<p>Oh please. My dad, a Cal alum has been tapped for 50 years. That Caltech and Pomona, with a fraction of alum are close to the top UCs says it all.</p>
<p>Gomestar said:</p>
<p>..They might eliminate some of the schools known as 'pressure cooker' in particular UChicago, MIT, Caltech, and Cornell. ..might not produce the most cheerful alumni. ..</p>
<p>Also, alumni giving rate isn't going to work either. .. I just want to show certains schools have certain majors that will naturally produce more income meaning the possibility of higher donations. </p>
<hr>
<p>If the students were not happy then it is a VERY good reason not to go to such schools. Good academics alone is not the goal in life for the most normal people. You need just enough academics to enjoy life and to make money.</p>
<p>I agree that amount of giving can skew things. Bill Gates can donate a hefty sum and single-handedly change the ranking of his school (BTW, where did he go?) So, it is better to look at the fraction of alumni givng donations, not the total amount given. The higher the percentage of alumni happy with their school, the more desirable a place it is.</p>
<p>Alumni giving rates are not telling because they favor smaller private universities. Large state universities like UNC, Michigan, UTA and Wisconsin have among the happiest and most satisfied alumns, but their alumni donation rates are much lower than their smaller private peers like Notre Dame, Georgetown, Brown and Dartmouth.</p>
<p>Cincinnatistudent said:</p>
<h2>measuring graduates happiness with their opportunities is a very flawed idea. first of all, if you have low standards, you're going to be happy with fewer opportunities. ..</h2>
<p>The way I look at it, if my college standards were low and I am not well-prepared for a decent career I'd very unhappy with my alma mater.
I see that your point is that alumni with lower standards will bias the rankings. If a large enough sample of alumni are taken the results will be realistic and useful.</p>
<p>Well, the fact that the schools are considered pressure-cookers would imply the students don't like it that much...i mean, of course CIT and MIT have top academics, but if its TOO hard and students dont like it for whatever reason that should be a factor...just because alumni happiness doesn't just mean how prestigious your degree was, but how much you enjoyed your college experience as a whole.</p>
<p>That is why I think the top private schools that aren't "pressure-cooker" have the happiest alumni - prestigious degree, had time to have fun too.</p>
<p>Of course, MIT and CIT shouldn't lax their academic standards to make the students happier...after all, surviving a "pressure cooker" school and thriving at one means you can handle a lot</p>
<p>If you want to see close-knit, happy alumni that stretch across generations, look at alumni from the Service Academies. My father-in-law is Class of '50 from West Point and his classmates are closer than any I have seen anywhere. Also, there is a bond from class to class that is just amazing. I guess they call it the "Long Grey Line" for a reason.</p>
<p>The alumni at Kings Point have embraced my S even when he was a plebe. </p>
<p>The shared experiences run deep.</p>
<p>I think we're also forgetting that people are probably more or less happy with their college choice after they graduate... If they weren't, there's a good chance they would have transfered out or even dropped out.</p>
<p>This is like debating the meaning of teacher evaluations. The teacher who is most popular -- i.e. gets the most uniformly popular evaluations -- may be worse at training students than the one who is adored by a minority, liked by a majority, but absolutely hated by the bottom 25% of the class.</p>
<p>Similarly a school with 95% satisfied alumni MIGHT be doing a worse job than a school with a tough core that alienates 25% of the students and moves them to even drop out while giving the remainder a level of expertise that is unmatched.</p>
<p>I'm biased. I think the best schools are mostly too kind to their worst (academically speaking) students and are insufficiently demanding of their median student. And these sorts of measures exacerbate these reprehensible trends.</p>
<p>Count me among those who support the Caltech-Chicago model of the world even if it produces less uniformly "happy" alumni.</p>
<p>Just because students don't enjoy their college experience or are always completely stressed out doesn't mean they are learning more or are being trained better for life.</p>
<p>Excruciatingly demanding academic environment + stressed out students + happy alumni = Service Academy</p>