Undergrad. Major Rankings Questions

College Search & Selection
161

<p>Damn, another pile of posts while I was watching “Project Runway”. Let me touch upon what Lex has summed up nicely. While I agree that money wise there may be no discernable, immediate benefit of attending WCUs or no name LACish . There are very real benefits that can last long in your life time.</p>

<p>Three things:</p>

<p>1) Prestige: if you’re an engineer from WCU, people around or above you will recognize and respect you. This is a very positive factor because it will in turn give you an edge for consideration in future promotion, and lucrative oversee deployment with all other fringe benefits that come with it. Let’s be real here. If you get a job outside CA or TX, and you’re a graduate from Mudd or Rice, then your colleagues (or your boss) will go like “What, Hmmm, I’ve never heard of it (scratch their heads)… must be a good school…. Awkward silence followed by more awkward smile,,, then silently walk away”. Let’s be honest. LACish simply don’t have the name recognition outside of their immediate surrounding states!!!
2) World-Class Education: Like I said many times, college education is not all about making more money, getting a better job, but it’s about preparing you for a better citizen, a better world denizen, and finding yourself within – this is happening more frequently in WCU than high-school like LACish settings. Still having a doubt or two? Look at the list of the WCU again, pause for a moment, and then think about all the accomplishments (academic & non-academic impact) that those schools have made in last 50 years or so. Then, only then, you will see what I mean by “World-Class University”.
3) I am done with this thread. Find me in another thread!!!</p>

162

<p>Carnegie Mellon engineers, like other majors, enjoy amazing job networking here. The avg for Chem Engineering for example is $60,000+ median and the same goes for IS and even Statistics. ECE is a bit more and CS enjoys over 70k. Business is tied with MIT-Sloan and Upenn-Wharton as the highest median base salary of 55k (bonuses not included).</p>

163

<p>Rabban: "Look at the list of the WCU again, pause for a moment, and then think about all the accomplishments (academic & non-academic impact) that those schools have made in last 50 years or so. Then, only then, you will see what I mean by “World-Class University”."</p>

<p>Except that the subject is the BA/BS <em>graduates</em> of LACs vs. WCUs, not the schools themselves, and how the LAC graduates excel while attending graduate school <em>at</em> the WCUs.</p>

164

<p>Berea, Grinnell, Rice and Wabash</p>

<p>Alexandre, but these schools all LOSE in other areas when compared to the schools we are discussing (Penn, etc) such as recruiting, selectivity (ie student quality), reputation, alumni support, grad placement, etc. You have to throw in all these elements, the issue is you are always trying to rank based on one criterion.</p>

<p>Michigan LOSES in endowment/ student and selectivity (plus other areas) which is why it is lower than Penn, Columbia, and company. When Michigan is as rich per student and as selective as these schools it will be in the top 15. Until then, its not.</p>

165

<p>Slipper, Rice does not lose out in any way. In terms of selectivity, overall reputation, graduate school and professional placement, alumni network etc...Plus, it has an endowment per student roughly twice to three times larger than Brown, Columbia, Cornell, Duke and Penn.</p>

<p>At any rate Slipper, there is absolutely no difference in overall quality between Michigan, Northwestern, Cornell, Columbia and Penn. Michigan has alternate sources of income which more than compensates for the slight disadvantage it has in endowment per student, and even if that weren't enough, Economies of scale take care of the rest. And no, cheaper tuition for in-staters does not curb those advantages because Michigan offers far less in way of scholarships and merit aid than its private peers. At the end of the day, Michigan costs as much to attend as its private peers. But I repeat, the gap in endowment per students between Michigan and its private peers is narrowing at an alarming rate, from 200%-400% 20 years ago to 20%-40% today. Unless you believe the last 20 years' trend is not sustainable, Michigan's endowment per student will soon overtake most of its private peers.</p>

<p>Quality of student body has never really been an issue either. Yes, the bottom quarter of Michigan's student body is weaker than those at the private elites, but many of those are students enrolled in the schools of Nursing, Kinesiology, Art, Music etc... Those students may not be the most academically inclined, but they add much to the school culture and experience. And like I said, the gap is narrowing in that regard too.</p>

