<p>thumper, prestige alone is not a reason to choose a school. But prestige DOES deserve to be a factor in the decision. Coming off the wait list does not, unless–and that is apparently not the case here–coming off the wait list means that FA or housing is all taken.</p>
<p>In my opinion, “prestige” is related to the caliber of student the school is able to recruit–which is cause, and which is effect, is not clear. So, let’s compare two schools from the OP’s two groups. I pick Dickinson and Grinnell because I know at least a little about both of them. Compare this:
<a href=“BigFuture College Search”>BigFuture College Search;
with this
<a href=“BigFuture College Search”>BigFuture College Search;
If those links don’t work, they’re supposed to be the College Board pages showing the score ranges of students at those schools. You can also look at class rank comparisons. Bottom line: the students at Grinnell have significantly (but not massively) better stats than those at Dickinson. In my book, that’s a very important consideration.</p>
<p>Consolation…maybe. If the student REALLY prefers the other school…then the weight prestige carries should be adjusted to accommodate this, in my opinion.</p>
<p>This student must have remained on the waitlist for a reason…presumably because he wanted to attend. If he STILL wants to attend, he should take the offer. If he has decided in the interim that the school where he has already sent his deposits is where he wants to go…then honestly, in this house, that would be fine.</p>
<p>I wonder if some people feel guilty “jilting” the accepted school when the waitlist school comes through. My advice: don’t feel guilty. The school that accepted you off the waitlist most likely did so because another student very much like you declined an offer.</p>
<p>“I must be traveling in the wrong circles. I NEVER heard of Grinnell or Carleton until I started reading CC. The only reason I know about Haverford is that a friend’s son went there.”</p>
<p>Likewise, I never heard of Santa Clara U til my niece went there. But whether or not you’ve heard of Grinnell or Carleton or Haverford – they are top ranked for a reason. </p>
<p>Another niece of mine went to Davidson. It’s “unknown” even mong the CC cognoscenti. But I’d be hard pressed to tell a kid to pick Gettysburg or Dickinson or FM over Davidson.</p>
<p>“If those links don’t work, they’re supposed to be the College Board pages showing the score ranges of students at those schools. You can also look at class rank comparisons. Bottom line: the students at Grinnell have significantly (but not massively) better stats than those at Dickinson. In my book, that’s a very important consideration.”</p>
<p>Exactly. It’s not because of the importance of a ranking. It’s because the ranking incorporates and reflects some things that are important (IMO).</p>
<p>"</p>
<p>In the end, every market is “local,” except perhaps for finance or certain types of medical research or the arts–and even then, there is a local component to hiring decisions. What Haystack said has been true in my experience as well. Heck, the two-year community college where I live has a stronger reputation for training students in graphic design, illustration and photography than the flagship state university with a full BFA/MFA art department in the same city. A well-known university on a resume might get someone a first look, but that’s about it. Again, it’s what people MAKE of the opportunities they have been afforded that counts."</p>
<p>Right, but the fact that everybody in city X knows college A and doesn’t know college B doesn’t make college A objectively better. Here in Chicago, everyone knows Marquette and no one knows Haverford. (I’m exaggerating of course) That doesn’t objectively make Marquette a better school than Haverford - look at the stats, they are on different planes. </p>
<p>Exactly like the Dickinson / Grinnell comparison.</p>
<p>As I’ve said, my son picked Grinnell over every other option he had and he had many. It was the right pick for him but I would never say it would be the best pick for everyone. And I wouldn’t even say that if he had chosen another school from his list that it would not have been as good. How could we know that? He did feel that the students at Grinnell were really there to learn and they also seemed to follow the Richard Feynman approach of “What do you care what other people think?” Mac, Oberlin and Carleton would have been similarly great choices. His only PA choice was Haverford and I think he would have loved it too, but he really wanted the midwest. Some kids would really not love the midwest.</p>
<p>Go figure.</p>
<p>Pizzagirl, I am not trying to pick on you but you are making my point, not yours. You say: </p>
<p>“Right, but the fact that everybody in city X knows college A and doesn’t know college B doesn’t make college A objectively better. Here in Chicago, everyone knows Marquette and no one knows Haverford.”</p>
