<p>No one is devaluing the elite experience. Acknowledging that an elite university is not the “set in stone, right” path towards greatness does nothing to smudge the “specialness” of elit universities. If anything, non elite top college deserve more credit for the greatness they put out.</p>
<p>Sally: if non-Ivy schools are so great, why would students headed there need some kind of consolatory message? I think non-Ivy schools are great! That is why I think it’s a non-productive thing to say.</p>
<p>The Ivy lusting student is heartbroken and in need of some consolation. They’re blinded. They don’t see what is really ahead of them. Once the semester starts and they get into a groove, they’ll have more focused goals and aspirations.</p>
<p>Plenty of people devalue the experience at elite schools. One way, and the subject of the OP, is by advising students not to “waste” their money on elite schools for undergrad. These people are basically claiming that spending 4 years at private, top notch, world-ranked universities like HYPS is no different than spending 4 years at the local state university along with hundreds of mediocre students from your high school who never took an honors or AP class.</p>
<p>A second way is to use the words lottery and luck when discussing elite school admission. The word “lottery” suggests a random distribution of accepted students, and therefore a group that is likely no different from that of any other school. The word “luck” removes the rather important concept of merit from the selection, thereby again implying the student body is just like the one at other schools.</p>
<p>Plenty of parents just love to say their child, with his stellar 1400 SAT scores and 3.2 GPA, “could have gone to an Ivy,” but wasn’t interested. The message: Ivy students aren’t better than average, and neither are the institutions.</p>
<p>Ivy and elite school students are regularly maligned as being entitled, nerdy, snobbish, boring (as in dull from all work and no play), arrogant, physically unattractive, cutthroat, and many more such insults. And of course, if the really wanted to attend, provincial.</p>
<p>Just go back to the ubiquitous threads about whether elite schools are worth it, and you’ll find plenty more. I’ve run out time to keep posting.</p>
<p>This is College Confidential… NO ONE devalues the Ivies here, they are practically holy on this site. I think that the only time you will hear people on this site suggest another school over an Ivy or a HYPSM is if there is a big price difference, and sometimes not even then. In fairness there is a reason for this. These schools have a lot of money to throw into their education, which even the best state schools cant match, particularly in the undergraduate sector, and in some areas such as law and politics, having a name like Harvard on your diploma really is a big deal for much of your future career. </p>
<p>That said I think the point on this thread is that A: You do get a second chance to make up for a sub par high school record and potentially be able to get into your dream school for graduate school, so dont give up all hope if you don’t get into your first choice HYPSM school, (God forbid!). B: The difficulty of this should certainly not be understated as top graduate programs draw from the best undergraduate students (which is a much more competitive pool then highschoolers). C: There are some very good graduate school out there outside of the old private schools and these schools often have much more of a focus on their graduate research then undergraduate education (ie. many of the top flagships are really not that special at the undergrad level but funnel tons of resources into graduate research).</p>
<p>
When they advise students not to waste their money, they are not saying there is a difference. They are simply saying the extra money paid to an elite institution is not worth the skills or experience gained. </p>
<p>
There is “luck” involved. If there are 300 students with all the same stats and ECs of similar nature, and Little Johnny was 10 out of those who were picked. He had some luck on his side. </p>
<p>
I would come to another assumption. I would have assumed that Little Johnny did not want to put forth the hassle of applying to an Ivy or was simply not interested in an Ivy (which is 100% Acceptable). </p>
<p>
Ok…? Is that our fault? Generally “elitists” and “intellectuals” come off and may carry those traits you have listed. On the other hand you hear state schools be bashed for having “hundreds of students who haven’t taken a single honors or AP course” and full of “drinkers who don’t go to class” and yada…yada…yada. </p>
<p>It goes both ways, TheGFG. </p>
<p>In the end, the student is who accomplishes great things, not the university.</p>
<p>TheGFG, why do you care? If I recall correctly, both of your kids have succeeded in grabbing the “golden ring” of an elite school undergraduate education. You have stated repeatedly that you believe they will have greater opportunities as a result. Well, great! You have confidence that your kids will succeed. So do many of us whose kids have taken different paths.</p>
<p>Also, I don’t know ANYONE with a child with a 3.2/1400 who would have had such false hopes about his or her chances at the Ivies. (But even if they do, who cares? Is it important to correct their assumptions?) Most of us here “get” the fact that the students at these schools are well rounded and highly accomplished by the age of 17. But what you fail to “get” is that 17 is not a cutoff for greatness. There are many, many extremely bright kids who goof off in high school, get their #*$! together at their state school or less-competitive private college, and go on to excel in graduate school, business, politics, or whatever. In other words, they begin to live up to their potential after they have left the nest, rather than when they were under our wings. </p>
