Prestige Going In vs. Success Getting Out

<p>Our college counselor gave us this sound advice: it is better to find a college where my son can be successful than a college where he will be at the bottom of his class.</p>

<p>Isn't that a bit of heresy to people here at College Confidential? Isn't the goal here to claw your way into the "best" college possible? (The "best" means the most prestigious and the most academically rigorous.)</p>

<p>On the other hand, a student could deliberately choose to attend a somewhat less prestigious, less rigorous college where he/she can have a better and happier educational experience. </p>

<p>I assume previous threads have addressed this question and would appreciate any links to those discussions.</p>

<p>Since colleges want the students to succeed one can generally assume that if they accept the student then the student has an opportunity to succeed at that college. The assumption is stressed when there are other motivations for accepting some students (sports, reaching too far for a demographic, etc.). There will always be someone at the bottom of the class but it's often due to factors other than capability (not studying, skipping classes, not focused, etc.). </p>

<p>One can also consider that one would be more likely to climb up if one's 'reaching' rather than if one is already near the top and static.</p>

<p>Most of us improve when presented with adequate challenges. Without challenges we tend to stay at the same level or decline.</p>

<p>wow, ucsd....I never disagree with you, but in this case, I think it depends on too many factors to give one answer....</p>

<p>I have two very diff children: I happen to totally agree with the college counselor for #2, but not nessessarily #1.....</p>

<p>no, I wouldn't want either of them at the bottom of the class, but for very diff reasons...</p>

<p>just wondering, why would someone go in knowing/thinking they were going to be at the bottom? seems a little self-defeating......</p>

<p>Too many parents here get caught up in the "competition" of their kids getting into most prestigious school possible..and this obviously trickles down to the kids. Parents should stop and think about what college would be best for their kid..and usually, that doesn't mean the most prestigious possible.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I think it depends on too many factors to give one answer....

[/quote]

I agree hence my stating 'generally', 'likely', etc. It depends on the kid, the major, the family resources, ECs (like having to hold a job to pay the way), willingness to do the work, level or preparedness, willingness to 'pump it up' to the level of the other students, and lots of other factors.</p>

<p>If students are almost guaranteed to not succeed in the college then the college probably made an error in admitting the student and the student probably should have chosen better. There was another recent thread about UCLA admitting a person with low stats for UCLA. She's actually doing okay for now but might face issues later - it's hard to say. This student probably fell into the 'other motivation' area as the reason for admission.</p>

<p>However, I do think a lot of the very bottom students are in that position because of factors other than capability.</p>

<p>I do think it's good to stretch whether it be admission to a college where one knows they'll face a higher level of competition than they're used to in HS, whether they pick a more challenging major at a particular college than an easier major at the same place, or whether they decide to add on a difficult minor as well. Not every person likes to stretch but I think it's 'generally' a positive as long as it's not an impossible reach.</p>

<p>Im with UCLA_dad on this. The most rigorous and prestigious schools do not admit failures and people generally rise when given adequate challenge. The very bottom students are in that position because of factors other than capability. Well said UCLA.</p>

<p>Also agree with the California dads, an unhooked candidate is highly unlikely to be accepted at a school they can't do fine at. If my kid were a star quaterback below their 25th percentile I would worry.</p>

<p>I don't think it's that easy to predict that you'll be in the bottom half of a class. I agree with uc-dad that frequently the kids who occupy the bottom rungs of the college are doing poorly for reasons that have little to do with their academic potential. My oldest is the type who rises to the top of whatever pond he's in, he'll work very hard at the things he's interested in, and hard enough in everything else. It's better for him to be surrounded by achievers.</p>

<p>Sometimes the benefit of being surrounded by many motivated bright peers at a school with amazing resources outweighs the slight drop in GPA/grades that one might experience when attending a prestigious school. Also, it's a great opportunity to rise to the challenge and push yourself. Learning hard work and persistence is better than just getting a high GPA.</p>

<p>Same here mathmom. Seems that the hardest material is always what gets S to do his best work. A little frustrating however when not everything has such a high bar. As an athlete way above any 25% of many schools, I will agree that a commitment to a sport requires much more discipline and time management than just your run of the mill brainiac. The goal is to find a school that really excites a kid. If the kid is engaged and happy, he will be far more successful at rising to the challenge of a highly selective school.</p>

<p>I think the right choice in this case depends on the student's personality and other personal factors. Does he live for a challenge, have solid study habits and work ethic, and get impatient with classmates who are slower? If so, the tougher college is probably the better place for him.</p>

<p>On the other hand, if he buckles under stress, has health issues, needs to spend extra time learning new material, or still has some adjusting and maturing to do -- or just is content with getting a "non-pedigree" degree and moving on -- a somewhat less challenging college may be the best place for him. I know that in my own case, with health problems that came to a head in my first couple years of college, I was able to get by at the public state U but might have had to interrupt my education if I'd been at a tougher college.</p>

<p>Financial considerations may come into play too, especially if the student doesn't qualify for a lot of need-based aid. In that situation, given merit aid, going in at the top of a "lesser" college could cost considerably less out of pocket than going in at the middle of a "higher-end" one.</p>

<p>Also GPA, if he plans to continue in grad/med/law school. From what I've read here, it seems that a high GPA will usually trump a fancy name on the diploma for graduate/professional admission.</p>

