<p>kmazza, you don’t need a Phd to be a full time professor at a UC. This is usually for exceptional cases though. Also, at berkeley there are esteemed professors that teach undergrads all the time. For example Smoot (Nobel prize in physics) taught lower division E&M. Mcfadden (Nobel in Economics) taught undergrad econ a couple years ago too before he retired. There are plenty of fields medalists teaching math courses to undergrads as well.</p>
<p>Dude, that professor earned his Phd in Electrical Engineering from MIT in 1994 as stated.</p>
<p>yeah that was a mistake. i meant to post another professor but i couldn’t find his website. Although, I’ve had professors at Haas with only MBAs.</p>
<p>@kmazza: I don’t really know what you’re arguing at this point. Yes, of course being politically connected gets you into a top school. George W. Bush went to Yale for his undergrad and then Harvard for his MBA despite not exactly being the top scholar. His dad was also incredibly connected. But those cases are the exception, not the rule. There are only so many kids of politicians out there.</p>
<p>There’s no conspiracy keeping the UCs/Ivy leagues at the top of the rankings. They’re outstanding schools with some of the deepest histories in the country, the most competitive admissions process, the most sought-after professors and the most funding. This culminates in prestige, which in turn continues to feed the cycle that leads to prestige in the first place. It’s a self-sustaining beast.</p>
<p>Look at the composition of the U.S. Supreme Court, for example. Every single Judge on the bench is a former Harvard or Yale law student. Look where they got their undergrad:</p>
<p>Roberts - Harvard
Scalia - Georgetown
Kennedy - Stanford
Ginsberg - Cornell
Breyer - Stanford
Alito - Princeton
Sotomayor - Princeton
Kagan - Princeton
(I don’t know where Thomas went, but I think it was a smaller school.) </p>
<p>Yes, where you go to grad school will obviously have much more of an effect on your career opportunities than your undergrad, but your chances of getting in to that grad school of choice increase exponentially if you have an undergrad degree from a top university and the GPA/test scores to back it up.</p>
<p>Look, you are referring to very high up positions in the circles of power. I already accept that no matter what school i go to or how well I do I will never gain entry to those inner circles. The notion that ‘if you work hard enough the world is your oyster and you can be president or a supreme court judge if try or go to the right school’ is just simply not true. Prestige is based upon cultural and social capital which can or cannot be turned into economic capital. Political pull does not necessary mean being a politician unless are planning on attending Yale. If you are truly interested in such issues, I recommend reading some Pierre Bourdieu which is a French dude colleges introduce to some grad students.</p>
<p>If I wanted to attend UCLA grad school, which has what I want, it wouldn’t matter if I attended a CSU or UC as my chances would be the same. I know it is different with lawyers, doctors, engineers, and businessmen but for me it is a non issue and have already discussed these issues with the department at UCLA. My situation with a bachelors degree is a cost benefit analysis and whether I should get a arts or science based degree. I am not planning on doing research work, a thesis, or publication writing on the masters level so even if I got a arts or science degree at a CSU it would not even matter nor would it increase or diminish my chances on getting into UCLA grad school. It all depends on ones college and career path and also how much experience one has outside the classroom. As I’ve mentioned, the majority of my instructors who went to UCLA, Stanford, or Berkeley for grad school came out of the CSU system. Teaching alone does not get you the house in the hills so many have to write or do research for that. </p>
<p>Also, there is a big difference in earning a science vs. art degree with only a bachelors. A BS in Petroleum Engineering is sufficient for entry level no matter what system one attends. If one was to choose a social science path i.e. econ, history, anthropology, sociology etc. they would have to be committed to going all the way to get a return on such an investment or it isn’t worth squat with merely a bachelors degree.</p>
