<p>Your comment about prestige was in response to the question: “Does UCLA, UCB, and USC carry the weight as Stanford”. </p>
<p>I believe that the students in the Midwest are smart enough to know that a school in the top 25 is prestigious.</p>
<p>As far as losing credibility, you stated “There’s a reason that smart kids in the Midwest apply to state flagships and no one considers it a “failure,””<br>
First off, that isn’t what this subthread is even about. IDK why people need to keep posting things that no one said.
You do know that you can believe that a school like UCLA is prestigious while at the same time also believe that your state flagship is a great prestigious choice, right? They aren’t mutually exclusive.</p>
<p>“Go to the Irish south side of Chicago and the most prestigious school for the smart kids is Notre Dame”</p>
<p>So what? Again, this isn’t about which of the schools is the most prestigious. BTW, since Notre Dame plays USC in football, I would expect that those students know that USC is a good school.</p>
<p>@lookingforward </p>
<p>“How many times they ask things like do I need 3 years of science or when is the deadline,”</p>
<p>I don’t know. But of the 3M seniors, I don’t think it is a large percentage of them. Besides, some of them are smart enough or lazy enough to have other people do their googling for them by posting a question here ;)</p>
<p>^ Fluffy, you said quality of a U and we’ve been talking about schools that ‘carry weight’ with kids. And, why they do. I don’t know if we can assume their true knowledge of a school or that they consider much beyond superficials. Not all and not even all on CC. Certainly not all applying to a highly competitive. </p>
<p>I also think any comments that, as a large geo region, kids in the NE are more driven to HYP, needs to consider the population density, demographics, etc. </p>
<p>(can I call you LF? Lookingforward is too long to type )</p>
<p>The context of the discussion was UCLA, USC, and USB carrying weight vs. Stanford. </p>
<p>I would expect that regardless of geography, if you are applying to Stanford, you are probably aware that their are other colleges in the Top 25 that also have prestige.</p>
<p>As for “true knowledge” of a school, I don’t think anyone gets that knowledge until at least sophomore year of attending that college…and even then, maybe not.</p>
<p>“would expect that regardless of geography, if you are applying to Stanford, you are probably aware that their are other colleges in the Top 25 that also have prestige.”</p>
<p>If that were true, you wouldn’t have so many threads of kids / parents who were “so upset” that they were shut out of HYPSM and have to slum it at sloppy-seconds Vanderbilt, Northwestern, U Chicago, Amherst, etc. The whole POINT is that these are people who DON’T see other colleges as having prestige. </p>
<p>I don’t know if this has already been said, but I think the reason the admit rate is so low is because high school students see Stanford as slightly more accessible/specialised than Harvard. You end up with kids who don’t even consider applying to Harvard who apply to Stanford (a lot of STEM kids).</p>
<p>Stanford admitted 10.8% through SCEA. Their total admit rate was reported as 5.07%. Did they say what percent of the RD applicants (including those deferred to RD from SCEA) were admitted?</p>
<p>It is too expensive and time consuming for the average student to apply to all three schools. These students are buying a lottery ticket for that very, very slim chance of admittance. I highly doubt students are applying to all three. </p>
<p>I would like to clarify “carrying the same weight”. I should have asked, does the average west coast 18 year old student think UCB, UCLA, and USC are as prestigious as Stanford? In the northeast the majority of the students have a warped perception thinking all private universities are better than public universities. Does it differ on the west coast? </p>
<p>I can only speak for my kids’ large very middle class high school in one of the largest very middle class districts in California. The kids who are applying to 4 year colleges know that it is much more difficult to be admitted to Stanford than to UCB, UCLA or USC. From our high school no one gets into Stanford, while every year there are kids going to the other 3. I don’t know about the word “prestigious”, I don’t think the kids think of it that way. These aren’t kids who have a sense about the 1% and making relationships in college that might help them claw their way into it. They know that any of the 4 offers them an excellent education and are happy at UCLA and UCB, but the top kids do keep throwing apps at Stanford every year. (This is the kind of school where every now and then an athlete goes to Princeton, and an occasional kid goes to a top 20 university or LAC out of state, but mostly the top kids end up at a UC.) </p>
While many do apply to all three, many others do not apply to all of HYP. Still others who are also reasonably strong HYP candidates may choose Columbia or Penn (particularly in ED round). We are talking about students choosing their high reaches. While schools like Columbia/Brown etc may lose the yield fight to HYP, they are strong candidates in diluting the number of applicants to HYP. Indeed, there are many more “viable” options for people in the east coast.</p>
<p>You used CAPITAL LETTERS so you must be SERIOUS. </p>
<p>Why do people see things in such BLACK AND WHITE? Yet another straw man argument. No one said that people think that U Chicago and the others you listed have NO prestige, even if they are disappointed they didn’t get into HYPSM.</p>
<p>You keep trying to move the goal posts on this argument.</p>
<p>I’ll say it again. If you are applying to Stanford, you are probably aware that UCLA, USC and UCB are also prestigious universities regardless of what geography you come from.</p>
<p>UCB and UCLA use the same application. They also don’t require recommendations or for you to even send in transcripts unless you are accepted and decide to go there.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>As a data point of one, the public universities are well regarded. The major negative, which is part stereotype, part true, is that the downside is that sometimes it is really hard to get into the required courses since they get filled.</p>
<p>“I’ll say it again. If you are applying to Stanford, you are probably aware that UCLA, USC and UCB are also prestigious universities regardless of what geography you come from.”</p>
<p>Are you on the West Coast, fluffy? Because I think you’re wrong. There are a whole lot of places in the country where these other schools just aren’t on the radar screen, and where “perceptions” are - UCLA and USC are known because of sports teams, USC has a vague “spoiled children” stereotype from years ago, and Berkeley is vaguely hippie-ish. Again, please be clear - I am not “dissing” any of these schools at all. They are all fine schools, and I work for a USC grad who is brilliant But it is silly to think that they are as much on the radar screens of kids elsewhere than kids in California. Perceptions are all regional.</p>
<p>This aspect is something which many aspiring engineering/CS majors are more than happy to ignore even on the East Coast because their departments are perceived even here as at the tippy-top Stanford/CMU/MIT/Caltech level and the California Bay area location is inviting.</p>
<p>Not to mention the hippie-ish factor IS a draw among some of those aspirants. </p>
<p>From working with engineers and computer programmers/techies and having quite a few in my own family, I found they tend to either be hardcore right-leaning libertarians or radical DFHs. </p>
<p>The latter group would definitely find the hippie aspect appealing…even if some who were Berkeley alums feel it’s not radically hippie enough for them. A good place to meet plenty of the DFHs is to attend conventions oriented towards the hardcore Linux programmer/user communities. :)</p>
<p>Also, Steve Wosniak is definitely considered a DFH in many quarters and was a co-founder of Apple and a Berkeley engineering alum. </p>
)</p>
But it is silly to think that they are as much on the radar screens of kids elsewhere than kids in California. Perceptions are all regional.</p>