everyone thinks because my friends are all going to top doctoral programs. It is also a stereotype that plagues the school I attended (which is a bit unfair since it is not that much different from the environment at other Ivies). This is just an example of the premed/finance mentality, that everything in college is just to get a prestigious and/or high paying job.</p>
<p>There are a lot of really great intellects at these schools, but I do think that the overall culture may make them doubt themselves at time. It’s always tempting for some to take the easy class to get a good grade so they won’t have to worry as much about their GPA. But that is not making use of being at an elite college. You are supposed to be there to learn, not just get a diploma. There are so many wonderful professors at these schools that I can never understand why more students don’t go to office hours or even approach them. They are more than happy to have interesting conversations with students.</p>
<p>Unlike what many people think, it is not true that everyone who goes to a top school is mindblowingly brilliant. To be frank, lot of the students are quite ordinary. They may have been superstars in high school but didn’t turn out to be as smart as everyone had expected. As goes the Peter principle, everyone rises to their greatest level of incompetence.</p>
<p>I’m sure that everyone is growing weary of my song, but it bears repeating.</p>
<p>It should be noted that “non-top” schools share those problems. Are the problems worse at “top schools?” Perhaps, but the top schools’ advantages are commensurate. (This post is not really a response to Poeme, just a general observation, but I use some of his or her terms.)</p>
<p>Materialism: The perpetual stake in the lofty intellectual’s side. If one wants to avoid this, he should avoid college. However, technical institutes and vocational schools will serve the typical money-seeker better than Harvard or Centre College can. </p>
<p>Obsession with prestige: This preoccupation appears in different forms at different colleges. At Sewanee or Reed, it’s the ability to boast that one attends “the most intellectual campus in the country…more intellectual than Stanford, Princeton,” etc. At USC, conspicuous wealth and sports are the banalities. The community college student can lord over dropouts and those who ended their schooling before college. College is, in the minds of many, another distraction, a source of cachet, a segue into the professional world: people at Swarthmore and at MIT share this viewpoint. </p>
<p>Self-doubt and “anti-intellectualism”: A damning objection. However, school is about alienating oneself and jumping hoops. Conforming to a school’s standard of conduct (or pretending to do so), taking classes to retain a certain GPA, matching your rhetorical and problem-solving skills to a teacher’s desires, accumulating extracurriculars and friends as a means to an end… To claim that hoop-jumpers exist at Duke but not at Oberlin would be absurd. If we say that everyone and only everyone in the top 10% of his high school class is an “insufferable hoop-jumper,” we will find that last year’s freshman class at Cornell had 87% insufferable hoop jumpers, and Wesleyan’s had 67% insufferable hoop-jumpers. Both sound unpleasant, and I’d expect Wesleyan’s high concentration to be compounded by its small size. If someone has thought of a cultural (cut-and-dry) difference between Ivy League schools and other so-called elite universities, between elites and non-elite universities, or between universities and LACs of elite and non-elite stripes, which explains why one group is pernicious and vocational and the other is pure and intellectual, I’d like to see it. Sure, the “average” LAC professor might focus more on teaching than the “average” university professor; the average LAC student might be more knowledgeable about schools and more concerned with fit than the average university student. But those are heuristics, based on a different form of prestige or reputation, and no school is average.</p>
<p>I am not making a profound observation. The fact that these problems are not cut-and-dry should be obvious. But the level of discourse on this forum, the sharp dichotomies and extrapolations that one would expect only from sublunary minds… Enough of that. I’m not a sociologist.</p>
<p>I wanted to go to an Ivy, just for their financial aid. I was never interested in them, and I’m not an Ivy-caliber student. But I applied there anyway because of their huge need-based awards. My family is poor, and I wouldn’t argue with a free college education from anywhere. I got rejected by the four Ivies I applied to. I’m very lucky that I going to a state school this fall with a lot of the bill already covered.</p>
<p>@Exodius, sure plenty of other schools suffer these problems. However, in my experience, being at a top school exacerbates them. The excess of wealth at Ivy leagues compared to other schools can create an environment where people are overly concerned about money and are not as sensitive towards those that are not as well off. I’m not saying money is not important and I am not saying that people should feel ashamed of having it and being able to afford luxuries. However, there’s something to be said for being gracious and modest and not riding off your parent’s success. This attitude is very irritating and is intertwined with a host of other issues.</p>
<p>I completely disagree that college is about jumping through hoops. High school is about jumping through hoops, college should not be. Academia is full of free thinkers. Other than studying for learning the material and studying for tests, I didn’t feel like I had to jump through hoops in my major. I just tried to learn as much as I could because I love my field. Without jumping through hoops I landed at Harvard.</p>
<p>It’s not about proving to everyone how “intellectual” you are, it’s about being open minded. Some people seem to be completely closed off to learning and actually trying to enjoy their classes because they are too obsessed with grades. If you go through life this way, you probably won’t actually learn any skills. You’ll be fine for a while, but then when you actually are challenged or need to do something new, you will realize you don’t know anything.</p>
<p>@Exodius:</p>
<p>I’m not sure you realize it, but you’re certainly giving the impression that the Ivies are full of insecure pompous ninnies (if we can take you as representative).</p>
<p>No, it’s not accurate to make the assumption that all and only the top 10% of each HS class are insufferable hoop jumpers.</p>
