<p>Reading the posts on this forum tells me that the name/prestige of one's undergraduate university is important in moving on to graduate school. Let's say I'm not from a top university, does it matter whether my university is ranked 160 in the world or not even 500 in the world rankings? Since either way, the university I graduated from isn't top, so would its rank still matter? Say if the university that is ranked 160 is the University of Illinois Chicago and the the other that isn't in the world rankings is a California state university. Would it matter? And which is more pleasing to graduate admissions: average grades at a good university or very, very good grades at a non-prestigious state university? </p>
<p>The undergraduate school is something they look that, but calling it “important” might be too strong. I would say it’s certainly better to be one of the very best at a state school. And besides, they know which schools have good programs in the field, and a lot of them will probably be state schools (“prestigious” schools like ivy league schools are not strong in all fields). You should look at the strength of the specific program you’re interested in at those schools because that’s what they would consider. </p>
<p>When I was at the MIT open house, here were some of the schools that were represented: Cornell, Stanford, Rice, U of Cali Riverside, U of Washington, Northeastern, RPI, Penn State, Vanderbilt, Ohio State U, U of Penn, Johns Hopkins, Berkeley, North Carolina State U, Case Western, UCSB, Cal Tech, Ga. Tech</p>
<p>What about a student who scores very, very well at a California State University (Long Beach or Fullerton) and another student who has averages scores from UIC? I plan to major in philosophy and maybe double major in psychology, history, english or literature. Which student would have a higher chance of gaining admissions to a good graduate school? Thanks!</p>
<p>Depends on what your goals are. If it’s simply to get a PhD, no problem. If it’s to get a PhD from a Top 10 or Top 20 program, major problem. You would probably have to earn a Masters at fairly highly rated program first as an interim step.</p>
<p>While it would certainly make it more challenging, I’m not sure “major problem” is necessarily the case. I’m sure it depends on the field and the program. I went to a no-name undergrad institution (top 200? Probably not. Not bothered to be given a specific rank at least) and was accepted into several top 20 programs. Having said that, I was rejected from a top 10 or two, but a friend from my graduating class got into a top 10 program (slightly better scores and a better GPA).</p>
<p>And a former lab-mate from my undergrad was accepted at Harvard and Stanford, though he had a longer history of research experience than I did. I had about 2 years UG and 2 years as a tech in a “better” institution. So even if you might not need to get an MS from a highly-ranked insitution, consider that all the little details we commonly describe as helpful but not deal-breakers are more crucial for folks in our situations. That means have three great letters, not two and a throwaway letter. It means have post-bac research experience in the best form you can find. Publications aren’t a requirement either, but they will certainly help you stand out. Don’t blow off the GRE, and consider maybe a subject test if people in your field even bother looking at that. Having an average factor in your application doesn’t need to mean having an average application.</p>