Perhaps. But it is Phil Knight’s money and he can clearly do with it as he desires. And he chose to spend millions to create a legacy scholarship. (At Stanford.) IMO, it’s ‘irrelevant’ that they might not “need it” (however defined); Uncle Phil chose to offer it to them and not say, the University of Oregon, where he has already donated millions. HIs money, his choice.
I think it’s worthwhile to separate college and grad quality and prestige.
Harvard, Stanford and MIT have bigger international reps than Princeton and Yale due mainly to the fact that they are more grad/PhD-focused than Y and P – more grad programs, more grad students proportionately. But Y and P are more focused on their undergrads, especially Princeton, and that shows in certain undergraduate rankings. Heck, UChicago and Columbia are at Y and P’s level internationally due to their greater overallgrad/PhD prowess. It is important, I think, for kids to consider – when comparing peers and near-peers – to what degree the school caters to undergrads.
Looking at all of the top-25ish private universities, it is somewhat surprising – at least it was to me – how few students at many of those schools are there for college as opposed to grad or PhD studies. Most are under 50% undergrad. Princeton, Dartmouth, Brown and Notre Dame, among a few others, stick out for their undergraduate focus among elite private universities. Penn was over 50% undergrad too, last time I checked.
When prestige is used for rating undergraduate opportunities, check the ranking formula before jumping to the same conclusion as the ranking you are basing your opinion on.
Stanford was ranked number 8 in undergraduate teaching (according to US Newsweek) while Yale was ranked number 10. Also, Stanford was ranked number 4 in Best Value UG and number 2 in Most Innovative, number 1 according to HS Counselors, and number 1 for best school for veterans.
I’d be willing to be that its more of their perceived STEM programs, particularly engineering than grad/undergrad ratio.
Shouldn’t be too surprising. The NRC University rankings are based on research quality. (As much as we love/loathe USNews, there really isn’t any evaluation of undergrad teaching. For research Unis, top rankings is all about Research (of grad programs).
I’m surprised USNews would be mentioned in this serious conversation.
Princeton was ranked number 1 according to US News. That’s why I am using the same.
The US News ranking is no worse than any other ranking. What differentiates it is that it places more emphasis on undergraduate parameters than the graduate and research parameters that other rankings traditionally use. That means the big, public research universities that do well in other rankings don’t necessarily do well in the US News rankings. I’ve noticed that the biggest critics of the US News rankings are alumni of those jilted big, public research universities, such as Michigan.
Of course, one of the schools I went to, USC, does pretty well in the US News rankings. So I think it’s a pretty good ranking system.
The narrative around the Ivies is that they are among the best universities out there. The narrative is that these schools are chock full of amazing students. But that statement doesn’t mean that they are the only places where amazing students can be found.
But it’s about the money. These schools are sought after by the poor and the middle income families who will get great need based aid, and by the very wealthy families who are not concerned about the price tag. Upper middle income understandably likes to find faults with the Ivies because they don’t give any merit-based aid.
There are a very small number of schools that can afford to be need blind in admissions (at least with respect to an individual applicant) and still meet 100% of demonstrated need, even fewer of these that meet need without requiring loans.
These schools can afford to eliminate tuition altogether. Perhaps doing so will make them more attractive to the students who come from upper middle income families, so no students will avoid them due to comparisons with merit offers elsewhere.
Of course, that will make these schools even harder to get into.
I don’t think the criticism of the Ivy League is about the cost of attendance. It’s that many of us who are a little older have seen that you don’t need to go to an Ivy to be successful. Also, for fields like engineering, the schools with the top reputations are outside of the Ivy League.
The “narrative” issue is driven by brand. Most rankings are undergrad only, but it doesn’t account for individual selection criteria biased by years of cultural assumption.
But it’s interesting to play out your suggestion…what would happen if you could isolate undergrad for all schools?
My guess is that the NE LAC’s would become even more competitive. Decisions on application and attendance in New England often come down to reputation versus experience. Find someone who attended Williams or Swarthmore when they were accepted at Harvard or Penn, and they will tell you about the conversations in defense of their decisions. Rarely have Penn or Harvard grads had to defend themselves about rejecting Williams and Swat.
That said, there are a lot of students at Williams and Swat who either turned down Ivy offers or didn’t apply. Those students often decided based on what they assume will be a more engaging, more personal education. They revel a bit in finding these opportunities that the masses don’t appreciate (even though those applying to schools at this level know well). The narrative around the Ivy League is driving activity both in and out of the 8 schools themselves.
The only place I’ve seen an obsession with the Ivies is on College Confidential. For some reason those students and parents obsessed find there way here. I don’t believe this site represents the real world.
I don’t believe there is a narrative to change because I believe the narrative only exists here. At least that’s the case in our area. Maybe the northeast is different.
BHS- I’m IN the Northeast and I agree with you. And spouse and I both attended Ivy League schools. Even in my neighborhood/kids HS/etc. seems like late adolescence has so many other issues that “OMG I have to get into Dartmouth” seems like a very tiny percentage of the population.
“I don’t believe there is a narrative to change because I believe the narrative only exists here. At least that’s the case in our area. Maybe the northeast is different.”