<p>I went to an Ivy-equivalent in a different decade, and I don’t know if it is because of the generational difference or because we weren’t a true Ivy, or what, but in my recollection, the student body was more grounded/humble–even the kids who were extremely loaded (“sublunary minds”; yeesh; pretty certain no one called those who disagreed with them that) and (outside of the pre-meds), you saw many kids who were more interested in learning (their craft) than in grades or grabbing the brass ring (heck, no one even know what GPAs anyone else had). Kids didn’t propose to write an entire operating system because of grades. They started that project because it would challenge them and make them in to damn good coders.</p>
<p>If I applied to an ivy and miraculously got in - my family would likely qualify for a need-based full ride at the more generous Ivies (Princeton, Harvard, yale etc.). That would be my reason for going. To pass up such a good educational experience and for free would be insane. However, if I were to get such financial aid offers at other universities I would love to be accepted to (Cal Tech, MIT, U Chicago , Stanford), then I wouldn’t automatically pick the Ivy - let alone just for the name.</p>
<p>For me, I would love to go to an ivy league school becuase I like academic rigor and the atmosphere. I would love to go to UPenn, Harvard, or MIT (especially UPenn for Wharton) but my EFC is way too high and even though id have somewhat of a shot getting into one of these (3.96 UW GPA, 32 ACT) it would cost way too much and wouldnt be worth it. I am very content going to a state university where I can get in state tuition (UW- Madison or Minn- Twin Cities) or even Alabama with the guaranted full tuition scholarship! So for me I guess I would want to go to an ivy but looking at costs they are not the best option.</p>
<p>I’ll correct a few misunderstandings and leave. </p>
<p>Re PurpleTitan: “I’m not sure you realize it, but you’re certainly giving the impression that the Ivies are full of insecure pompous ninnies (if we can take you as representative).”</p>
<p>I’ve a keen sense of irony. I like to show others what they look like from the outside. If you hadn’t noticed, I’m always telling people about what happens when they paint schools with a broad brush, take any opportunity to pull down certain schools, fall into elitism or reverse elitism, and, in general, do the same things as the people they criticize. You have noticed that I look like an “insecure pompous [ninny].” Great! Now you should heed your reflection.</p>
<p>“sublunary minds” – Perhaps a common attack in Renaissance and Enlightenment England. If you had read more carefully, you would have noticed that I was referring to those who constantly make sharp dichotomies and neat distinctions, which are violations of common sense, not necessarily to those who disagree with me. I was incensed at the time.</p>
<h2>“not accurate to make the assumption that all and only the top 10% of each HS class are insufferable hoop jumpers” – Not my assumption. I adapted this premise from an article, which was posted some days ago. If we don’t use statistics, we must rely on hearsay. (Or: assume that everyone who goes to top school X is an “insufferable hoop jumper” by virtue of going there.)</h2>
<p>Re Poeme: “academia…full of free thinkers” and “school not about jumping through hoops” – Apologies. I’m jaded. I’d like to believe this.</p>
<p>“money and entitlement” – OK. All I’ll say is that many other schools have an “excess of wealth” in the studentry, and singling out “Ivies” or “elite schools” is a bit odd.</p>
<p>Two of my kids turned down Ivy. When you say Ivy League, there is a vast difference between HPY and the rest, IMO. I know a lot of kids who turned down the latter group of schools for non ivy, very few who turned down HPY except for schools like MIT, Stanford, and for very nice merit money at other highly ranked, well known schools, or if there were specific programs involved. </p>
<p>@Exodius, I never said that there weren’t other schools did not have an excess of wealth, however, the Ivies are the most well known offenders. Think people randomly going to Europe for fraternity pledging. And like I said, this issue is also associated with a lot of other issues. Some people think that because they attend an Ivy, they are automatically entitled to success. They believe it when the president tells them they are among the “best and the brightest” at convocation. That’s not true of all students. What is true is that attending a top school gives you access to the top researchers in the world, many of whom are very nice people and love to share their interests with students.</p>
<p>And I disagree about your assessment of academics, most of the ones I met are like I described. Of course there are politics involved and other indiscretions. However, academia is a much more open environment than a lot of other places. Of course there are going to be pompous nobel prize winners (I am thinking of a particular one at Stanford), but some of the most accomplished professors I have met are actually incredibly modest while others are calling them a genius. I visited several top ten grad schools and met a lot of professors like this, even at Harvard and Stanford.</p>
<p>“When you say Ivy League, there is a vast difference between HPY and the rest”</p>
<p>All eight of them are different. My daughter who is going with Engineering won’t even consider Harvard or Yale! She has Cornell and Princeton in mind. (top two are Cornell and Stanford but for ivies: Cornell and Princeton.)</p>
<p>The differences I’ve heard: Brown is smaller and with no core. Columbia is urban, Penn has the best Business school, Yale is strong in humanities, Harvard is very balanced except for engineering (unfortunately my daughter is interested in engineering), Cornell is an Engineering school and also number 1 Hotel school/number 1 undergraduate Architecture and strong in Business and Algriculture, Princeton is a science ivy. (I have little knowledge of dartmouth though)</p>
<p>For students who are fearful of ivy GPA (or top school GPA), have the ability to but won’t go to a rigorous school, I can only say: In case I have cancer I would want my doctor to be one who is a risk-taker. Those who want to cruise through better not get into medecine/law/innovation area… which means they can only keep their success to themselves. There are plenty like that and we need more risk-takers.</p>
<p>Definitely no Ivy League for my daughter. It would be full price for me and none of the Ivy schools offer her interested program. Plus, she wants to go to medical school which makes paying for Ivy League a bad deal. She’s not interested in any and I would never pay for any.</p>
<p>@wisconsin13:</p>
<p>You can find academic rigor and atmosphere outside the Ivies. Some of whom may even give you enough merit money to attend. And yes, some departments/honors colleges of some state schools as well (many also with merit money).</p>
<p>@PurpleTitan PSU Honors comes to mind. Many people reject Top caliber schools to go there</p>
<p>@PurpleTitan Yes I totally agree 100%, my ultimate hope is to get directly admitted into the Wisconsin School of Business. I want to go into Actuarial Science and they have a very very good Actuarial program. </p>