<p>Also, to impugn kids at state universities who (gasp!) “never took an honors or AP class in high school” says a lot about your classist/elitist attitude. There are numerous reasons why some kids haven’t had advanced classes, or why they might prefer (or have) to attend a public institution. Many of them have just as much potential as your kids. Quit being such a snob.</p>
<p>Well, what is “waste” to some people is not “waste” to others. Yet “waste” is not exactly a value-neutral word, is it? Yet it’s one I’ve heard used in this context. Hence, my point that people IRL should just keep their college/grad school opinions to themselves, because many folks are pretty emotionally invested in the whole college thing and in the intangibles it seems to be proxy for. </p>
<p>Some high schools don’t even offer honors and AP classes, and colleges claim they don’t hold that against the student. Some students have difficult backgrounds that have affected their education. I understand that, and colleges claim to as well. But our suburban high school does offer a range of classes and anyone in the district has access to the same education. There is a large gap in breadth, rigor, and workload between the highest level of classes and the regular level at our school. Not only that, but tracking begins in 4th grade for math, and 7th grade for English. Part of the decision about placement is based on work ethic. People don’t like to talk about that piece of it, but it’s the truth. A lot of excuses for underachievement don’t cut the mustard with me, because my youngest has lots of issues and even she managed to work herself into some top classes through sheer will power. </p>
<p>So the academic gap keeps growing each year of middle school and high school, and doesn’t suddenly vanish in college. So can you understand why it is not appealing for some top students to want to study in college with kids they were segregated from based on ability while in high school? Why is it snobbery or impugning anyone to suggest that some kids are more academically oriented and talented than others, and would be better served being in class with students like themselves who are at a similar level of accomplishment? You know, the kid on the junior national soccer team is unlikely to want to play regularly on an intramural soccer team instead, but I doubt anyone would label him a snob. Why the double standard? The fact is that in ours and many high schools, the litmus test for academic ability is course rigor. It’s an imperfect measure, but it’s what colleges use as well. Thus, I suppose adcoms must be snobs too?</p>
<p>So yeah, there are a lot of kids at our local state school who have never taken an honors or AP class. Make of it what you want, but it’s a factor that will matter to some people and for good reason. Again, live and let live.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Dissenting voice here. I don’t think Ivies are for everyone, not even for all top students. They’re big research universities, and as such, they’re pretty impersonal. My daughters had close to zero interest in them, even though they had credentials that would have made them competitive. They wanted smaller and more intimate schools with all small classes and closer relationships with their professors. I think for each of them, that was the right call. That won’t be the case for everyone. But I strongly resist the idea that the Ivies or HYPSM are a one-size-fits-all, hands-down superior choice for every student. That’s just prestige-obsessed BS.</p>
<p>In class sizes, there’s a much bigger difference between the top LACs and the top private research universities than there is between the top private research universities and the top public research universities. And ALL research universities, public and private, prize research and graduate education over undergraduate education. As an alum of a top public research university who also has graduate degrees from top private research universities and has taught at both top private and top public research universities, I will insist that it’s possible to get an outstanding undergraduate education either at a top public or a top private research university. But the differences between a top public and a top private research university are going to be much smaller than the differences between a top research university and a top LAC. And I think each student needs to explore for herself which of those options is the best fit. </p>
<p>So yes, I would definitely advise some students to consider alternatives to the Ivies, even if the price is a wash. But it depends on the student and what they’re looking for. The Ivies are very, very good, but they aren’t the be-all and end-all for everyone.</p>
<p>Dartmouth and Princeton are Ivies, but are more like LAC’s than large research universities.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Getting more challenging classes was my son’s motivation for trying to get into the elite schools. At the local state university, he could get near 100% averages by just listening in class and without ever opening the textbooks; at Brown he has to work for every single A. Yet he couldn’t be happier, because he feels he’s actually learning the material in depth, not just assembling a high GPA.</p>
