Top colleges overrated?

College Search & Selection
21

<p>Weldon, you should be happy you succeeded in pointing out my sentence error. I'm sure that's not quite as pathetic as people who "feel so inadequate that they need to prop themselves up by associating with some name brand".</p>

<p>If you wanna play like that...</p>

<p>"You're quite correct, no matter how much ...etc"</p>

<p>'You're quite correct' is a sentence by itself. Enjoy your run-on. </p>

<p>I do admit however that my last statement was tactless. I take that statement back. Some people like going to schools with the best students in the nation, not going to state schools where they have to sift through 30,000 people to find them. Happy?</p>

22

<p>"Some people might be convinced that the world will become a better place once that admittance to Harvard comes in the mail. Let me be the first to tell you that it won't be."</p>

<p>Really? My world got better. Immensely better. It still is. </p>

<p>That magical school is different for each person, and there might be one or five or twenty that would be magical for a given individual. But the right school sure can make your life better. I could have gotten a fine education at my state school, but I know that I would not feel this love.</p>

23

<p>My guess is that you did not hinge your self-worth on your admittance to Harvard, and is confirmed by your saying you could have found another "right" school. Some people take an admissions decision to an elite school as an all-or-nothing: either I get into the dream school, get the dream girl/guy, and live a happy life for all of eternity, or I get into another school, where I will have a miserable existence for all of eternity.</p>

<p>There's something wonderful about being able to be admitted to and afford an elite school-- at least, there's something in it that's wonderful for me. For the first time in my life, for me specifically, I'm in an environment where I feel accepted and appreciated for exactly the person I am, and I imagine that students at Harvard or another elite school might have a similar experience of connection. </p>

<p>Perhaps I'm a little bit jaded, having spent a good deal of my life around intelligent, wealthy, and well-educated people and not feeling connected to them, so I do not think that, for me, feeling connected to people necessitates that they are intelligent. I also know a lot of intelligent people who went to schools that were not known to produce bright minds, and they too feel a connection to their school that's as intense as the one I feel for mine.</p>

<p>Perhaps it's the universal experience of being away from home and making one's own decisions from top to bottom that makes college life so great? I mean, being "independent" is pretty flippin' sweet.</p>

24

<p>I don't think it's a matter of people, "hinging their self-worth on their admittance to Harvard." I think it's a matter of them hinging the worth of their academic decisions on their admittance, wherein, I see nothing wrong. Some people want to go to a prestigious school with a certain type of social and academic atmosphere. Actually getting in, means that after working for FOUR YEARS to establish an outstanding transcript, you've exemplified such academic fervency that despite the massive applicant pool, you were chosen for admittance to a top school.</p>

<p>There are a lot of great networking opportunities for students at Harvard, which are unavailable to students at X State U. In addition, putting Harvard on your resume doesn't just mean that you went to Such-and-such University. It speaks about your character, in that you were qualified enough to be admitted to, and committed enough to graduate from, such an elite institution.</p>

<p>After going to school for 12+ years, it's nice to know that you've finally made it among the most ambitious and motivated students in the world, rather than fallen into a wormhole of indistinction at a random university.</p>

<p>It's not like Harvard has a nine-percent acceptance rate just to be trendy. I would go so far as to say that the academics are more rigorous at an elite school because again, they are at the top of the US News list for a reason. This is not to discredit the intensity of any state school courses, but is also not to overlook the purpose of elite schools being so selective.</p>

<p>A good portion of it is about pride, yes, but there are lot of great and unique things one can do, a) as an affiliate of an elite school, b) with the financial backing of a multi-billion-dollar-endowed university, c) at a school that undoubtedly has professors who are distinguished in their respective fields and qualified to instruct you with an informed, and perhaps unconventionally conceived curriculum, d) with your newfound sense of completion and establishment in life, and newfound optimism for the quality of your future. Be weary, though; one should not assume that admission into an Ivy guarantees a perfect life.</p>

<p>I hope the person who started this thread is happy at his/her state school, but I question their judgment, if they think that one can get a Harvard education, with Harvard resources and Harvard money, at a state school. I also hope that they learn to recognize ambition with open-mindedness when they see it next, especially if it is in regards to college, one of the most important investments a human can make in life.</p>

25

<p>Grad school is were all the money's at. If you wanna spend the big bucks, do it on something like an MBA or law degree or Medical degrees.</p>

<p>I do think 4 undergrad many schools are overrated (HYPS) and other schools like UCHICAGO, WUSTL, and JHU and stuff are underrated.</p>

<p>I do believe that most top privates will give better undergrad than top publics because of size and stuff, but it is all up to the person.</p>

<p>And i think Liberal arts colleges are way underrated. I can say with 100% confidence that multiple top LACs will give a better undergrad than harvard, hands down</p>

26

<p>BIGTWIX,</p>

<p>First off, the rank of your med school is, relative to other fields, not meaningful. Your USMLE scores are far more meaningful.</p>

<p>That said, I suppose I could chime in here for a bit. I graduated from one of the "top" schools in the country, and I go to a program that's pretty highly ranked in my field. I can't tell you how many times I've been interviewed (even at top employers) by people with degrees from schools I scoffed at when choosing my undergrad.</p>

<p>The two reasons for "elite" universities I commonly see on this site are:</p>

<ol>
<li> Elite grad schools are packed with top school grads.</li>
<li> Merrill-Lynch, et al. won't give you a job unless you go to school X, Y, or Z.</li>
</ol>