<p>^ Actually untrue a BA in economics is usually enough unless your headed for a MBA</p>
<p>Most business related job will take a BA in econ/biz econ/business admin as about the same.</p>
<p>Same with most IB jobs</p>
<p>A BA in econ is a Liberal Arts degree and primarily theoretical. A BA in econ with little supplementary work or by itself is not sufficient for most management positions. A BA in Business Admin is entry level for middle management where they are another persons *****boi. A BA in Business Econ can be the most practical of the three since incorporates the theory side of econ with the practical side of either math, accounting, or finance management or all three! They are most certainly NOT the same so don’t know where you heard that from.</p>
<p>I did not invent this and have been reading education publications for a long time. Many executive branch educators in places like Maryland and Delaware have severely scrutinized this issue. It started a little over a decade ago when a whole bunch of people started flocking towards business degrees. It overwhelmed the education system because many thought that econ and business gelled well which at the time didn’t. They tried to educate students on this matter but instead spent years working the kinks out and catering to students wants over job market needs. Econ has always traditionally been a LIBERAL ARTS degree and they weren’t going to change that all of a sudden. Instead they hybrid the programs so that students who wanted a econ degree but planned on going into business would get a mix of theory and metrics. In many ways a non accounting or finance based business based econ degree is basically a Statistician Lite, a technician level stats person. I realize there are differences between schools and programs but that is the way it is looked at and handed down from the Dept. of Education. If you would like proof, I can locate some for you on this issue.</p>
<p>Quote: TonyPreMed2013 Sounds like the OP is just p!ssed off that he does not have the work ethic or the grades to get into a UC… </p>
<p>Actually, you don’t know anything about me, so stop assuming. And judging by your SN, you are probably well off yourself. But see, if you have better grades than me or anyone, you have no right to say they have no “work ethics.” Who are you to judge? And whether or not I get into a UC is none of your business.</p>
<p>The reason why I ask these questions is because I am facing a decision whether I should aim high, which is UC’s, or State, which is super close to my house and cheaper.</p>
<p>I’ve read and learn many things from people who posted, such as the availability of work afterward, as I’m sure it would suck if one doesn’t get a job after succeeding. And also, thank you everyone for your inputs!</p>
<p>@kmazza:</p>
<p>“If I wanted to attend UCLA grad school, which has what I want, it wouldn’t matter if I attended a CSU or UC as my chances would be the same. I know it is different with lawyers, doctors, engineers, and businessmen but for me it is a non issue and have already discussed these issues with the department at UCLA”</p>
<p>Oh, so you’re saying that for certain masters degrees it doesn’t matter where you get your undergrad? Yeah, that’s probably true. I was referring to the big ones, as you mentioned (MD, JD, MBA, engineering.) In those grad programs, it absolutely matters where you got your undergrad degree from, and they overwhelmingly select students from the highest ranked universities.</p>
<p>I used the Supreme Court example to show individuals at the very top of their profession and where they received their undergrad degree from.</p>
<p>Just because there is a correlation between the undergrad schools of the supreme court with good graduate schools doesn’t imply causation. It would make sense that people that worked hard enough to get into good schools for undergrad would work hard to get into good graduate programs. This doesn’t imply that the name of their school is what got them into graduate school.</p>
<p>Just take a look at the undergrad institutions represented by Harvard Law. There are 261 schools with plenty of schools that you’ve probably never heard of:</p>
<p>[Undergraduate</a> Colleges](<a href=“http://www.law.harvard.edu/prospective/jd/apply/undergrads.html]Undergraduate”>http://www.law.harvard.edu/prospective/jd/apply/undergrads.html)</p>