<p>So I do think there's some merit to considering this counselor's advice. Will it be the right answer for everyone -- no. Might it be the right answer for someone -- absolutely.</p>

<p>^^^ Agree perfectly. I have three children.. one at the top of that scale and one closer to the other end. And the youngest child is exactly in the middle. I call her my goldilocks an is just right. :) She excels in some things, likes a challenge but will need to have more opportunities to find success. I am already keeping my ear to the ground even though she is only a freshman.</p>

<p>I do not think it is a heresy...
What pertained to their education so far pertains to college as well. You do not want to overwhelm them but you also do not want them to be stars with only followers...
Both my kids have been stars so far and I think that it would be better for them to have more challenges in terms of schoolmates. Competition is very healthy, it builds...
Why are people against academic competiton and competition in athletics is just fine?</p>

<p>I am not sure if I agree with searchlight22's college counselor. I went to Stanford and although I wasn't at the bottom of the class I was most certainly not outstanding in any way, shape or form. But over the years I still get a lot of benefits just because my resume has the name Stanford in it. </p>

<p>The most important aspect of getting into these prestigious school is the network of alumni that could offer help to you at any stage our your career. After a while nobody looks at your grades anymore, but the name of the school you go to will follow you for life.</p>

<p>I agree with Cacooldad. I certainly wasn't at the top of my class at Harvard, but the benefits have followed me for a lifetime, and I learned so much from interacting with students who were brighter and more accomplished than me. Those interactions expanded what I expected of myself and what I've done for the rest of my life. I do not like being a star with lots of followers. I find that boring. I like to be around lots of people whom I can learn from.</p>

<p>D has chosen to go to state school and has been treated there as a star. Opportunities for various experiences and Merit scholarships just pile up and she had to regretfully decline some (like Sorority President) for the lack of time. She commented that she has learned so much in her very challenging Honors classes and outside of academics. For comparison, her friend was not even accepted to the same sorority at a larger school. I am not sure at all if D. would have had the same top notch opportunities at HYPS. She graduated #1 in her class and never applied to any elite schools. However, she might apply to very selective highly ranked Grad. school after UG.</p>

<p>I also think that it depends on the student. My daughter gets motivated to do better when she is at the top of the heap and is high on the profs radar. She enjoys the extra attention when her work captures the professors eye and then tries even harder to "outdo" herself. She has also been given some opportunities that she probably would never had known about as a "middle of the packer" in a more prestigious setting. It just depends on what motivates your kid.</p>

<p>It does depend greatly on the student. Older S got into 2 top 25 schools, but followed merit aid to go to a tier 2 where 40% of the students dropped out. Due to his grades and scores, S was an automatic admission to the school, and got virtually a full ride. He was in honors college, but said that the honors course he was taking had work that he did as a high school junior, work that was new to most of the students taking the class. </p>

<p>S had never been a student who performed up to his potential, but always had taken pride in finishing what he had started academically. At his college, however, he hung around with a crowd of older students who were deliberately taking their time finishing college because they didn't want to go into the real world. They did as little academic work as possible. </p>

<p>S ended up adopting their perspective that college was just a place to have a good time, and he flunked out and has never returned to college. Based on the fact that he was so much more knowledgeable than were most of the students whom he met at the college, he also has the idea that college is a waste of time. </p>

<p>Younger S went to a school where his scores are at the top, but his gpa was close to the bottom. He loved the school, and felt grateful to be admitted. He got some merit aid, but not a ton of merit aid. Classes were extremely challenging even though S had taken a demanding curriculum in high school. There also is a significant core of students who are more intellectually accomplished than is S. These include students who get excellent grades in tough courses while also pursuing demanding ECs.</p>

<p>This S has risen to the challenge and is getting good grades while also doing well in ECs. He has a nice group of friends who enjoy and do well in the academics while also pursuing interesting and demanding ECs.</p>

<p>It depends on the kid. I have one student who decided to go for middle of the road schools -- she knew she would get in with her scores and stats, got invitations to the honors programs, etc. She seems happy with her decision. My son is her friend, and he's all over the board with colleges. He has an excellent safety, but he also reached for top-level schools. He says that he will weigh everything when all the decisions return. Every kid is different. Some kids tell me that they really do not want to go too far from home -- and that will influence greatly where they will go to school (and some of those choices will be middle of the road schools where their scores and stats will be superior.)</p>

<p>Thanks for all of the excellent comments.</p>

<p>In the end, most of the parents in my community will encourage their children, through conscious and unconscious behavior, to go for the college with the most visible brand name. My son can even see it when we drive around town. The only rear window car decals are for the elite colleges.</p>

<p>There is something of an "Old Philosopher" quality about my son. He believes he is smart (ACT 33 and hopes to raise that to a 34) and is a good student, but he has no respect for the students in school he says are "book smart". My son doesn't like school and wishes he had better teachers. He constantly complains that a lot of what he is doing in school is not "learning".</p>

<p>My son is grinding out the grades now to get into the best college possible, but he said he might not go to the best school which admits him. Not only that, he is not interested in getting good grades in college. My son told me his educational goal in college is to learn how to write, think and speak. That's it. He also has a particular extra-curricular goal but that is another matter.</p>

<p>Of course everything depends on which colleges accept him.</p>