<p>From a young age, you hear about the elite schools in America: Brown, Yale, Harvard, etc. They are featured in countless movies and are considered the pinnacle of American Colleges. I know that this thread may raise some issues with people, paticularly people enrolled or who have graduated from Ivies, but I have a question, Are the Ivies really as good as people say they are? I have heard many stories from Ivy League students about how these schools are really not the best, that TA's teach the majority of underclassmen courses, that the social aspect is relatively boring, the community is not diverse (in race as well as class)? Are these true? Are the Ivies become schools that just have presitgious names or are their academics still superior to that of most other schools.</p>
<p>only the hypscm, the rest of the schools are pretty much the same as every other school in the top 50 in us news, it just comes to personal preference</p>
<p>There's another thread ( <a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=301840%5B/url%5D">http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=301840</a> ) referring to the article linked below about how HYP have tried to protect their "brand name" though the 20th century. It's not about taking the best students (as in a meritocracy), it's about picking the future leaders and future successful alums in various segments of society without favoring one segment (Jews, Asians) over another (Wasps). And why student athletes and legacies are still highly preferred. An interesting read.</p>
<p>The one thing the article refers to is the study by Alan Krueger and Stacy Dale which basically says if you are good enough to get into the Ivy League, you can go anywhere and be just as successful. This part of the article is represented below.</p>
<p>Social scientists distinguish between what are known as treatment effects and selection effects. The Marine Corps, for instance, is largely a treatment-effect institution. It doesn't have an enormous admissions office grading applicants along four separate dimensions of toughness and intelligence. It's confident that the experience of undergoing Marine Corps basic training will turn you into a formidable soldier. A modelling agency, by contrast, is a selection-effect institution. You don't become beautiful by signing up with an agency. You get signed up by an agency because you're beautiful.</p>
<p>At the heart of the American obsession with the Ivy League is the belief that schools like Harvard provide the social and intellectual equivalent of Marine Corps basic training—that being taught by all those brilliant professors and meeting all those other motivated students and getting a degree with that powerful name on it will confer advantages that no local state university can provide. Fuelling the treatment-effect idea are studies showing that if you take two students with the same S.A.T. scores and grades, one of whom goes to a school like Harvard and one of whom goes to a less selective college, the Ivy Leaguer will make far more money ten or twenty years down the road.</p>
<p>The extraordinary emphasis the Ivy League places on admissions policies, though, makes it seem more like a modeling agency than like the Marine Corps, and, sure enough, the studies based on those two apparently equivalent students turn out to be flawed. How do we know that two students who have the same S.A.T. scores and grades really are equivalent? It's quite possible that the student who goes to Harvard is more ambitious and energetic and personable than the student who wasn't let in, and that those same intangibles are what account for his better career success. To assess the effect of the Ivies, it makes more sense to compare the student who got into a top school with the student who got into that same school but chose to go to a less selective one. Three years ago, the economists Alan Krueger and Stacy Dale published just such a study. And they found that when you compare apples and apples the income bonus from selective schools disappears.</p>
<p>"As a hypothetical example, take the University of Pennsylvania and Penn State, which are two schools a lot of students choose between," Krueger said. "One is Ivy, one is a state school. Penn is much more highly selective. If you compare the students who go to those two schools, the ones who go to Penn have higher incomes. But let's look at those who got into both types of schools, some of whom chose Penn and some of whom chose Penn State. Within that set it doesn't seem to matter whether you go to the more selective school. Now, you would think that the more ambitious student is the one who would choose to go to Penn, and the ones choosing to go to Penn State might be a little less confident in their abilities or have a little lower family income, and both of those factors would point to people doing worse later on. But they don't."</p>
<p>This is a legit question, although I am sure it will cause some argument. I can only tell you what I think--I am certainly not the authority. But here goes: I think that the problem with the Ivies is not that they are not wonderful institutions--by and large, I think that they are. It is that in the minds of some people, they are the college equivalent of the Garden of Eden--perfect, sinless, holy grail-type institutions. This is a standard that no institution can stand up to, and so the backlash is incredible at well. Not everyone who goes to an Ivy will be happy with their experience--just like every other college. Some people who go will be estatically in love with their experience--just like every other college. For some people, in some situations, I am sure that all those complaints that you list are true and valid. These institutions aren't perfect, and if you think or expect them to be as such you will most likely be disappointed. </p>
<p>I am still a senior in high school, and so I can give no first hand experience. But are these excellent academic institutions? I think so. It is hard to devalue the benefits of a college filled with some of the top young students (notice I said some, not all) who are learning from some of the top minds in each field. </p>
<p>The Ivies aren't the only excellent institutions--everyone will have a different opinion on how many other schools are on the same level, and I don't want to get into it, but there are for sure many other colleges and universities that offer a similarly excellent education, and many times that number that offer a very good education, and so on and so forth. </p>