<p>Or look at harvard’s MBA program where there are over 500 institutions represented:</p>
<p>[Undergraduate</a> Institutions - MBA - Harvard Business School](<a href=“http://www.hbs.edu/mba/perspectives/undergraduate-institutions.html]Undergraduate”>Undergraduate Institutions - MBA - Harvard Business School)</p>
<p>Thx Jet, I’ve read quite a bit of peoples experiences concerning law school. The argument tends to boil down to the ‘prestige’ of a T14 vs. GPA. The T14 crowd will defend their ‘prestige’ based decision to the death because they invested social-cultural and extra economic capital into it so have a reason to protect their own self interest. The majority just basically said that they earned a good enough GPA to get into the grad school of their choice no matter where they went for undergrad. </p>
<p>So if this is a means vs. end argument it is still contingent upon the individual. Personally, I’m too much of a Machiavellian ■■■■■■■ to worry about means over end or just being the lion without the cunning of the fox. Until there is closure (whether in closing a sale, winning a game or getting the job, girl, school of choice) the final tally does not yet exist so is merely just a form of wishful thinking, blind hope and faith, fronting, a confidence trick etc. Understand?!?!</p>
<p>“Since it is necessary for the prince to use the ways of beasts, he should imitate the fox and the lion, because the lion cannot defend himself from snares and the fox cannot defend himself from wolves. Therefore, it is important to be a fox in order to understand the snares and a lion in order to terrify the wolves. Those who choose only to be a lion do not really understand.”</p>
<p>Using claims like it ABSOLUTELY matters or OVERWHELMINGLY choose students from ‘prestigious’ schools just does not statistically add up. I’m not saying it doesn’t help but many of today’s students need to come back down to earth. Talk within colleges, businesses and the government have been saying for the past decade that many students are getting suckered with these marketing ploys. They feel many are in way over their head, have little experience about the working world or what jobs are out there, and becoming disillusioned as the hope starts to crack and fade and reality and debt start to sink in.</p>
<p>In reference to the OP question as to why we choose the “more prestigious” schools, I think a lot of it is just validation, right? I mean, don’t get me wrong, I want a really thorough education (at least as much as I can in an undergrad) that will either allow me to pursue a career or go to grad school if I chose.
However,I can attest to choosing a school with a little more prestige (okay, UCI isn’t Harvard but its a great school and highly regarded in my family).
I don’t think you should ever choose a school only based on the name though. I have been pushing to go to UCLA for a while but I am starting to realize that it really doesn’t mean that much to me. They name would be nice but it wouldn’t fit my life right now. I also think I can get just as good an education at UCI or another UC in general.</p>
<p>I think if you’re not going into a very technical program such as engineering or med school, it doesn’t matter quite as much. I am a women studies major and every UC offers close to the same classes.</p>
<p>@Grimes99</p>
<p>Justice Thomas received his undergraduate degree from the College of the Holy Cross in Worcester, Mass. It is a small but well regarded Jesuit school with a particularly strong reputation in New England.</p>
<p>@JetForce: You’re correct in the sense that you don’t have to go to a top-10 school in order to get into Harvard law. I’ve said exactly that in previous posts. However, the percentage of students admitted from top universities greatly exceeds that of lower-tier schools. So yes, CSUN might have a student get accepted to Harvard law, but UCLA/Berkeley/Virginia/USC/Stanford/the Ivy’s will have a much higher percentage. </p>
<p>I was actually at one of the UCLA graduations this past year and met three people going to Harvard law. The top undergrads are going to feed the majority of the top grad schools. </p>
<p>As I said earlier, some law schools list which universities they draw from the most and UCLA law listed the usual: Stanford, Virginia, HPY, UCSD, Berkeley, UCLA, etc.</p>
<p>@Lemaitre1: Thanks! 
