<p>Can undergrads at the top of their class at "lower-tier" schools end up at top graduate schools (eg Harvard, Princeton, MIT, etc...). I am a junior right now, and I will be applying to colleges next year. I am very qualified to go to a top tier undergraduate college, but I was thinking that it might be better to go to a public school (Umass system) and graduate with no debt, through the honors program, and top of the class there. Would I be able to end up at a good grad school though? I really would like to graduate debt free, and I know that if I do go to a top undergrad school like HYPMS, I would probably have quite a bit of debt at the end of undergrad; however, I would probably also be set for going to a good grad school (not sure about that though). Does the prestige/rigor of undergrad school affect graduate admissions?</p>
<p>It can affect your chances (for example, if your school is known to have a very rigorous program and you still manage a 3.9, that’s definitely a plus for you), but it’s not necessarily the defining characteristic of your application. If you are at a lesser known school, you will need to shine a bit brighter, perhaps by doing some more exceptional research or whatnot, but it certainly can be done.</p>
<p>I’d definitely recommend trying to get as many REUs (summer research opportunities) at other quality schools as possible. Doing well in a professor’s lab over the summer is a great back door to get into a fantastic grad school. They also generally look for students from schools with fewer research opportunities, so you should stand a good chance at landing one.</p>
<p>This topic has been discussed to death. Use the search function to find such threads.</p>
<p>It depends on your field of study and what kind of grad program you are thinking of. The top schools will give you access to classes not generally available at a state school. Also, if you qualify for financial aid, Harvard is cheaper than UMass.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t know how true this is. I’m at Caltech, and there’s certainly fewer classes offered here in pretty much every discipline than what you’d see at my home state school of Penn State. Not to mention that within my major in my graduate program there’s a grand total of seven courses offered (on quarters) while I took at least three classes per semester in my same major in undergrad.</p>
<p>
Somewhat. The opportunities available to students affect students’ ability to put together strong graduate applications, and the number and quality of opportunities available to students correlate loosely with conventional notions of prestige. It’s not really the prestige per se that helps, though, it’s the relationships with well-known academics, the availability of outstanding research opportunities, and those sorts of things that are helpful.</p>
<p>You should attend the undergraduate school where you personally will be happy and successful. That particular school is different for different people: some want to be the outstanding student at a state school, and others want to be one of many bright students at a top-tier school. Not everybody would be equally successful in both situations – personally, I feel that I’m in the graduate program I’m in because I went to a top-tier undergrad school, because I really thrived in that environment, while I don’t feel I would have at my state school. Others feel differently.</p>
<p>Ultimately, you can’t know going into undergrad whether you will actually want to go to a top grad program in your field, or whether you’re really good enough to do so. You have to pick the best environment for you at the time – the grad school stuff will work itself out.</p>
<p>the quality of the undergraduate program means very little compared to a “prestigious” school with plenty of name recognition, especially for top tier grad programs. with grad programs that receive several hundred applications, the first round of rejections is all based on nonsense numbers, like the GRE, and name recognition. you can even work your ash off getting lots of research experience under your belt as an undergrad at a lower-tier school, and it can still be worthless to a grad admissions committee if you worked with a professor they don’t know.<br>
Grad admissions is a lot of bs really. so I guess my advice would be got to a top-tier undergrad program, or a lower-tier program if there’s a prof there who is one of the top in his/her field. (there are actually many, really brilliant profs at lower-tier schools; ironically, there are quite often some very unimpressive profs at prestigious schools who think very highly of themselves while doing very poor research.)</p>
<p>and no, I’m not bitter if it sounds like it above. I’m actually at Cornell for my PhD. i worked my ash off at a SUNY school for undergrad, then obtained my master’s from one of the top programs in my field. so I’m not bitter about Ivies.</p>
<p>I’d have to agree with the above poster. The opinions of respected colleagues go much farther than a perfect GPA or GRE.</p>