<p>Full disclosure: I am the child of Princeton grads. Their attitude about Princeton and the other Ivies is as mine is--they think that Princeton is great, but that it is certainly not the only great institution. I have also applied to 4 Ivies--including Princeton--and so I suppose I may seem to be very biased toward the Ivies. All I can offer is my assurance that I spent a long time researching and developing my college list, and it was not for want of consideration that I did not end up applying to some of the other excellent, super selective institutions. My list simply made worked for me.</p>
<p>One thing that the ivies do have is connections. A lot of ivy students are hooked up with well paying jobs right after graduation. And saying you went to an ivy leagues school does sound impressive, so why wouldn't someone contemplate going to the ivies?</p>
<p>At some ivies like Brown and Dartmouth there are few TAs.</p>
<p>Why ivies? Because no matter what, every time I send my resume out that Harvard part gets me in the door.</p>
<p>Posted elsewhere...</p>
<p>Honestly its a great thought to think that anyone can do just as well anywhere, but personally I have seen my friends who went to Ivies vs. lesser schools (equal students in high school) do much better. The truth is that the Ivies (and similar offer):</p>
<p>1) The opportunity to be surrounded by an incredibly bright peer group which in my opinion helps as these people will become your advisors more than your parents even. You end up having an incredibly capable and successful friend/ peer group, and over time this really starts to matter.</p>
<p>2) The instant name recognition. ALL the Ivies have this, and in educated circles that matter it gives you instant credibility which you otherwise would have to work towards. This pays off more than people like to assert. If you just mention it to a new employee or someone learns that you went to an Ivy in a meeting, it really gives you a boost.</p>
<p>3) The opportunities: Top firms take Ivy students (regardless of major) by the scores, even with a 4.0 from X state school you wouldn't get the exposure to these places. </p>
<p>4) The network: Sure there are lots of very successful people without Ivy degrees, but there are no other communities with such a high saturation of successful alumni. </p>
<p>Add all these factors together plus others explain the benefits of going to an Ivy.</p>
<p>If IVYs admit a student, he or she will have to have a very strong reason not to go there. They have extra-ordinary reputation which helps their graduates all their life, so 'Why IVYs?' is not a question that most should wrestle with.
But I have a dilemma which I am sure many others also face. I am sure I don't qualify for any need-based aid at IVYs, and I am getting full ride at a State Univ. The question for me is 'Is an IVY education worth spending ~170K extra?'</p>
<p>Eh. I believe that there are certainly benefits that come from name recognition and networking and so forth that are available at the Ivies, but that isn't why everyone is interested in Ivies (or the main reason why people should go there, in my opinion). Personally, I don't care about networking or name recognition, beyond the fact that I would like to attend the best level of institution that I can and would naturally like a good job after college. I think that if your ONLY reason for going to an Ivy is that you want to be really rich and are desperate for the name recognition, you are probably not going to have the best experience. Those concerns/wants are valid, but there should be more reasons why you want to attend an Ivy--you should actually like the school. Some people would hate going to a certain school, Ivy included, and I think that that is a perfectly compelling reason why they would turn down an offer of admission. </p>
<p>I can't say for 100% sure, but I am pretty certain that my parents would not tell you that their status as Ivy grads has really helped them their entire lives/made their lives better in everyway. They think that Princeton is great--but not the answer to all your troubles. I just don't think that that is as true as others claim it is.</p>
<p>Don't think of them as Ivies. Think of them as eight very different top schools in the same athletic league that don't give out scholarships. The term "Ivy" leads many people to believe that there's something inherently different or special about them. Places like CC, with its separate forums for Ivies, reinforce this absurd mentality. </p>
<p>Note that the things slipper mentioned can be applied to all top colleges.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Ha, your response reminded me of the Atlantic Monthly article, "Who Needs Harvard?" ( <a href="http://www.brookings.edu/views/articles/20040902easterbrook.htm%5B/url%5D">http://www.brookings.edu/views/articles/20040902easterbrook.htm</a> ). It ended with the line, "Harvard is marvelous, but you don't have to go there to get your foot in the door of life."</p>
<p>I think applicants have to be aware of this because most will not be able to attend Harvard. As the president of Temple University mentions in the article, "The child who is rejected at Harvard will probably go on to receive a superior education and have an outstanding college experience at any of dozens of other places, but start off feeling inadequate and burdened by the sense of disappointing his or her parents. Many parents now set their children up to consider themselves failures if they don't get the acceptance letter from a super-selective school."</p>
<p>And as I mentioned in a previous post, the study by Alan Krueger and Stacy Dale indicated if you are good enough to get into the Ivy League, you can go anywhere and be just as successful.</p>
<p>It's amazing what this winner-take-all society in the US has taught us. There was an article in the Stanford Daily a few years back that interviewed Stanford students that had been turned down by Harvard. One Stanford student was in tears because her sister had gotten into Harvard and she hadn't and oh what may have been if only she had gotten in. This at Stanford, a not too bad school. There are an incredible number of students who feel like failures if they don't get into their first choice school. They are not going to be happy, they are not going to get in Med School, they are not going to be successful, etc. It's just not true.</p>
<p>
<p>Note that the things slipper mentioned can be applied to all top colleges.
