<p>And that's only one metric-- a very limited one, at that.</p>
<p>When nightmare was thinking about professionals who are "tops" in their fields, was he or she also considering public interest lawyers, Doctors without Borders, and other people who are clearly very intelligent and use their intelligence to make a difference? Or was he or she just considering "top" in terms of fame and remuneration? This "top" ness bugs me to no end.</p>
<p>Here's another fun project: look at Entertainment Weekly's annual "Power List" (I think EW has it) and track where those people went to college (or if they went to college, or if they got out with a degree). The Power List uses a handful of metrics, net worth being only one of them, to approximate influence.</p>
<p>In many cases, it is simply cheaper to attend an IVY or a top 25 private that meets full need. This was certainly true for my son - who attends Brown but was offered great deals at other top schools as well. I'm amazed at how many people continue to say that Brown doesn't give good aid. It's true that Harvard and Princeton provide better FA for those in the over 100K income level, but from what I hear from other parents, Brown's aid is still good. FOr those making under 100K, students receive all grant money - no loans - and the family EFC is much less than attending our cheapest state school.</p>
<p>But I don't think students should choose schools solely for financial reasons. THere are plenty of good schools out there and some students will prefer them (over top ranked schools) for all kinds of reasons, such as location (close to home, job, relatives), weather, major or combination of majors, medical facilities, campus, or even just a change from what they know. I agree with those who say it's a very personal choice and what's good for one isn't right for another. Part of growing up is no longer worrying what others think.</p>
<p>"Why do higher concentrations of "sucessful" people go to good universities? I mean look at U.S Presidents, MOST went to top universities or LACs with the exception of extremely high ranking military officers. Five U.S Presidents went to Harvard."</p>
<p>First of all, do you think that the Harvard education that gave Bush made him a true, changing political leader and pleased the majority of Americans over 8 years or an idiot who thirsts for war, etc.? </p>
<p>Secondly, the only those who went to a top law school can become president because of status and image. They want America to know "wow this candidate went to Harvard/Yale and not so and so school. WE'RE SAVED!".</p>
<p>You also said that most scientists went to top universities.</p>
<p>Look at Einstein and Edison and Bill Gates and Michael Dell. IMO I think the LAC produces the finest scientists that other universities fail. Harvard = Hypocrisy (sometimes :)"</p>
<p>One more thing, I think the elite college system is bogus. It's too bad this kid who got in and deserved a harvard education but CAN'T AFFORD while this other rich spoiled kid gets in and just blows their parent's money off. Then you have blacks vs Asians. A 4.0 and perfect SAT1 & II can hardly get in cuz he's Asian but a black with a 3.6 and somewhat perfect SAT can easily.</p>
<p>I think prestige is overrated too. The valedictorian of my high school, who wants to be a cardiologist, got a FULL RIDE to Vanderbilt, tuition, fees, everything, yet she chose to pay 45k+ or however much it costs for Harvard...kinda dumb if you ask me, since Vandy's med program is top notch.</p>
<p>Firecube, Einstien went to University of Zurich, Harvard of Germany.
Bill Gates and Dell are unfair because they dropped out. Steve Ballmer did graduate from from Harvard, if you want to argue Bill Gates.</p>
<p>FiN01....Did you remember what I said?
I know Harvard and Brown doesn't let you graduate with debt if your parents make under $150k a year I believe...
Harvard also has a much better pre-med program.</p>
<p>I know the stats for Brown...
95% of students get into top 3 choice Law School,
99% of students get into top 3 choice Business School
90% get into top 3 choice med school.</p>
<p>Nightmarerec0n. The people who are 'top' in their field went to top schools because they were capable enough to go to these places in the first place. Going to Harvard did not make them into top scholars. They went to Harvard because they were top students bound to be top scholars in the first place. Correlation does not equal causation.</p>
<p>"I know Harvard and Brown doesn't let you graduate with debt if your parents make under $150k a year I believe..." Depending on your assets, you may not get any financial aid from Harvard with this income.</p>
<p>Nightmarerec0n: kh892 has it exactly right. I'm not saying that less prestigious universities produce an equal number of "top" people (what ever that means). It's obvious that prestigious schools attract students with high grades and high motivation to succeed monetarily. I'm saying that the education at other universities isn't far below that of Ivies. I've talked to my professors. They feel fully confident that based on their experiences with previous students, I'm a totally competitive candidate for grad school. </p>
<p>I put this out there not to argue that the student body at less prestigious universities is equal to that of HPY, but rather that going to a university that isn't an ivy isn't a death sentence. In fact, I love the student body here way more. The fact that many people aren't aiming for grad school, med. school, or law school is refreshing to me. I like diversity. I like being reminded that some people around me have greater concerns than grades and "prestige" like feeding their children, taking care of sick parents, working full-time jobs, etc. It puts my stress about the GRE into perspective. </p>
<p>This idea of "top" people or "successful" people is so freaking arbitrary. If being successful means making a lot of money and gaining fame, then "success" is certainly not even close to one of my top goals. I want to have a job that I love in a place that I love. I believe that my (less prestigious) university can get me that. Plus, I can have a huge amount of fun moving in that direction.</p>
<p>While you may not get a better "education" at top ranked schools, there a huge benefits</p>
<p>1)Opportunities for advanced research is greater(Points to MIT dark matter detection)
If you want advanced research you need A LOT of money in most cases. Highly endowed universities have this kind of money.</p>
<p>2)Connections help: Perfect example is the Skull and Bones at Yale, Nearly every member is a top ranking government official or such....</p>
<p>3)Prestige helps: Don't argue this, A LOT of people go to college, only 6000 undergrads can go to Harvard. Obviously a degree from Harvard is more impressive then a degree from the University of Phoenix(but their football stadium is really nice) </p>
<p>I personally define success as how much a persons has left a history changing mark on the world(Presidents,Scientists,Buisnessmen...etc.) A person that has mankind better a species.</p>
<p>people tend to overlook the fact that the people who go to the top law schools and top med schools and top whatever did not get there because their college made them- the people with the highest stats in high school will often go to the top colleges and then the top grad schools. the people with the highest stats who choose to go to not the most prestigious schools will still end up where they want to end up. the college does not make you brilliant, it is what you put into it. of course schools like harvard and princeton will have a ton of people going to the top programs, because you have the highest concentration of top students there. </p>
<p>bottom line: if you are bright and motivated, you will succeed, whether its community college or harvard.</p>
<p>Nightmarerec0n, you still don't "get it". You honestly believe what you state here but the truth is, when you're 40 years old or so, you'll look back at your statements and chuckle.</p>
<p>I've really enjoyed reading this thread.
