<p>Hehe. Some folks do consider U-Michigan a lesser school.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>^As a Duke graduate, and a very proud father of a daughter who attends a third tier university (Kansas State) and is about to enter veterinary school (read: harder to get into than medical school), I feel reasonably well qualified to characterize kellybkkās comment as absolute nonsense.</p>
<p>In the past 35 plus years not a single person has asked where I went to undergrad school. Grad school yes, but more often it was (is), who did you train with?</p>
<p>Iām going to exercise my right to no restraint, and just point out a small fallacy in reasoning to the Duke grad by way of an example:</p>
<p>Harvardās selectivity was lower (a greater fraction) than Northeasternās this year. By your reasoning, Northeastern is the harder school to get into.</p>
<p>^Iām not sure how you drew this conclusion from my post. My point was simply to echo what the OP originally said: that a smart, motivated student need not attend a top tier school in order to excel.</p>
<p>kellybkk is a young child who hasnāt experienced enough in life to know what she is saying. Ten years from now, maybe sooner, she will probably be embarrassed by her naivete.</p>
<p>what Kelly feels about brand-name schools is rather prevalent with college age students these days. so, maybe us older people are missing the point, maybe this college age generation will be asking about your undergrad school and using an āappreciative nodā in the future. We are coloring are comments by the fact that people in the past didnāt care much about where you went to school, maybe thatās changed.</p>
<p>If it has changed, we are to blame. Because itās us who have put so much emphasis on brand name colleges, weāre the ones that made where your kid goes to college the new āstatus symbolā. It use to be your country club, or your house, or your car, or your ranch in montana, but now itās my kid is going to Duke or Harvard. College brand names have become the new status symbols!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What would be his incentive to work harder at a first tier college? Every college has groups of student who simply do the minimum and if heās naturally smart, then he can do it too. I would be far less likely to invest money in someone who is not showing enthusiam for the challenge. Show the motivation first, then the reward. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There is a big difference in that grad schools are actively looking for a wide variety of students. One stat that comes to mind is that Harvard medical school accepts about 150 students each year from approx 60 undergrad programs. Thatās a wider swath of schools than I think most people would guess. </p>
<p>I am open to the idea that grad school names can matter but it also becomes more specialized. A third tier university can possess a top grad program.</p>
<p>I agree with m.s. I went to state schools for UG and grad, but then taught & worked at Wellesley & then H for 12+ years. To this day, that credential gets me recognition and interviews. Then they ask about publications, and rarely ask about anything else. </p>
<p>I suspect that someone could emphasize any school or job that brings the most name recognition. It would be just as ācoolā to talk about working in Silicon Valley as to talk of college experience.</p>
<p>What matters to adults is what happened AFTER undergrad; what advanced degrees you got, or where you worked, or most importantly, what you have accomplished. If the height of your achievement in life (and from where you garner the biggest status or ego boost), is where you got into undergradā¦well, that doesnāt say much about your undergrad education then. And, in our world at least, it would be a bit embarassing to make it into somethingā¦sort of like those old beer bellied men who still talk about their days as a track star in HSā¦it just seems kinda sad, as if nothing greater happened since then, they are has-beens. </p>
<p>And I think if you live in a world where your undergrad is considered a big accomplishment, maybe that matters. I dunno. In our world, itās considered ājust an undergradā and no one really cares (and everyone assumes their kids will do more than just an undergrad-- likely with more advanced degrees or in meaningful occupations). Just like HS is not a big deal, nor is undergrad (unless you ran into someone who went there too and you had stories to share). </p>
<p>No one has ever asked me about or noticed my undergrad or mastersā degree-- ever- but where I got my PhD and where I have taught is meaningful in my professional world (as a professor). Likewise, if my kid became a doctor, where he works or did his residency, would be obviously more part of his ābrandingā and what people care about than his undergrad degree. And so on.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Really? The professors are better? In which department and on what basis do you know this to be true? Just cracks me up because I work closely with faculty at both. No offense to my colleagues, but they- at both institutions- would agree that there is no basis whatsoever to suggest professors at one teach better than at the other.</p>
<p>One of the guys I play tennis with is a recent grad from a third-tier public. He works alongside lots of students from the best schools in the Boston area. They rib him about his school. He ribs them about their loans. Heās a very bright and athletic kid that emigrated from Pakistan. Iām sure that he would have done fine at any school.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Boston College has really nice grounds, libraries, atmosphere, etc. Itās a nice campus for sure but strictly speaking, there is a lot of money spent that doesnāt directly contribute to academics. Iāve been to Duke and it is nice. One thing that isnāt is the angry studies department.</p>
<p>I know a guy who got his Masterās degree from Stanford. People have even more respect for him once they found out he graduated from Fresno Stateā¦</p>
<p>āReally? The professors are better? In which department and on what basis do you know this to be true?ā</p>
<p>So, your argument is that everything is the same. Profs at Duke or Baylor or wherever are all the same. that everything is the same in the academic teaching world. that all teaching abilities and qualities are equal. that cracks me up:)</p>
<p>At Duke, are professors rewarded more for their research or their teaching?</p>
<p>At my sonās school, research is clearly far more important than teaching ability. I think that this isnāt all that uncommon in public and private schools.</p>
<p>BC, Iām trying to understand your points. is it 1) that people are angry at Duke? is that like related to the LaCrosse incident or something and 2) rewarded for researchā¦is that bad or good? I think you mean itās bad because it takes away from classroom teaching. I agree, I think if youāre taught mainly by TAās then you are missing out on what the prof could be teaching you. Of course, on the other hand the profs research could lead to advances that would be helpful to learn, probably a balance of both research and in classroom teaching is best</p>
<p>Anger Studies refers to the majors that end in āstudiesā. Many professors in these majors persecuted the Duke Lacrosse kids and some have been promoted since.</p>
<p>I think that being rewarded for research is a good thing. There is much less hand-holding in the real worlds and I think that many kids thrive in a sink-or-swim environment. Iām fine with TAs - you often donāt work with the best communicators in the real world. You might be working with people all over the world and have to get used to bad accents.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Ha, I like that. It does sometimes seem as though ā[Whatever] Studiesā are mostly about how rotten everyone has been to [whatever] people. Which is a legit thing to study, by the way. Itās just that the people who speak for those fields just seem so sour and humorless sometimes.</p>
<p>I apologize for this being off-topic from this threadās intent, but in fairness to these āstudiesā programs, they have lead to some important changes. Duke, for example, has commendably faced many tough issues around the treatment of women on campus. [url=<a href=āhttp://www.dukenews.duke.edu/2006/09/posters.html]Challengingā>http://www.dukenews.duke.edu/2006/09/posters.html]Challenging</a> the Image of Duke Parties<a href=āsee%20also%20this%20from%20a%20few%20years%20ago%20to%20see%20the%20need:%20%5Burl=Music Newsā>/url</a></p>
<p>One reason some of these studies programs describe how rotten the group being studied has been treated is because the group has, and often still is treated poorly, and no one else will talk about it.</p>