<p>Which means (despite what you say), in the branding/preference world in Chicago, Marquette wins. If I want a job in Chicago, it will be a GOOD thing that I got my degree from a school people know and that has brand affinity (Marquette) rather than some school no one has ever heard of (Haverford). As a 22- to 24-year-old in a first job interview, how would you personally play the Haverford “advantage”? Would you say it is a “better” school? Why, because it attracts more East Coast people? How do you think that would go over in the Midwest?</p>
<p>You also say, “Likewise, I never heard of Santa Clara U til my niece went there. But whether or not you’ve heard of Grinnell or Carleton or Haverford – they are top ranked for a reason.”</p>
<p>What reason?? Please, give specifics. If I am in Silicon Valley, am I really going to have an advantage having a degree from some Midwest/Northeast school no one has ever heard of versus one (like Santa Clara) where people may have gone or sent their own kids? Of course not.</p>
<p>And then…“Another niece of mine went to Davidson. It’s “unknown” even mong the CC cognoscenti. But I’d be hard pressed to tell a kid to pick Gettysburg or Dickinson or FM over Davidson.”</p>
<p>Really? Even in the mid-Atlantic/Northeast? Where, as others have said, people believe certain things about their own state’s LACs as well as things about the south/southern schools that may or may not be true? What would be your basis for this recommendation? Is it really all USNWR to you?? And again, as the recent college graduate, how do you think this would play out? “Yes, I want a job at Acme corporate HQ and I know a lot of your senior management went to second-tier Mainstream College but <em>I</em> went to DAVIDSON! Which is much higher-ranked in USNWR! You should hire me!!”</p>
<p>I know this is an exaggeration, but I think you get my point. :)</p>
<p>My first college, Antioch, is not first tier according to USN but it was absolutely amazing and is reinventing itself as we speak and will still be absolutely amazing. USNews …I don’t need to finish this sentence.</p>
<p>"
Which means (despite what you say), in the branding/preference world in Chicago, Marquette wins. If I want a job in Chicago, it will be a GOOD thing that I got my degree from a school people know and that has brand affinity (Marquette) rather than some school no one has ever heard of (Haverford)."</p>
<p>But it’s not all about getting the job. It’s about the education. And in this example, Haverford attracts a demonstrably stronger student body. I say attend the better school and let the chips fall where they may.
I want to be clear - I’m certainly not of the “the school ranked #6 is soooo superior to the school ranked #18” variety. Absolutely not. I view the USN rankings as bands where the schools within a band are interchangeable (leaving aside cost and specific programs). But I think in this example, the student is going down a band.</p>
<p>What most people “know” about schools is based on a general “yeah, I’ve heard of it, I’ve driven by it, I know people who’ve gone there and they seem like good people, I’ve watched their sports teams.” Unimportant and irrelevant to me. I send my D to a top LAC that has very little name recognition among the general public. By the logic being expressed here, I should have sent her to Marquette because everyone in Chicago knows Marquette. Nope. (nothing against Marquette, just using that as an example). My S’s uni is far more known in these parts for obvious reasons. That doesn’t objectively make it a “better” school than hers - they are in the same band. I cut my bands pretty wide - for example, I’d say toss the top 25 colleges and unis in a pile and make choices based on personal preferences, and I don’t engage in the stupid HYPSM exaltation above all - but I don’t see how you can’t argue that the list of Gettysburg, D and FM isn’t down a band below Grinnell and Carleton.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Exactly. And it’s about the copious research that shows that there is NO evidence that prestige or selectivity has ANY effect on the quality of the education available - in spite of the fact that researchers have looked for exactly that effect.</p>
<p>You were correct when you said:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/14310478-post21.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/14310478-post21.html</a></p>
<p>Luxury good, you know - like a Mercedes or a Rolex.</p>
<p>Whatever gets you through the night, Annasdad.</p>
<p>Both positions have been reiterated quite a few times already and no real perspective is being added, IMO. But carry on.</p>
<p>I don’t think these are positions that will be reconciled.</p>
<p>I will say that focussing only on outcomes in terms of employment is not the entire story.</p>
