<p>I ask this question because I'm really looking to gauge what the actual effect is of being at a target school and the relative strengths of being in different "tiers". </p>
<p>For example let us compare 4 schools: two which are unarguably the best of the best -- Harvard and Wharton -- and two which are unarguably target schools but are somewhere lower in the general hierarchy: Cornell and Brown. </p>
<p>Now I've consistently seen the statement that schools like Harvard and Wharton are better placers into IB than are schools like Cornell and Brown. However, my question is how much of this is based on the quality of students and the career aspirations of the students at the respective schools, and how much is based on the effect of the school name in the job application process? </p>
<p>In other words, are Harvard and Wharton students getting jobs because their UG name carries more weight and firms are more likely to want to take them, or is it the fact that in general students from those schools tend to be more driven, harder working, and they themselves aspire to be going after IB jobs more than the typical student from Cornell or Brown?</p>
<p>Basically, is going to a target school that is not in the "top" tier of Harvard or Wharton going to really hurt me, or if I do a well at a target school I am in just as good a shape as anyone from Harvard or Wharton? </p>
<p>Also, please do not turn this into a discussion of what the "tiers" are. I think I've chosen pretty consensus picks on top tier schools vs middle tier schools, so let's try and avoid that argument since it's already been discussed in other threads.</p>