<p>I know a few friends who are accepted and/or called for interviews (therefore qualified) for #1 program in their field of study. What universities are they from? Ranked 50+ by US NEWS! So it is very possible. And if you want more concrete proof, you can always browse through the graduate student directory and see where they completed their undergraduate (sometimes their CVs are posted on the lab websites where they do research). This way, you can see what they have accomplished as undergraduate). </p>
<p>Nevertheless, I still believe you have more opportunities at a top university (mentioned in the previous posts). Ultimately, if you’re going to dedicate your college-life to class and research, I don’t think it would matter that much (you will succeed wherever you go but you won’t have much free time to do other things in life!). I don’t mean to discourage you; Research is SUPER FUN.</p>
<p>But there are other avenues in life. Remember you only live once… there is an alternative way to get into a top program without sacrificing your ‘once in a life time college experience’: plan out your undergraduate milestone really well (start thinking the type of research you want and what it requires [e.g. major, classes, exp]), get a 3.6+ GPA (while having fun moderately), join summer research program (2-3rd year; this could be really fun as well), continue on with research on your 4th year, graduate, Post-Bachelor research (publication/paper is key here) + GRE, then finally apply. From what I have heard and seen so far, graduate adcom would not weigh down an applicant if he/she spent an extra 2-3 years to build their experience. It makes sense because it assures the adcom regarding your interest in the topic and of course, it lets you experience research full-time for longer than a mere summer.</p>
<p>Personally, I would choose free debt / full ride at a good-great school rather than paying 150k+ at a top university (Exception, if my parents are wealthy!).</p>
<p>I got into top 5 programs in my field from a small liberal arts college nobody has ever heard of, so I don’t think the undergraduate institution is that important.</p>
<p>^^^^</p>
<p>Why do people always think that just because it’s not true for them, it’s not true at all?</p>
<p>Well, I walked through a pride of lions yesterday and didn’t get attacked therefor lions don’t ever attack humans…nonsense</p>
<p>If your profession requires a graduate degree, where you get this degree from is most important, not your under grad. For example, it’s better to get your under grad. from a small school then go to grad school at an ivy or one of a similar tier. If it’s the other way around, that’s when there’s a possible conflict.</p>
<p>VastlyOverrated,</p>
<p>The point I was trying to make is that going to a prestigious undergrad institution is by no means a REQUIREMENT for going to a good grad school. There were lots of interviewees from tiny schools at these recruitment weekends. It’s far more common than walking through a pride of lions without getting attacked :-).</p>
<p>Of course it’s not a requirement, and nobody is suggesting that it is. Your undergraduate origin is not the most meaningful part of your application, and top graduate programs are not made up exclusively of students from top 20 undergrad schools.</p>
<p>Still, students from top 20 schools are heavily overrepresented in top graduate programs, and it’s hard to argue that a top undergrad origin isn’t helpful in a graduate application. The top feeder schools to my PhD program (by raw numbers, not even relative to the number of biology degrees awarded) over the past three years are MIT, Harvard, Princeton, and Yale.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is slightly exaggerating, I think, but I believe name recognition really matters when it comes to letters of recognition. The one senior from my school last year I know very well, who was accepted to Princeton’s, MIT’s, Berkeley’s, and UChicago’s math Ph.D. programs (at MIT now) actually had a great relationship with an exceptionally famous name from my school. I’m very, very sure that’s what got him in, because there are other applicants with great coursework. Oh, and he took some courses that I think have name-recognition in and of themselves. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think, to both of you, the basic truth is that a large, top school offers the most variety in terms of good courses. For instance, Harvard has a very large selection. A top school more likely does tons of good stuff in its courses, and the courses themselves can have name-recognition. Even if Caltech doesn’t offer some classes, it is sure to offer very high caliber classes, and going through them will mean something to the admissions committees.</p>
<p>By the way, an REU or other out-of-school experiences are great ways to make up for not being at a large top school. I think Caltech is kind of an exception because it has tons more resources than the small schools I’ve seen. It basically becomes significantly harder to do without these out-of-school experiences if you don’t have a number of resources at your undergrad school. </p>
<p>I would emphasize that it is more what you do right, not what you do wrong, that will get you into schools. So take what you have, and do more, and you’ll be fine even at a school with fewer resources.</p>