And I actually agree with both sides of the spectrum. there are benefits of going to top tier, ivy league, prestige filled universities and colleges, just as there are benefits in going to second or third tier colleges, state Us, or smaller LACs. What everyone needs to realize is that all types of colleges and universities have benefits, if they didn't...I don't think anybody would be enrolling in them. </p>
<p>Sometimes it is true that ivys and top tier institutions provide more opportunities to their students (more research, more faculty, ect.); they simply have the money to do so. HOWEVER, students at other colleges and universities can easily recieve the same opportunities, it may just require more work on their half. Initiative and hardwork are the key components for any student to get what they need to get out of any school.</p>
<p>I think it is crucial to stop pointing out any negatives that might go along with just ivys or just state Us (for this board, specifically). It's not about pointing out what's wrong with a university, it's about realizing what could be right about another one. The pros and cons need to be weighed for both. If someone can get into Harvard, Yale, or Princeton...maybe it is a fit for them to go there academically, socially, and environmentally. However, this same person's best friend could also get into the three and know that the social and environmental aspects are not hitting it off well with him.
Both students could wind up in good grad schools together, with good jobs. </p>
<p>I know I repeated some of what other posters have said, but my main point is this: don't discount the ability of any university to nurture a strong student and person, whether that school be an ivy (yes, prestige still does matter to some people...not rightfully so...but it does. and if people want to rely on prestige to get them by, they will do so. and then realize later what a mistake it may have been) or whether that school be a state school. Initiative and hardwork is where it's at! (it being success).</p>
<p>p.s. guys...try not to stereotype any school. I know a lot of down to earth people at the ivys (my brother included) who actually do want to go on to helping other people and not just themselves. People who didn't get in because of money, and people who truly weighed all of their options and didn't go solely based and perceived prestigious advantage. But I digress.</p>
<p>Prestige isn't a a guarantee to success, but it can help you get there faster especially grad school wise. A degree from Harvard Law School is going to open up many more door in big law especially if you want a job straight out of college. You may need 5 good years of work experience to outweigh the prestige. Ibanking is popular here...Big Ibanking firms also have 10-20 colleges they only recruit out of. If you don't go to one of them, you may need years of work experience that someone else got straight out of college. </p>
<p>No to mention, there is a "top" school exchange for grad school. People from Harvard go to Stanford, People from Stanford go to Princeton, People from Princeton go to MIT...etc.</p>
<p>2legit2quit, Filling out papers to TRY to get grants is no fun, And that will happen if your university doesn't have a certain research labs you need because they don't have the money. </p>
<p>Nysmile,How do you know? Maybe I will be crying because I failed myself.</p>
<p>Well some of the benefits you mention are available at a lot of schools you wouldn't consider prestigious. </p>
<p>1: Research. Did you know that the University of Wisconsin-Madison is second in the nation for federal research funding, receiving about 800 million dollars? Obviously the school's huge size means it is harder to get research opportunities, but who is to say that a Ivy-caliber student at Wisconsin is going to have *less research opportunities there than at a prestigious university? I think that the same should apply to a lot of state flagships, especially in places like CA and Texas. </p>
<p>2.Connections: Let's go through the list of the undergraduate schools that Presidents have attended. </p>
<p>F. Roosevelt - Harvard
Truman - University of Missouri - Kansas City School of Law (did not go to UG, and dropped out of Missouri)
Dwight Eisenhower - United States Military Academy
Kennedy - Harvard
Johnson - Southwest Texas State Teachers College
Nixon - Wittier College
Ford - University of Michigan
Carter - US Naval Academy
Reagan - Eureka College
Bush Senior - Yale
Clinton - Georgetown
Bush Junior - Yale</p>
<p>The Ivy League is well-represented, but only 4 out of these 12 attended one as an undergraduate. The amount of help in 'connections' an Ivy League education is really overstated. Ask Lyndon Johnson, who seemed have gotten all the 'connections' he needed despite going to <em>gasp</em> a state college.
I will concede that postgraduate education did matter for these presidents. For example Ford and Clinton both attended Yale Law. But I really don't think not going to HYPS as an undergraduate is going to cripple anyone's political career. </p>
<ol>
<li>Prestige Helps: No one is going to dispute this, but I really think your overstating the effect of your UG college's prestige. See above.</li>
</ol>
<p>Nightmareec0n, now you're talking about law school, not undergrad. I have never heard of a top school grad exchange--I don't think it's like MIT will accept all Harvard graduates. I don't think it has to do with the institution, but rather that the people at top schools apply to to top grad schools. People from Reed and Swarthmore also go to MIT and Harvard, but that doesn't mean that there's an exchange program. I don't think Nysmile was literal when he/she said that. The point is, you're saying things that are very false, so false that it's comical. You just don't get it yet.</p>