Agreed. The funny thing was when I suggested this in that thread with the parent suggesting that any non HYP school with ED can’t possibly have the top students applying, the response from that parent was along the lines suggesting that I was simply too stupid to understand this desire among the elite students and families. Because surely all top students and families feel the same way - and all want HYP, or perhaps S or M. Nothing else could possibly be a top choice for a top student.
Um, OK… but we’re gonna need an eye roll emoji here.
This is a problem since many parents are succumbing to “the Joneses” and have lost their own perspective and balance. It’s hard to give sage advice when you’re blinded by your own biases about how important it is for an education to be “elite” or prestigious". And that attitude doesn’t just exist in 10 zip codes. Parental pressure, intentional or not, is just as bad as peer pressure.The bottom line is there are lots of smart kids going to hundreds of schools that will afford them excellent educations. The diploma can help you get that first job, the rest is all performance, hard work, attitiude and social/emotional IQ. As for the comment about the sports facilities being packed on weekends and the libraries being empty, those EC’s are being driven by the schools who want to see well rounded applicants - even better if they are award winners or scholar athletes.
I think the issue stretches beyond Ivy acceptance. I think higher education is a gateway to opportunity, and hopefully success. I recognize that not everyone who goes to a specific college becomes a success in life (however it is defined), giving order and assigning a rhyme and reason to pursue educational goals are necessary. How else would you convince your 12 year old or a 14 year old that studying hard matters? How else would you convince your teen that getting good grades makes a difference? You can say, “get good grades so you can get into a good college,” and you’d have to follow up with a definition for “good,” which in most families does not include Ivy League. When parents find a way to explain why not all colleges are created equal and why studying hard makes a difference in where you go to college, we can begin to change the conversation about prestigious acceptances whether they be Ivy or not.
Sorry, the fact that parents will pay for private coaching for their 8 year old but can’t take the kid to the library is NOT being driven by the colleges. Unless you live in a wonderful place where the values of ancient Athens are being practiced, our society does not promote sports for any higher value other than… sports. Watch a little league game where the parents in the stands are borderline abusive to the umpires (good sportsmanship? I don’t think so). Watch a HS hockey game where teenagers are causing concussive head injuries to their friends. And don’t get me started on the August phenomenon of a HS kid dropping dead in the heat during practice.
This is in pursuit of becoming a "Scholar Athlete? no.
Agree that parents have lost perspective and balance, but nobody takes their daughter out of middle school to be “homeschooled” to focus on gymnastics due to academic interests. They want their kid to focus on gymnastics without the distractions that a normal school day would provide- social AND academic.
This one you can’t pin on the colleges. Parents go nuts over sports- that’s on OUR society.
[QUOTE=""]
::: "How else would you convince your teen that getting good grades makes a difference? You can say, "get good grades so you can get into a good college," " :::>>>
[/QUOTE]
Well, you could begin with not defining the only path as college to begin with. We’ve always encouraged our kids to do their best in anything they tried, but not so they could get into a “good college”. We use the phrase “to give yourself options.” Because people who do well have many good options to choose from. We even talk about different options - full scholarship at a state school or solid regional school, top ranked college for your interest, skip college and start a business, go to a service academy, enter a trade, etc. If all you have is a hammer (thinking you have to go to a good college) then everything looks like a nail. And if your kid doesn’t fit that pattern then s/he feels even worse at the failure on the one and only path.
Most colleges have need blind admission. Common trivial examples include all of the open admission community colleges.
I live in CA and I can assure you that many of the top HS students will apply to at least one of the ivies because of the brand and thinking that they may has a shot at getting accepted, regardless of financial need. Right or wrong they believe that the ivies are the pinnacle of the hard work they have accomplished over the years and “deserve” a shot (albeit a long shot) at the tippy top colleges.
Parents have lost their perspective and balance because so many have had the rug pulled out from under them.
20 or 30 years ago, “college grad” meant you could always find a reasonably good job. If you had to, you could go to night school and work your way through college. Once you had a job, performance enabled mobility.
Then we became greedy. Everyone needed a second home and 5,000 sq ft. of McMansion. We leveraged ourselves to the edge, and then millions got pushed over in the 2008 financial crisis. Home values plummeted and jobs were lost.
In the years that followed, automation, robotics, and efficiency gains mean that all college grads may not get a job based on their diploma. When some diplomas are worthless, the ones with “assured” value become more desireable. An Ivy degree will never hurt you in applying for a job, and will ensure you don’t get cut off without an interview solely because of education.
Parents also can’t imagine how they can pay for college, so the trainers and traveling teams are a chance to improve the chances of an athletic scholarship. In reality the chances don’t change much, but it is a way for parents to try and do something to help.
In a perverse twist, the kids who are left alone to find their own way may eventually have the inside track to happiness. High debt and an increasingly small need for “executive” talent will continue to eliminate white-color jobs, while trades and basic skills will retain value. Take tree services in the Northeast right now. In my town you’re looking at weeks before someone can cut down what’s left of the trees damages this month. This appears to be a business that is more and more in demand, as the weather gets crazier and crazier. Instead of studying global warming, build a small business that supports its impacts. No need for a college education…but you can’t sell that to the parents of a 5 year old who want the best for their little one. If only we knew what that was anymore…