<p>But I would not want to take away from the satisfaction many have experienced in all sorts of situations, schools with best merit money, lowest price tag schools, schools closet to home, schools chosen (or ended up at) for all sorts of reasons beyond fit and prestige. I did myself.</p>
<p>I also would not want to take away from the satisfaction experienced by lucky students who choose and attend a dream school chosen for a different set of factors. My children did this and were very satisfied.</p>
<p>It’s up to the OP and her son to decide what the factors are in this case. I am sure either set of schools can produce a good result. Will the second set of schools offer more? Hard to say, but because of the points pizzagirl has made if it were me or my kids we would probably think that maybe they would and prefer them. YMMV.</p>
<p>Sorry pizzzagirl, I see we cross-posted with similar intents.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Conflicts between mythology and science rarely are.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Nobody’s suggesting taking any of this away. Only going into it with eyes wide open.</p>
<p>Of course it’s a luxury good, especially if all you care about is the employment outcome. But you’re going to spend four years in college, which is a significant chunk of your life. Some people (including me) place a high value in spending that formative period of time with highly accomplished peers. If that’s a value you share, the choice between Grinnell and Dickinson is pretty clear. There may be other reasons to choose Dickinson–financial, fit, or specific academic program–but other things being equal, I say go to the place where the other students are the most accomplished.</p>
<p>Annasdad, ask anyone who has taught at… oh, let’s say Quinnipiac and Yale (since they’re down the street from each other) if there’s a difference in the level of pedagogy which directly relates to the “quality” of the student body. Surely the administration at Quinnipiac doesn’t overtly tell its faculty, “go ahead and move slower through Dante’s Inferno; don’t assign as much reading in the seminar on Anarchy and Revolution; make sure you do a snapshot review of American History before you tackle Isolationism vs. Globalism in the 20th century.” No, they don’t tell their faculty that. But if you are teaching the material to two different groups of students- one of whom is comprised of kids who’ve gotten mostly 5’s in AP classes, have top reading and writing scores on standardized tests, and read fluently for both comprehension and pleasure-- you’ll move at a certain pace. Discussion will be focused on nuance and ideas. Papers will utilize primary sources (available at the rare book library/archive down the street to anyone who agrees to wear cotton gloves while handling the material) and not summaries from textbooks. And you will teach the material to the second group of students in a different way- less reading of primary sources, more time spent reviewing timelines since the kids won’t have as rigorous a background in the basics, less reliance on discussion and more lecture time.</p>
<p>So your insistence that if both institutions have great faculty and teach the same courses the experience of learning is identical… seems evidence of a lack of critical thinking. Ask the professors who have taught in a range of settings. I have a friend teaching Freshman Lit at a third tier liberal arts college who was astonished at how radically he had to revise the syllabus of a course he has also taught at a top tier college. Not that the kids weren’t smart- there are plenty of smart kids. But the gaps in their knowledge, their lack of familiarity with the building blocks of literary analysis, the fact that they weren’t ready to tackle Tolstoy until he ran a review session on European History, and for many, the appalling state of their writing skills- that was an eye-opener.</p>
<p>You can keep quoting all the studies you can find. There are plenty of smart kids at every institution in America. Not all of them are ready for what you would consider college level work.</p>
<p>blossom, I think you illuminate a key point in this kind of discussion–there is no question in my mind that your Tolstoy class will be better at Grinnell than at Dickinson (on average, anyway). That may not make much difference in your ultimate job placement or income, however. So what good is that better Tolstoy class to you? Well, in my opinion, it enhances your future life of the mind in all sorts of ways. That enhancement is probably a “luxury” if we’re measuring value in monetary terms. It reminds me of the Erasmus quote: “When I get a little money I buy books; and if any is left I buy food and clothes.” If your thinking is like that, you’ll want the more “prestigious” college.</p>