Hear, hear!</p>
<p>As much as I really don't like to, I going to have to disagree with slipper1234's statement 1.
[quote]
The opportunity to be surrounded by an incredibly bright peer group which in my opinion helps as these people will become your advisors more than your parents even. You end up having an incredibly capable and successful friend/ peer group, and over time this really starts to matter.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Although I have a few more months before actually attending Brown myself, most of my friends are very dissatisfied with the academic rigor there (and Princeton's as well). That is because, unlike our highschool here, focus is put on weaker students - helping them understand the classes instead of going over with the top ones. I myself always wanted to study at the highest possible level (even more so if the level was above me)...that's why I wanted to study at Ivies. Now I hear all my former peers feel like being surrounded by..idiots. And what's worse, teachers make them feel like it's ok to be dumb.</p>
<p>Now I don't know if this true everywhere, or just these classes, but..cmon, how can you not know what recursion or dynamic programming is and major in CS? Or not understand the physics class because the teacher made some other notations that you were used to?</p>
<p>And no, it's not because they chose easy classes. Most of their physics/math classes in their freshman year are 2nd or 3rd year ones.</p>
<p>I'm really hoping it's not like that..</p>
<p>On the other hand, it's pretty true you aren't going to find smarter people anywhere else ( on the average), so..</p>
<p>Collegebound, depends on the state school, how big an issue money is to your family and what you want to study.</p>
<p>
Negru- sounds like you would have been a better fit at Cal Tech where it is all incredibly bright students (2/3 with above 1500 SATs compared to 1/3 at Brown) but it is more or less sink or swim. You wouldn't need to spend time helping the weaker students since those 10% will end up dropping out anyway (compared to an average of 4 or 5% for the Ivy league and MIT).</p>
<p>Well ya, but I had many reasons to chose Brown over Caltech/Mit..anyway</p>
<p>I'm not used with :
Student asks stupid grade 5 question
Teacher says yes, excellent question, very good, [then starts explaining for 20 minutes, losing everybody's time]
The other students wait patiently.</p>
<p>Here it was:
Student asks stupid question
Teacher goes, *** is wrong with you, are you ****ing stupid, how the hell did get into this school?? Go and take out the trash or something. FAILED CLASS.
The other students laugh their ass out loud for 20 minutes along with the teacher, and then continue making fun of the idiot for another 3-4 months.</p>
<p>Needless to say, second one is a lot more fun and efficient.</p>
<p>Most everyone says the reason for going to an ivy is the other students. At ivies, people have to not only be academically successful, but successful in some EC as well (usually, at least). That means that if you want to play with some good soccer players, trombone players, piano players, research scientists, etc. YOU WILL find them there. That's my draw. It's cool to go to school w/ the best of the best...</p>
<p>Also, your resources are usually greater, as ivies may be able to provide what smaller LACs or less prestigious schools cannot.</p>
<p>
<p>Also, your resources are usually greater, as ivies may be able to provide what smaller LACs or less prestigious schools cannot.
And this is not true for other elite schools? (I know you say usually, but there appear to be many exceptions) The endowments of Northwestern, Emory, Chicago, Wash U, Duke and Notre Dame are all above those of Cornell, Dartmouth and Brown and are on a per-capita basis similar to Penn. With the exception of the schools in the UAA, they have tremendous sports teams. Several have great music schools. Most have world-class research scientists. Even Amherst, Williams and Swarthmore have incredible endowments on a per student basis. There are many schools that belong to COFHE that provide equal opportunites to the Ivys for their students.</p>
<p>
[quote]
At some ivies like Brown and Dartmouth there are few TAs.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>at others there are more...</p>
<p>dare I say Harvard?</p>
<p>Warblers, sorry to use the word Ivy. I mean all the top ten-fifteen schools including Duke, Stanford, Amherst, Williams, Caltech, etc.</p>
<p>Negru, I think you misinterpreted my point. When I reference peer group I mean that fifteen or twenty years down the line you're likely to know incredibly successful people in many walks of life. That means when you want to do a big business deal, you'll likely have a great contact who can help you. When you want legal help, you're likely to know a top lawyer, etc. </p>
<p>At my firm, which is a botique new york firm, we've hired a ton of grads from one particular Ivy. Basically one guy knew another guy who hired another guy all from the same school. This is an incredibly powerful thing.</p>