<p>
If a top student is effected by a 2.8 student that goes to their university but yet they don’t have any classes together nor are in the same social groups, then that is on that “top student”. </p>
<p>
It isn’t snobbery. </p>
<p>
There isn’t a double standard in my opinion. The kid on the junior national soccer team wouldn’t mind occasionally playing a couple games with the intramural team. This is where your analogy falls apart. Studying at a university is not the equivalent to being on a team. It is an individual journey where the individual fairs better with the help of like minded individuals. Top students can find other top students at their school. They are not the only bright bulb in the box.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is such a crock. You obviously have no idea how large universities work. There are ample opportunities for the best, brightest, and most accomplished to self-segregate if that’s what they want. Most public flagships have honors colleges. Even apart from that, top students place into more advanced and/or faster-paced classes, and the sky’s the limit on how far and how fast they can go in the field or fields they’re interested in. I know a local kid who is a true math whiz. As a freshman and sophomore at our local public flagship he was taking graduate-level math classes in a math department that is generally regarded as one of the top 20 or so in the country. His classroom peers are graduates of the best public and private colleges and universities in the country. It matters not one whit to him that three doors down, there’s a classroom of students taking remedial algebra. They don’t hold him back in the least.</p>
<p>It’s just pure snobbery to suggest this kid is being disadvantaged by attending a public flagship. It is his dream to attend Caltech or MIT as a grad student. One question is whether they’ll have enough coursework for him by the time he gets there. But they’re resourceful; I’m sure they’ll work something out.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Wrong again. It doesn’t bother me at all to see kids try again after failing the first time. In fact I think it’s great. More power to them. I said clear back on post #35 that I think it’s fine to console a kid who couldn’t afford or couldn’t get into Dream U. with the notion they can “always” try again for grad school. And I sincerely hope it works out for them. In fact I’m thrilled when it does work out for them.</p>
<p>What I object to is using the “always” statement to dissuade a kid (who has competitive stats) from even applying to the dream undergrad college at all - by expressing the totally false idea that this kid can “always” get into that school’s selective grad program later.</p>
<p>And what’s worse, far worse, is when the kid has actually already won “golden ring” and has a Dream U acceptance in hand but again is discouraged from taking it with promises that he/she can “always” go there later. </p>
<p>If some kid plans to be a lawyer and also dreams of attending Harvard and gets accepted to Harvard College, but turns it down for spot at Southern Nowhere State U. based on advice and promises from adults to save his money because he can “always” go to Harvard for law school, and he then subsequently fails to win the “golden ring” for a second time and doesn’t get into Harvard or similar peer law school when the time comes, I guarantee you that kid will bitterly remember that piece of terrible advice for the rest of his life.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is so untrue, especially of Princeton. Pay careful attention to class sizes. What matters is not the number or percentage of small classes–by definition, these are all small and have relatively few students. More important is the number/percentage of large classes, which by definition have a lot of students and therefore tend to dominate where students actually spend their classroom time. At Princeton, 10% of the classes have 50+ students. This could easily mean that students at Princeton, on average, spend as much time in large (50+) as in small (<20) classes. </p>
<p>Princeton’s percentage of large classes (10%) is much more similar to UNC Chapel Hill (13%) than it is to Williams (3%), Amherst (4%), Swarthmore (2%), or my D1’s LAC Haverford (0.3%).</p>
<p>If you want small classes, choose a LAC. Don’t buy the BS that some major research universities are “more like LACs than large research universities.” It just ain’t so.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>On the other hand, if that same kid goes to Harvard as an undergrad expecting it will give him the golden ticket to get into Harvard Law School, he may be sorely disappointed. The average Harvard grad has neither the undergraduate GPA nor the LSAT score it would take to be admitted to Harvard Law School. But I suppose for some HLS-aspiring kids, a Harvard College degree would be an OK consolation prize.</p>
<p>“Plenty of people devalue the experience at elite schools. One way, and the subject of the OP, is by advising students not to “waste” their money on elite schools for undergrad. These people are basically claiming that spending 4 years at private, top notch, world-ranked universities like HYPS is no different than spending 4 years at the local state university along with hundreds of mediocre students from your high school who never took an honors or AP class.”</p>
<p>If you’re happy with your kids’ education, THeGFG, why do you care if other people think you’ve wasted your money?