166

<p>Alexandre, the gap might be narrowing but its far from there. And, no, I do not believe Michigan will ever catch up and once it does I will be the first to welcome it to the club. </p>

<p>As for Rice, it is competitive with the lower end of the category and, as such, is between Michigan and the better schools in the category mentioned. It isn't nearly as selective as the category best, such as Columbia, nor does it have the reputation with recruiters or placement of most of those schools. but its endowment keeps it in the running. Take that away from it (or Emory) and both Rice and Emory fall in the rankings.</p>

167

<p>The proportions of students that major in social sciences and other non-vocational fields are probaby similar between Mich and Dartmouth (and other top state schools and elite private schools)</p>

168

<p>
[quote]
1) Prestige: if you’re an engineer from WCU, people around or above you will recognize and respect you. This is a very positive factor because it will in turn give you an edge for consideration in future promotion, and lucrative oversee deployment with all other fringe benefits that come with it. Let’s be real here. If you get a job outside CA or TX, and you’re a graduate from Mudd or Rice, then your colleagues (or your boss) will go like “What, Hmmm, I’ve never heard of it (scratch their heads)… must be a good school…. Awkward silence followed by more awkward smile,,, then silently walk away”. Let’s be honest. LACish simply don’t have the name recognition outside of their immediate surrounding states!!!

[/quote]
</p>

<p>So what if they don't have the name recognition? What's so good about name recognition if you are not rewarded for it?</p>

<p>Case in point. Even an engineering graduate from a no-name school will make more money than a liberal arts grad from one of your WCU's. Take a look at the salaries of, English majors from Berkeley. Compare that to the average nationwide salaries of engineers, from all schools, and from the no-name schools. Even an engineering graduate from Michigan Tech makes significantly more than an English grad from Berkeley. Hence, who really cares that you have such a prestigious degree? The guy from the no-name school is laughing all the way to the bank. </p>

<p>
[quote]
2) World-Class Education: Like I said many times, college education is not all about making more money, getting a better job, but it’s about preparing you for a better citizen, a better world denizen, and finding yourself within – this is happening more frequently in WCU than high-school like LACish settings. Still having a doubt or two? Look at the list of the WCU again, pause for a moment, and then think about all the accomplishments (academic & non-academic impact) that those schools have made in last 50 years or so. Then, only then, you will see what I mean by “World-Class University”.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Oh? From a per-capita basis, who is getting more PhD's, Mudd undergrads or Berkeley undergrads? From a per-capita basis, who is doing better salary-wise, the Mudd grads or the Berkeley grads?</p>

<p>The truth is, Berkeley has a long tail-end of rather mediocre students. Sad but true. And the fact is, these people aren't exactly going to accomplish a whole lot. </p>

<p>Hence, I strongly dispute that the WCU's are categorically preparing students better to be good citizens, or whatever criteria you want to use, relative to the elite LAC's., for the simple fact that a lot of the students at certain WCU's (i.e. Berkeley) will not do much at all.</p>

169

<p>No one knows Berkeley. I swear to you, outside of California people think its a slightly better than okay school. Go to an Ivy and its instant credibility. This has nothing to do with the rank of graduate programs, and everything to do with selectivity and historical reputation and contacts.</p>

170

<p>Slipper, that's completely untrue. Berkeley is known all over. It's reputation is second to none. And I never understood what you mean by "instant credibility". Are you saying that you are willing to judge a person based on where they went to college? That's pretty shallow isn't it?</p>

171

<p>I hate to say it but it happens everyday. Even in their 40s people discuss it. And Berkeley is not competitive this regard outside of California.</p>

172

<p>Never happens. I know much more about this than you Slipper. I deal with HR issues at the stratospheric level. I spend hundreds of working hours on this annually. Nobody who is worth anything will ever judge anybody based on where they earned their degree. NEVER! Yes, it helps land us that first jobs. Thanks to the fact that we attended World Claass universites, we had great and lucrative offers from the most exclusive of companies before we even graduated. But that does not mean that we are judged as superior simply because we attended great universities. Where it really counts, it is our actions and our ability to "finish" that have earned us our success...not the name of our undergraduate institutions. You are right, even in their 40s, people discuss it. I always get it when I interview...even today. My two universities intimidate most people. But then we get to the nitty gritty and they ask me technical questions. It is my answers to those technical questions that will get me the job...that and my composure. My universities only serve to confirm that I am good at what I do, but even without them, I would still land those jobs.</p>

