<p>I don’t know where you got your Supreme Court info, but Clarence Thomas got his undergraduate degree at Holy Cross, not Conception Seminary College (which Wikipedia says he “briefly attended” at 16). Also it’s a little misleading to count Ruth Ginsburg as a Columbia Law School graduate. She went to Harvard for her first two years, and was a member of the Harvard Law Review (only the fourth woman ever to qualify). She transferred to Columbia for her third year because her husband Marty had graduated and taken a job with a firm in New York, and that’s what young wives did then. But really she’s yet another Harvard Law alumna.</p>
<p>yalemom15:</p>
<p>Congratulations on your child’s success. But really that post is a little wanton in its cruelty to a 17-year-old. And, while you may be right about more connections per square inch at HYP than elsewhere, you are dead wrong to suggest that it really makes any difference. Especially compared to a place like Hopkins, which is absolutely first-rank on anyone’s quality scale, and especially in a field like IR. Every college has a mixture of qualities and opportunities, more than any one student could possibly take advantage of, and by far the most important factor in any student’s success is what he does with them, not how many he could never get around to.</p>
I don’t think most people would disagree with that. Of course, there’s a slight difference between missing out on some intangible benefits and being “screwed.”</p>
<p>I think a far more important “intangible benefit” of a college education would be the benefit of learning not to look back wistfully and second guess the decisions you made as a high school senior, but take advantage of all the great benefits (and yes, maybe even some “connections”) that you might find at a great school like JHU. </p>
<p>It’s a lesson I’m still trying to learn myself, and I’m certain I’ve wasted a fair share of my own life with regret over stupid things I can’t change, and that didn’t really make any difference in the long run.</p>
<p>She has already exerted a significant amount of mental effort on next year’s (possible/probable?) transfer application process, according to additional posts in other threads.</p>
<p>Well, if she is going to continue to be bothered by this perception she has, then I say good for her. Give it a shot. But if it doesn’t pan out it certainly isn’t the end of the world.</p>
<p>First of all, I can’t believe a teacher would say such a thoughtless thing to you, especially when you have achieved so much - a full ride to JHU is an awesome accomplishment! </p>
<p>Secondly, a girl I know was in such despair when she didn’t get into her first choice, an ivy (Brown), and worried so much about not having the “ivy status”, ivy experience, etc. She is now a VERY happy student at JHU, loving the experience and receiving a fantastic education. She is not looking back, but looking ahead at all the doors that are being opened for her at JHU. You have made a very good, solid decision. Think about many hundreds of thousands of high school graduates would LOVE to be in your position.</p>
<p>Also, be happy for what you have “in hand” - a full ride at an excellent institution. Just to play devil’s advocate, and meaning no offense to you, with Harvard, Yale, Princeton and Brown all accepting in the single digits for this coming year’s freshman class, you could not possibly begin to assume you would have definitely been accepted. That is a big “maybe” for all of the brightest and most talented students - no guarantee for anyone. What you have is FABULOUS and celebrate that :)</p>
<ol>
<li><p>assume this hyp business has validity, that their grads have a better shot at top spots in fed gov. seems reasonable then to ask: how well have these swell wunderkinder done for us in their beknighted “pubic service” careers? guess that all depends on what you think of things today…maybe better let a few folks with less lofty pedegrees have a go at it for awhile?</p></li>
<li><p>one way or another, the op sounds weird to me. i’d rather have someone running the ship who has confidence in their own perceptions, than someone so focused on approval that they figure their lives are over already since they didn’t go to the right ivy. puhleeze.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>With the exception of some Wall St or Gov’t jobs where you go to undergrad makes zero difference in the long run. What matters is what you do after graduation. </p>
<p>The undergrad degree is a checkbox on an app. I’ve interviewed and hired 100’s of people. Nevr once asked where they went to undergrad. It just does not matter. I cared about their demonstrated accomplishments, references, etc. </p>
<p>Graduate school does make a difference. Go to the least expensive undergrad you can afford and that gives you a decent education. Don’t run up debt. Aim for a top tier grad school if your vocation requires it. </p>
<p>I went to a tier 3 school. I’ve never been unemployed a day in my life. I know of two Harvard grads out of work for over a year. Ivy does not equal success. Hard work does. </p>
<p>In my experience Ivy Leaguers do not have any special advantage in the Federal government. I’ve worked in Justice and Education for 30 years. Some of these young people might come in as political appointee special assistant types, but that is because they worked on the campaigns or have political contacts. Generally, but not always, the young political appointees do not know their heads from a hole in the ground, and are often despised by the career people for their overall lack of program specific knowledge and arrogance. </p>
