Top tier school?

<p>I’ll add my two cents to the discussion. I’ve both a Ivy grad degree and a local university BS degree. I’ve experienced plenty of introductions that start out as “X, our HYP grad…”, well into middle-age with gray hair when school pedigrees aren’t supposed to matter. (And I don’t mention the grad school unless specifically asked.)</p>

<p>On other hand, neither university had an effective career placement office, but the local university’s professors were very proficient in placing students in internships and first jobs thru their own connections with local businesses and industries. Those professors took a strong interest in strong students, much more so than Ivy grad school’s professors (many who were snobby and self-important, and enjoyed harassing female students).</p>

<p>I always say my education reflected the “ying and yang” of two entirely different institutions, where the strengths of one were the weakness of the other, and vice versa. Neither was perfect or complete in education experience. However, there are far more young HYP grads who feel entitled to accelerated career advancement than local U grads, but that’s an altogether difference discussion.</p>

<p>One of the hallmarks of the critical thinker is the ability and the willingness to consider evidence that runs counter to dearly held beliefs, and reconsider those beliefs in the light of the new evidence. </p>

<p>ah , but the only “evidence” you are interested in is written only by those outside CC. I include the 'evidence" that hundreds of posters on CC have posted over the years when forming a judgement. So who has the blind spot?</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Actually, I have changed my mind on several matters based on the compendium of the published papers I have been citing.</p>

<p>I used to maintain that where you went to undergrad didn’t matter economically beyond your first job. I now accept that for the most highly selective colleges, there is evidence that the economic benefits continue throughout one’s working career. (Though not as much as a lot of people think.)</p>

<p>I also used to believe that educationally, it didn’t matter at all where you went to college (with a few outlying exceptions at the bottom). I now accept that there are institutional characteristics that can affect the quality of the education delivered. (Although they’re not the ones that everybody gets excited about, and there are no reliable data that a prospective student can use to tease out which schools have them and which don’t.)</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Another hallmark of the critical thinker is the ability to assess evidence and determine its validity. </p>

<p>So yes, I will give far more weight to evidence published by people who are not afraid to do so under their real names, who are trained and experienced educational researchers - evidence which is based on published and often widely available data, that has been tested for statistical significance, that has been vetted by juried publication processes, and which has been exposed to critical review post-publication by other professional educators - than I will to anonymous postings that have not been vetted by anyone other than the poster, that rely on data that may or not have been created from whole cloth, that has not been examined for statistical significance, and that has not been subject to any critical review (other than unsupported opinions by other anonymous posters).</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>In response to my question:
Quote:
if they all cost the same amount, are you directing the future art historian to UConn??
what you said was:</p>

<p>

…</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>This is a generalization. It has little or nothing to do with finding the best possible education for an individual student - like the hypothetical art history major, or a future MD/PhD student. There are not 3,000 schools where those particular students can get an education appropriate for their future goals.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Which does not equate to:</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>“One of the hallmarks of the critical thinker is the ability and the willingness to consider evidence that runs counter to dearly held beliefs, and reconsider those beliefs in the light of the new evidence.” </p>

<p>funny, you wont change your mind when other posters cite papers that run counter to your dearly held beliefs. And of course you wont consider any evidence that hasnt been “published”. So you miss out on lots of information because of your own blind spot. Too bad. </p>

<p>Time to close down this thread as it has run its course.</p>

<h1>166</h1>

<p>seriously?
:(</p>

<p>annasdad. CC was created for '"anonymous " posters to share their experiences, questions, wisdom and information they have gathered about colleges, not for posters who want to disparage those anonymous posters and the information and knowledge they share. </p>

<p>I think its time for you to find another forum where you can post your research and lecture a more gullible audience.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>What papers would those be? The one that was published by the website where undergrads publish each others’ papers? For that one, I evaluated the validity of the evidence, based on the criteria I listed a few posts ago, and decided that it bore little weight against 30 years of juried, published research by professional education researchers.</p>

<p>For the article posted by thumper1, I acknowledged the validity of the research, but suggested that it was not strictly on point with the topic under discussion.</p>

<p>Show me research that contradicts what I have posted, and I will evaluate it.</p>

<p>Why not take the same tack yourself. Instead of just “Oh, can’t be any good, it contradicts the wit and wisdom of CC postings,” why don’t you engage it and tell us specifically what’s wrong with the methodology or the analysis of the data, or find contradictory research from equally reliable sources?</p>

<p>Answering my own question, I suspect that there are three answers: (1) it’s harder, (2) there really isn’t any research out there that qualifies, and (3) it’s much more fun for you to hide between your mask of anonymity and make ad hominem remarks.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Of course I will consider it. I will not change my mind, however, unless it makes a compelling case. So how is that a “blind spot?”</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I don’t disparage any anonymous posters; I do call into question the validity of anonymously posted unsubstantiated data and opinions when those conflict with far more reliable sources.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>(a) It’s not my research; I haven’t done any of it and indeed, would not be qualified to; (b) The gullible ones, in my opinion, are those who swallow whole the mythology when there is ample evidence that that emperor is running around buck naked (to mix a metaphor) (c) I ain’t going anywhere.</p>

<p>I see. what other posters post here is mythology then?</p>

<p>"I ain’t going anywhere. "</p>

<p>we’ll see about that…</p>

<p>annasdad: It seems to me the very authoritative way in which you present your “research” might lead some not-so-well-informed parents to use your posts as a rationale for sending their child to the least expensive college possible, regardless of whether it has appropriate resources for their particular child’s interests, since:</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>How do you feel about that? Any concerns at all?</p>

<p>Maybe you honestly believe it really doesn’t make much difference where most students go to college. You think it doesn’t matter for any?</p>

<p>Gee, I think ennumerating all the senators, congressmen and presidents that graduated from “top tier” (i.e., Ivy and Baby Ivy) schools is a good argument for State universities. IMHO.</p>

<p>“I do call into question the validity of anonymously posted unsubstantiated data and opinions”</p>

<p>this is a internet forum. we dont have to “vet” our opinions, ie get verification from some publisher, in order for them to be “valid.”</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Let me turn that around.</p>

<p>How do you feel about “not-so-well-informed parents” going into debt to send their kids to a prestigious and expensive (or just expensive!) college, because of the mythology that prestige and cost correlate with educational quality, when the weight of the scholarly evidence is clear that no such correlation exists - and when those kids have other, much cheaper options, where they can get just as good an education?</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>mythology: A set of stories or beliefs about a particular person, institution, or situation, esp. when exaggerated or fictitious.</p>

<p>Not everything here is mythology, certainly. But the set of stories or beliefs about the a presumed correlation between prestige/cost/selectivity/resources and educational quality is clearly exaggerated and fictitious.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>No, of course not, but when those opinions contradict the weight of scholarly research, their validity becomes very much in question. Clearly, anyone is free to make their own evaluation and give whatever weight they want to any evidence they choose.</p>

<h1>176 No, please don’t turn it around. Do you have any concerns about the impact of your posts?</h1>

<p>But the set of stories or beliefs about the a presumed correlation between prestige/cost/selectivity/resources and educational quality is clearly exaggerated and fictitious. </p>

<p>no, thats only your opinion, based on what your choose to believe.
Once again, you are sitting in judgement and making pronouncements regarding what others have posted here.
That has no value on this forum.</p>