<p>As for Cal not having as great a reputation outside of California, so what? Does Dartmouth have as great a reputation outside of the Northeast? Or Chicago outside of the Midwest? But where it really matters, among the educated elites, Cal is as highly respected as they come.</p>

173

<p>Cal grad more than Cal ugrad. The same goes for Umich Grad > Umich ugrad. I think UVA is the best flagship for ugrad focus based on them having the lowest % of transfer CC kids. 23% or whatever of CC kids at Cal is a bit too much in my opinion.</p>

174

<p>Dartmouth, Columbia, Brown, Duke work everywhere in the US. Chicago not as much. Cal isn't in the same ballpark.</p>

<p>HR at the ELITE companies DO look for Ivy grads. But this isn't what I am referring to. In my work which is media venture capital UNDERGRAD school comes up every day. It was this way at my internship, my previous job, and when I vet companies its in every single "management team" biography.</p>

175

<p>i think people in states that dont have amazing state schools dont realize that public schools can be top notch. for example, in my suburban new england hometown, people going off to uva, michigan, etc get the same reaction as those who go to uconn, which is a great school but obviously not in the same category as the aforementioned.</p>

176

<p>slipper,</p>

<p>Working in Washington, D.C. I met tons of people with dinky West Coast degrees. Even ::GASP:: UCLA and USC!</p>

<p>Degrees only take you so far. The rest is all you. People on this board don't realize how far a driven human being can go without a name-brand.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I swear to you, outside of California people think its a slightly better than okay school.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>This is just silly and untrue.</p>

177

<p>I agree with your first point BUT what I am saying is if a guy walks in with an Ivy degree, its his meeting to lose. When a guy went to Suny whatever he needs to impress. Of course there are SUNY grad who are much more impressive than Columbia grads, but the Columbia grad gets the benefit of the doubt.</p>

<p>You can;t control life, but you CAN give yourself the best possible shot at every opportunity. This is what going to an Ivy (and similar ) does bottom line.</p>

178

<p>slipper,</p>

<p>No, a Cal degree is not an advantage over most Ivy degrees. Except maybe Brown and Dartmouth, who don't fare quite as well in California.</p>

<p>However, it's also not a door-closer. It won't preclude you from getting ANY job. This is what people on this site don't bloody get. Just because you have a degree from "ZOMG BROWN!" doesn't mean that employers just walk over and hire you without putting you through the gauntlet. I have plenty of Ivy League-grad friends who have learned that lesson. </p>

<p>Cal offers advantages over the Ivies, even if you can't see them. For one, it offers a great location, a fairly decent nearby job market, and a good sticker price for many.</p>

<p>Another thing that many many people on this board don't realize is how many people from California simply will not leave California. Why? Who wants to? We're spoiled! I may have a degree ahead of me that will get me in at top firms across the country, but I ain't leaving! I'm looking for a job right here in SoCal. Enjoy your winters, East Coasters, while I go surfing.</p>

<p>And yeah, I'll take a pay cut.</p>

179

<p>UCLA you are totally right. In california UCLA an Cal are solid gold. I could not agree with you more. But its nice to hear someone honestly talk about Cal's benefits instead of some 16 year old trying to say its equal to Columbia or Dartmouth.</p>

<p>I myself have a Columbia MBA and in New York a Columbia MBA=Harvard MBA, but I learned fast that in SoCal UCLA MBA>Columbia MBA.</p>

<p>I don't think Californians understand how amazing the Ivy/ Northeast college experience is, but on the othehand I now live in NYC and I would LOVE to live in SoCal.</p>

180

<p>slipper,</p>

<p>I also tend to be a bit irritated by the fairly palpable anti-California vein that runs through a lot of this site.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I don't think Californians understand how amazing the Ivy/ Northeast college experience is

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Well, I did seriously consider the East Coast for grad school (and London), but in the end, I want to live in SoCal. Oh, and in-state tuition helped. Heh.</p>

<p>But hey, West Coast can also be a very amazing experience, particularly for the East Coasters. A buddy of mine at UCLA was from Jersey, and couldn't get over the idea of a warm winter. :p</p>