<p>"If you go to Harvard undergraduate, you better go to HYP or a top school for the area you study for graduate school. Otherwise it will be seen as going down hill....better be the top one in that area"</p>
<p>cc2, you're totally wrong. Many of my H undergrad friends went to YHS for law school, as I did, but I know people who went to Georgetown, Northwestern, and even BU and Rutgers for law school and are now working at excellent firms in NYC and DC. Having college degrees from Harvard did not hurt them at all. I don't know what in the world you're talking about with this "going down hill" business.</p>
<p>"Reality is my back up."</p>
<p>I'm out in the work force and facing reality just fine. Unless by "reality" you mean "cc2's imagination of what it would be like to have a Harvard degree."</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Very few employers who need to hire only undergraduates will hire from Harvard because you are seen as over qualified and elitist to them<<</p>
</blockquote>
<br>
<p>This is nonsense. Employers will always try to hire the best employees they can get no matter the level of the job. It's clearly in their interest to do so. I make a lot of hiring decisions for my company, and we would never dream of turning down some applicant because their college was too good or the applicant was too smart.</p>
<p>Now whether a given BS/BA graduate of Harvard is "better" than one from Amherst is a separate question that will depend a great deal on the individuals involved. But the notion that employeers will generally avoid hiring Harvard grads out of some misguided theory of anti-elitiism is just ridiculous.</p>
<p>You should think of your decision as larger university vs. LAC, not just Harvard vs. Amherst. Those two are both at the top of the heap in those categories, and you really can't make a wrong decision here. If you really prefer Amherst, you may want to hear that it isn't nuts to turn down Harvard to go there: well, it isnt nuts. Some people very much prefer the LAC experience, and if you're one of them, this would be a very rational decision, and you wouldn't be selling yourself short.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>This is nonsense. Employers will always try to hire the best employees they can get no matter the level of the job. It's clearly in their interest to do so. I make a lot of hiring decisions for my company, and we would never dream of turning down some applicant because their college was too good or the applicant was too smart.<<
God bless you and your company. We need more people in the hiring position like you. And I am sure you will hire someone from Harvard to replace you if he/her is more qualified than you. (And I wonder why that has not happen yet.)</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Thanks for your imput guys, but this discussion has gotten really stupid quickly. Obviously, no employer will refuse to hire me if I have a Harvard degree. </p>
<p>I agree that the issue is more do I want a small, liberal arts experience or the vast variety of choices and independence of a large university. What I was hoping for is some imput on what you guys see as the benefits and drawbacks of each.</p>
<p>The standard answer to your question, and I suspect it's the truth, is large university=more options, in courses and activities, and LAC=more contact with faculty and closer-knit community. In your case, there isn't a quality difference--it's rather a lifestyle choice.</p>
<p>I mentioned this when you posted on the Amherst board. I would suggest visiting and staying overnight at both places, and imagine where you would most enjoy spending the next four years. I think the differences are signficant enough, not only university vs. LAC but also urban vs. college town, Boston with its cultural attractions vs 5 college area with mountains, lakes,etc. nearby that you probably can arrive at your decision fairly quickly. Right now, you are seeking a lot of advice from strangers who do not know you, although we have laid out some of the pluses of both institutions. Posters are providing hypothetical reasons for one or the other. Advice from family, friends, and teachers who know you personally may be helpful. However, ultimately, you need to ask what is best for you. For whatever its worth, I chose Amherst over Yale a number of years ago. After visiting both places and meeting students, one place seemed to be a better fit for me than the other.</p>
<p>cc2,
I think your comments on a Harvard degree being a handicap are not based upon reality. I totally agree with coreur. I have never heard of it being a disadvantage for job or graduate/professional school applications; in fact, just the opposite. It is probably the most recognizable and marketable degree in the world; on the other hand, whether it is the best place for an undergraduate education is a separate question and will depend upon the individual.</p>
<p>Julius - I have a D at Harvard who is having LAC-quality interactions with faculty, but she's a flaming extrovert. She has no problem showing up for office hours at a celebrity faculty member's office, indicating what she wants, and negotiating the kinds of experiences and advocacy she'd like to have. Harvard is her perfect milieu. I'm not nearly as forthcoming, and I'd have probably benefitted from a small college where caring faculty could have noticed my strengths and drawn me out. If I had your choice, Amherst would probably be a wise decision. But then, if I'd had an interviewer detect that I'm less likely to self-advocate and put myself out there, I probably wouldn't have been accepted at Harvard as you were.</p>