Does Where You Go For UnderGrad REALLY Matter?

<p>As a young person, I thought it was crucial to attend a "name brand" undergraduate institution. I've now lived long enough to meet many highly successful, brilliant (and usually modest) individuals who attended both undergraduate and graduate schools I didn't know existed. Where you go doesn't matter nearly as much as what you do while you're there. I always remember that the only trait all successul people have in common is tenacity.</p>

<p>If you are good enough (and lucky enough) to be successful in everything you do, you won't need to go to Harvard. But if you meet with failure along the way (like many people do), then your Harvard diploma will help you recover, get a job, find your footing again. That is the principal value of a degree from a super-selective university. It provides a certain measure of reassurance to future employers... "This person was good enough to get into and graduate from Harvard. He/she can't be that bad.". If your degree is from the Univ of Kansas, you will have to reassure your future employer with some other part of your resume- maybe your graduate degree, maybe your accomplishments on the job somewhere.</p>

<p>I disagree that a Harvard degree awards that insurance. Apparently we don't know the same Ivy graduates.</p>

<p>


Written like someone who has very little grasp of graduate admissions. :rolleyes:</p>

<p>The quality of your undergrad institution impacts the quality of your college peer group, which is a huge influence. You will aspire to live up to their standards, whoever they are. You will - intentionally or subconsciously - adopt many of their habits and behaviors. On CC, there are always threads in which prospective students ask "what schools are strong in this field?" They'd probably be better off seeking schools at which the students appear to have the level of skills and attainments that they aspire to have.</p>

<p>One should also keep in mind that although many plan on going to graduate school, a large percentage don't go right away or at all. In these cases, a good undergraduate education is important but this of course doesn't imply that an ivy league education is required.</p>

<p>I grew up with a huge Ivy bias, but have modified my views as a result of life experience. There is no peer group that guarantees success, and remarkable people do come from seemingly unremarkable educations.</p>

<p>I think it matters in terms of opportunities, with seems more important for someone going into academia as opposed to medical school. Top schools like the one I attend offer students the chance to work with some of the top scholars in a field right from the beginning, which affords them opportunities that students at other schools don't get.</p>

<p>Here's a fun article on this topic. :)</p>

<p>The</a> Best Colleges for Making Money at SmartMoney.com</p>

<p>The real question isn't
"will a random person from HYPS do better in graduate school placement than a random person from BIGSTATEU", </p>

<p>but rather </p>

<p>"would a GIVEN person have a better chance applying from HYPS than from BIGSTATEU."</p>

<p>And that's where it gets tricky. Suppose a GIVEN person is accepted to both... it then becomes a question of fit. Does this GIVEN person function well as a medium sized fish in a huge pond, or as a big fish in a small pond? None of us could possibly answer than for any GIVEN person. If this GIVEN person is inspired, motivated and driven by being in the top 1-2% of his/her peer group, an IVY might be the worst place for him/her... finding him/herself in the middle of a class and after a few B grades, they might stop putting 100% effort into their learning efforts.... such a GIVEN person would be much better off at BIGSTATEU where they might see two or three Bs their entire college career.</p>

<p>So, the bottom line question is which environment encourages a GIVEN person to reach their potential?</p>

<p>IBCLASS06: that is a reflexive comment.... let me guess... you haven't been through the process either?</p>

<p>DunninLA#30: ITA. 100%.</p>

<p>

Not quite correct. I just turned in my graduate applications.</p>

<p>I stand by what I said earlier. Char4457's comment grossly simplified how graduate admissions works. Medical and law school admissions are primarily based on numbers, true, but graduate admissions is more complex. GPA and GRE scores are important, but less tangible factors are at least as important (arguably more so). These factors can be heavily influenced by where you do your undergraduate work. As someone mentioned earlier in the thread, it matters more with whom you work rather than the prestige of your institution. I am NOT arguing that prestigious colleges necessarily put one at an advantage in graduate admissions.</p>

<p>Take my own field, Egyptology. Although only about a dozen colleges offer Middle Egyptian, I had two graduate programs tell me they flat out reject applicants who do not have at least one year of the language. An applicant from Beloit or Howard would be much more likely to secure admission in this case than an applicant from Dartmouth or Harvard because (s)he would have had the chance to gain a better background in the subject, even if (s)he has slightly lower grades or test scores. </p>

<p>Using another field as an example, colleges vary widely in their coverage of archaeology. An applicant from, say, Bryn Mawr or Boston University would (all other factors being excellent) be well situated to apply to programs in archaeology- because these colleges offer superb resources and research opportunities to archaeology students, not because they're considered prestigious. There are relatively few universities where students can volunteer in a zooarchaeology lab, be fully funded for an archaeological field school, or curate an exhibit of artifacts. This exposure to research can make or break an applicant when applying to graduate school, and it's misleading to imply that the choice of undergraduate college does not affect these opportunities- even for an applicant with excellent grades and test scores.</p>

<p>I think it's safe to say that the quality of the specific department/program at the undergrad school is far more important than the school's overall prestige (or USNews ranking).</p>

<p>It's also important to note that once you have a graduate degree, where you went for your bachelors is completely meaningless. It's definitely the last degree you get that employers care about.</p>

<p>Undergrad has to got to be important... otherwise why all the hype about college admissions?</p>

<p>Hype about college admissions? That's an interesting question. Where does it come from? An industry of high school counselors, tech college commercials, the education system itself? Who benefits? The students, faculty, administrators, teachers? I would be interested to hear other peoples theories on why there is so much hype about college admissions.</p>

<p>If you know that your career-path is going to require a Masters or beyond, save your money (and student loan eligibility) and go to a cheaper school for your undergrad. Also to keep in mind: If you borrow a lot to go to an expensive school for your undergrad, you may not qualify for additional private loans to attend grad school (consider debt-to-income ratios for a student who didn't borrow any private loans in undergrad versus one who borrowed $60,000). </p>

<p>Good Luck!</p>

<p>


I'm not sure I agree. Most PhD programs and many terminal MA/MS programs offer waived tuition and stipends through various means (fellowships, teaching assistantships, research assistantships), and quite a few offer other perks like health insurance. If you can't get sufficient funding for graduate school, you probably shouldn't go for it.</p>

<p>Only for your first job. So honestly, not really.</p>