<p>Again, in my experience, people, except at the very lowest entry level, are hired into the Feds because they have job-related experience. I was hired into my first Federal position after working for two years at the state level. People get ahead in the Federal government by becoming exceptionally knowledgeable in their programs and getting along with other people. An ability to write and analyze, and, as in other large organizations, knowing when to keep your mouth shut, are critical career-enhancing skills. Where you went to college is irrelevant.</p>
<p>Obama’s undergrad was from Occidental in CA! Agree with everything already said --it’s where you go for graduate work that matters. Condi Rice went to Stanford for grad…etc. Work hard at Johns Hopkins (a very well respected school!) and then head to Ivy afterwards. Right now the best decision you made was not piling up debt for your education. You will go much further in life in general, having a life free from debt! There will be plenty of great opportunities for you being near DC. My husband was in politics for 12 years here and worked his way up. He first answered phones in a congressional office for FREE (keep in mind he had his MBA from Thunderbird at that point). But you start at the bottom no matter who you are, or who you know ;). He worked his way up to COS in 5 years for a “Cardinal” member of Congress. He was later accepted a presidential appointment. He was ambitious like you and didn’t know how he’d get there --he just did. That’s what you do! Sounds like you have dreams that go even further…just set your sights on you goal and the rest will fall into place.</p>
<p>Should have read: “I worked in Justice and Education”. I retired from the Federal government in 2004. Let me add that I have my current position, at one of the country’s major research universities, because of my 30 years in the Federal government as well as my ability to charm the hiring panel during the interview. For most jobs, those involving being an economic parasite excepted, experience (and being a nice person) count much more than where you went to college 5, 10, 20, or 30 years ago.</p>
<p>You’re still missing the point if all you do is transfer the misguided and naive fear that “only a handful of undergrad schools confer magical success and everyone else is out of luck” to “only a handful of grad schools confer magical success and everyone else is out of luck.” All you’ve done is delay her fear for four years rather than address the substance – which is that JHU is an outstanding school and it will get her wherever she needs to go in life, since it’s the person, not the school.</p>
<p>Well, he transferred to Columbia to finish his undergrad degree, but that is beside the point. </p>
<p>People are right to add perspective about how great a school Johns Hopkins is. I do feel an ivy-centric point of view can be helpful to high schoolers, though, even if it is partly false. By ivy-centric point-of-view, I mean that the experience there is so much better and the education is clearly superior, and your future opportunities are better. I think it helps kids work harder in high school. However, it can end up hurting them when they make choices about where they should go, and afterward if they are so disappointed they lose motivation in college. </p>
<p>I think the best point of view is something which I think QuantMech said. If you have developed your intellect in high school and worked hard, you will get to attend a better school than those who did worse than you–even if you attend the same one. Clarifying this, even if you attend the same state school as someone else, you will be better able to take advantage of what they have to offer–in terms of impressing the faculty, taking the harder classes, engaging in world-class research earlier, etc. So in effect, you are attending a different school. So even if the name on the degree doesn’t exactly reflect the extent of your intelligence, you still have many of the benefits of attending the top-flight ivy.</p>
<p>OP, the sooner you stop wasting time worrying about this, the happier and better off you’ll be. You can easily find nincompoops to say that failure to receive an Ivy undergrad will severely disadvantage you. You will also find plenty of people to point out that people are wildly successful not having obtained an Ivy undergrad degree.</p>
<p>yalemom15, I’m guessing you did not go an Ivy yourself. The naivete of believing that “hobnobbing” with the children of senators etc. is a key ingredient determining someone’s success. Really, it’s not even worth discussing.</p>
<p>Disclaimer: H was Harvard undergrad; I went to Wellesley and Stanford, so my comments are not based on sour grapes.</p>
<p>Are undergrad alums a potentially valid source of networking benefits? Of course. Do they have to have been Ivy networks? A ridiculous notion, not even worth discussing. Do most Ivy undergrads even have this networking factor into their careers? NO.</p>
<p>OP… when you run into some nincompoop who feels sorry for you because you did not attend an Ivy… realize that this person has a problem. </p>
<p>Of course I realize that my comments will fall on deaf ears. And that this will just be the umpteen thousandth thread on this topic. Because some people just NEED to believe this craziness.</p>
<p>Well, there are causality vs. association arguments that you still need to consider. Again, causality != association.</p>
<p>And the people elected president now graduated 30-35 years ago. So, like looking at the light of star in the sky, you are not seeing what is happening now. You are seeing how things worked 30 years ago. </p>
<p>Not saying you are wrong, but there are other things at work here.</p>
<p>Ignoring the politics of this post, I think George W. Bush is a one example of why the value of Harvard/Yale is overstated in terms of helping you get elected president. Bush went to Yale and Harvard because he had family connections. He was elected president, or at least was in position to run for president, for the same reason–not because Harvard or Yale helped him.</p>