Look, like you, I pay for the privilege of sending 2 kids to fancy-schmancy elite schools. It is something that was important to H and me, and I’m happy to spend my money that way. But I don’t sit there and worry about what other people think of that use of my money. If my kids’ high school classmates’ parents (who mean nothing to me, I don’t know 99% of them) or my neighbors (ditto) think “oh what a waste, they should have just sent those kids to U of IL, same difference” … So WHAT? Why would I pay one minute’s worth of attention to “what they think”? </p>
<p>Your posts have always revealed a lot of concern with what your kids’ classmates’ parents think of where your kids go to school and the value thereof. And you seem to take it very personally if these schools aren’t bowed down to. I couldn’t be bothered. I know my kids go to fine schools. That’s enough for me. Why isn’t it enough for you? Why do you need reassurance that everyone else thinks your decision was wise?</p>
<p>“Plenty of parents just love to say their child, with his stellar 1400 SAT scores and 3.2 GPA, “could have gone to an Ivy,” but wasn’t interested. The message: Ivy students aren’t better than average, and neither are the institutions.” </p>
<p>Plenty of people don’t know what they are talking about. </p>
<p>“Ivy and elite school students are regularly maligned as being entitled, nerdy, snobbish, boring (as in dull from all work and no play), arrogant, physically unattractive, cutthroat, and many more such insults. And of course, if the really wanted to attend, provincial.”</p>
<p>The p word is my word :-). It’s provincial to assume the Ivies are revered as much as they are on the East Coast, sure, or that they are always first choice and other top schools are the fallbacks. What’s wrong in calling that mindset provincial? It’s also provincial when people out here think that U of IL is the top school in the country and why would you ever go out of state. Equal opportunity provincial.</p>
<p>" So can you understand why it is not appealing for some top students to want to study in college with kids they were segregated from based on ability while in high school? Why is it snobbery or impugning anyone to suggest that some kids are more academically oriented and talented than others, and would be better served being in class with students like themselves who are at a similar level of accomplishment? "</p>
<p>I totally understand this and feel this way myself. I also agree about wanting a purposeful, intellectual tribe to be “thick on the ground” versus thinly spread out and requiring some assembly, so to speak. However, the problem comes in when a parent or student assumes that the student can only find this tribe at HYPSM. Or worse yet, only at MIT – those are insufferable threads.</p>
<p>
LoremIpsum, that is just a gross generalization (and one, I’m guessing, that is based on very little information–your son’s experience taking college math in high school, perhaps?). There are easy-A courses at every university, including the most elite ones (see below). And there are super-hard courses where the students have to work their butts off and learn the material in depth. If state schools and second-tier privates and LACs couldn’t produce students capable of doing that, you’d never see them in top PhD programs or law or med school.</p>
<p>[10</a> Easy Classes | Flyby](<a href=“http://www.thecrimson.com/series/bargain-hunting/article/2012/1/23/ten-easy-classes-spring-2012/#]10”>http://www.thecrimson.com/series/bargain-hunting/article/2012/1/23/ten-easy-classes-spring-2012/#)</p>
<p>[Stanford</a> University: List Of “Easy” Classes Was Provided Only To Athletes - Business Insider](<a href=“http://www.businessinsider.com/stanford-list-of-easy-classes-for-athletes-2011-3]Stanford”>Stanford University: List of "Easy" Classes Was Provided Only to Athletes)</p>
<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/princeton-university/562599-easy-classes.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/princeton-university/562599-easy-classes.html</a></p>