<p>Number one is undoubtedly true. There are far more Harvard and Yale grads in the PhD/law/med programs at Harvard and Yale than there are OSU grads. However, this could be for a number of reasons. The average Harvard grad is more likely to be a butt-kicking machine than the average OSU grad (the numbers alone should tell us this.) However, look at UCLA. Something like 40% of the undergrads had SAT scores over 700 in both sections. Quantitatively, there's very little difference. The big difference, however, may be character traits or some other intangibles. In the end, though, it's impossible to say what's the primary reason for the way that grad admissions parse out thanks to the many confounding variables. </p>

<p>As for number 2, I kind of have to laugh. For one, I don't think most 17-year-olds (no matter how awesome their stats are) really know what they want in life. I'm in my mid-20's, and my career goals have changed a few times. Of course it's nice to have top recruiters at your campus looking to hire you, but you know what? I know just as many burnt out and miserable employees at the super great Vault ranked uber-firms as I know happy ones. </p>

<p>I, for one, would never find any joy in a high-powered finance career. So where's the loss to me? </p>

<p>If you're awesome, you'll be awesome at Harvard or MIT or Berkeley or UC Merced. Nothing will stop you from kicking butt once you get out there. Yeah, you might have to work a bit harder for the first few years if you don't have that starting edge, but a few years of work experience and good recommendations can more than make up for the school name on your resume.</p>

<p>And really, out of the 5 past interviews I've had, only one asked me about my alma mater. The rest were more interested in what I'd bring to the company as an individual.</p>

<p>That's the kicker, huh? The onus of responsibility is ultimately on YOU, not whichever school's coattails you get to ride on. Besides, both rich schools and poor schools are going to be hounding you for money for the rest of your lives. You're just a perpetuity to all of them. :)</p>

27

<p>I won't deny the fact that the top colleges offer fantastic educations; after all, that's where the prestige comes from. However, some places such as Harvard are better options for grad school, as they don't focus too much on their undergrads. I personally think LAC's offer the best undergrad education; they are underrated if anything. But at the end of the day, your education is what you make of it, your life is what you make of it. It's possible to cure cancer even if you go to Podunk university. Basically, not getting an education at one of HYP is not a be-all end-all.</p>

28

<p>For me, the draw of a top school was always the resources. I doubt that I would have had the same options overall had I gone to Cal State LA instead of UCLA.</p>

29

<p>"some places such as Harvard are better options for grad school, as they don't focus too much on their undergrads."</p>

<p>What are you basing this on? This truism is repeated all the time on these boards with a vague secondhand source or none at all. I never hear this from people who went to Harvard for both undergrad and grad, who are really in a position to compare the two. There were about 80 of them in my law school class alone, and I do not know a single one who would agree with you.</p>

30

<p>
[quote]
I find it really unnerving that you characterize somebody who disagrees with you as somebody with a soapbox and an agenda to push forward.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Who said I was talking about you, or about all people who disagree with me? But a soapbox doesn't require you to be an extremist who thinks that elite schools are terrible places, it just requires that you're speechifying about your opinions. I get on a soapbox on CC sometimes, for sure. :) And I would say that the OP of this thread is very much on a soapbox, yes.</p>

<p>I do find the "It doesn't matter where you go to school because [subject] is [subject], no matter the venue in which you take it" argument to be completely invalid. [subject], whatever it happens to be, can be taught in different ways, cover different amounts of material, and go into different amounts of depth. Tests on [subject] can skim the surface, or require true understanding. That doesn't mean that big name schools necessarily give you a better instruction in [subject] - maybe they do, maybe they don't, maybe (most likely) it depends on the school, and what subject [subject] is. But it does mean that it's silly to claim that it doesn't matter where you go to school to study [subject].</p>

<p>The elite school that I attended altered the course of my life, permanently, drastically, and, I think, for the better (though not without a significant amount of pain). If you tell me that my school choice didn't matter, I will laugh at you. I know it's not true. If you tell me that I could have had just as much growth and just as intense an experience at my state school, I will also laugh at you. That doesn't mean, of course, that everyone should want to go to my school. Different environments will click for different people. Different academic styles and emphases will click for different people. My quarrel is with the people who make blanket statements about how [LACs/state schools/large research universities/HYPSM] are "better" for an undergraduate education and don't take into account that "better" means different things to different people, and the people who make assumptions about others' priorities and put down their choices.</p>

<p>And I just felt like parodying the themes and subtexts that seem to come up over and over in these discussions. :)</p>

31

<p>jessiehl,</p>

<p>I agree with you to a point. I think that the problem with ALL of these arguments is, of course, the path dependency inherent in our personal experiences.</p>

32

<p>^^ Agree.</p>

<p>I must say that the soapbox I am standing on one is an unusual one. I simply wanted the best and most rigorous undergraduate education I could find, bar none. I don't believe my school holds that title, actually (I think Reed College wins for most rigorous, scourge-your-brains-with-a-brillo-pad intense academics), but it was the only school that was both off the beaten path enough for me and acceptable to East Coast style family and friends. (Reed was out of the question because it was West Coast).</p>

<p>I think BantamBoy articulated the clear-cut advantages of going to an elite college quite nicely.</p>

<p>
[quote]
great and unique things one can do, a) as an affiliate of an elite school, b) with the financial backing of a multi-billion-dollar-endowed university, c) at a school that undoubtedly has professors who are distinguished in their respective fields and qualified to instruct you with an informed, and perhaps unconventionally conceived curriculum, d) with your newfound sense of completion and establishment in life, and newfound optimism for the quality of your future.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>These things, to me, were all relative detractors to the college experience, as they all struck me as bonuses of entitlement. I wanted to go to a college, not a country club.</p>

33

<p>Someone earlier brought up a good point. It's not that those top 25 ranked schools aren't awesome schools. It's that people don't realize that all the top 100 ranked schools are awesome schools. And it's not only limited to those top 100.</p>