I should know that… I took a full year of study on the Supreme Court and the background I have on them qualifies as stalking in most states 
Don’t know why Thomas slipped my mind.</p>
<p>Interesting discussion. I have actually been battling with this issue myself.</p>
<p>SMCguy: “Most care about prestige…younger students are usually able to take advantage of moving in order to attend a better school. It seems like some older students tend to go to a local CSU because it’s not easy for them to move. Most older students have to work fulltime, have kids, in a serious relationship, etc. So sometimes CSU is preferred because of a unique situation.”</p>
<p>This, 100%. I was admitted into SDSU last week for the spring semester. My dilemma is that I have a TAG filled out for UCSD - however, I would have to pass up SDSU in order to wait around and see whether or not I get in for sure. In my situation, I really don’t have the luxury of risking the wait, and in my opinion it would be foolish. I am not 18 or 20 or 22. I am a 25 year old wife and new mom. My husband works here; my family is here. I only have so many options. Furthermore, I also don’t have mommy and daddy paying for me. I expect to receive financial aid, but nonetheless SDSU is the more feasible option. </p>
<p>I would prefer attending UCSD. I have many reasons (location - no parking permit needed, quarter system, my major isn’t impacted), but yes admittedly one of them is for prestige. I admit I am slightly insecure. I don’t want to have to defend my intellect based on a stereotype. I could work my butt off for a 4.0 at SDSU, or have a 2.0 at UCSD - yet I wouldn’t doubt people would be more impressed with the latter. I have witnessed this in fact. I personally know somebody with a 2.4 GPA from UCSD, but because they have a Biochemistry degree in their hand people automatically “ooh” and “ah”. </p>
<p>I wish people wouldn’t be so quick to stereotype. I wish they would be willing to consider the circumstances and not be so quick to write a person off based on where they attended - rather respect them for what they accomplished. I personally believe that SDSU is a decent school and you can receive a decent education there. I believe your situation is what you make of it. The negative comments I have been hearing about SDSU & generalized statements of their student body really bother me. I am not going there to party, nor do I talk like a valley girl or use self tanner. I am going there because it is the best opportunity in my situation to further my education. (And no, I will not go on to flip burgers or mop bathroom floors because I received my education at SDSU - that is the most insulting comment I’ve heard yet.)
It would be easier for me to just say “I attended UCSD” then to have to give this explanation. Sure, I shouldn’t have to prove myself. But some people are narrow minded and you have to accept that as a part of life. </p>
<p>(ETA - In reality, most people I know personally wouldn’t make assumptions about me based on this school. I am sure it won’t be as extreme as I may be making it out to be. I know I am not doomed. But I have heard just enough to fuel this kind of response.)</p>
<p>Fortunately, I am looking to go into teaching. In the end, I wouldn’t expect that it would matter a great deal whether I attend SDSU or UCSD.</p>
<p>@Fortunately, I am looking to go into teaching. In the end, I wouldn’t expect that it would matter a great deal whether I attend SDSU or UCSD. </p>
<p>WHAT?!?!?!</p>
<p>The CSU system NOT the UC’s were specifically created for educating teachers.</p>
<p>@Justice Thomas received his undergraduate degree from the College of the Holy Cross in Worcester, Mass. It is a small but well regarded Jesuit school with a particularly strong reputation in New England.</p>
<p>Many of the Jesuit schools in NE are well regarded. Even BC was created because the Protestant colleges i.e. Harvard and Yale refused to accept Catholics. The rivalry between the Jesuits and Protestants raged for hundreds of years. Religious denomination schools did NOT sit around contemplating god as much as were studying Humanism and Science. One of the main reasons Harvard was created was to compete against ‘those damn French neutrals’ and ‘heathen follower of Ignatius’ who were just better earth scientists and designed better looking maps than the Yankee English Protestants. It was economic warfare and about entering into societal circles of power whereby religious issues were used to politicize the people with divide and conquer methodologies.</p>
<p>@Fortunately, I am looking to go into teaching. In the end, I wouldn’t expect that it would matter a great deal whether I attend SDSU or UCSD.</p>
<p>**"WHAT?!?!?!</p>
<p>The CSU system NOT the UC’s were specifically created for educating teachers."**</p>
<p>I didn’t quite word that right. It’s in context to what I was saying. I think we’re on the same page. I just meant that because of my intended profession, UCSD - SDSU - whatever. I am sure I’ll become a teacher either way. And yes - SDSU is great for education. If I went to UCSD for a bachelor’s degree, I would go through SDSU to get my credential.</p>
<p>Kewl, another CC mystery solved! Hope you find happiness and become a great teacher.</p>
<p>You are all pawns of the social game. [YouTube</a> - Alan Watts on insecure societys and hermits](<a href=“Alan Watts on insecure societys and hermits - YouTube”>Alan Watts on insecure societys and hermits - YouTube)</p>