norcalguy

I disagree. Selectivity has become a proxy for elitism. Often HS kids choose to go to, not the most prestigous, but rather the most selective school they can. Otherwise, they feel they've worked hard in HS for nothing. I think that is totally the wrong mentality and causes the HSer to ignore fit.

For example, WashU, through various methods, has become pretty selective. What is it actually good in? Some people will say "premed" although we know there's no such thing as a premed program nor does WashU offer a premed major. There are some schools that have artificially inflated their selectivity through marketing methods without a corresponding improvement in the strength of their academic departments. HSers go gah gah over SAT scores and acceptance rates. Academics won't go for it. They look at what the university actually has to offer to the student (not the other way around). That's why schools like WashU will continually lag in the Peer Assessment department until they bring their academic departments up to par.

hawkette

collegehelp,
I look forward to the explanations of actual PA voters who say that they used anything like your "formula" to determine a college's prestige. That should be groundbreaking and highly informative. Oy, if only it were that easily explained.

Let's cut to the real world. A student gets into Tufts and Cornell. He/she prefers the Tufts environment and believes that Tufts can meet his academic and non-academic requirements better, yet Cornell carries higher prestige, including a significantly higher PA score. How do you advise him or her?

collegehelp

hawkette, I would encourage the student to subjectively weigh the greater attraction to Tufts against the greater prestige of Cornell. There are always going to be trade-offs. I would also make sure the student wasn't mis-informed about the academic and non-academic virtues of Tufts and Cornell.

Actual PA voters don't actually use any formula. But the formula shows that their intuition has merit and validity in the "real world". They don't just pull their ratings out of a hat. They are not random. They are accurate. They capture a lot about a school.

hawkette

collegehelp,
I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on PA. I agree that the scores are not random; I'd say that they're almost permanently fixed. I would also say that they are not accurate and, for the for-profit world that most students will enter, they capture almost nothing about a school.

researchmaven

I agree with you wholeheartedly, hawkette. Many people are CC are extremely misguided.

Fetou

I still hold that if you have all the necessary training and talents in your field, and you came from a prestigious college, you have the best chance of getting a selective high end job that suits you. This is independent of whether or not your college offers basket weaving. I think that "interesting" nature you spoke of is built into people, it's not learned. I think a person who really prioritized his academics can still be a perfectly normal person.

Milkmagn

in the end, it's really your skills and personality that will keep you in jobs and help advance your career.

Fetou

Precisely, and I'm not saying completely ignore all the other factors, I'm going to be looking for them as well next year. But I still do think its most important to go to a place where you will strengthen your skills most and get the best understanding of your field.

collegehelp

hawkette, you use data when it supports your bias but ignore data when it disproves your bias. The reason prestige doesn't change is because the relative quality of universities stays the same.

norcalguy, I share your disdain for deceptive and manipulative marketing. It is unethical. Colleges should not be chosen based on glitz and hype. The quality of faculty and academic programs doesn't always keep pace with what students deserve and expect.

UCBChemEGrad

Hawkette, USNWR defines PA specifically - as a measure of a university's "academic programs" rated from "distinguished" to "marginal".

Cornell has more "distinguished" academic programs (engineering, hotel management, etc.) than Tufts - despite the similar level in student quality.

norcalguy

If anything, if two colleges take similar quality of students and one college produces better chemists, engineers, whatever, wouldn't that college be inherently better?

The strength of a program or major at a college is obviously dependent on the quality of students but also on the quality of faculty and the availability of resources. So, if Cornell has a stronger X program than Tufts despite similar quality of students, Cornell must be contributing something in the faculty/resources department.

unalove

Back to hawkette's original point--

I more or less took her advice (about finding a school that fit best academically, socially, and resource/philosophy-wise) and I didn't end up with a school that's commonly cited for "well-rounded" kids, nor did I end up at a school that employers will recognize.

I think we fail to remember that most employers in most fields won't think much about the prestige of an undergraduate degree. The biggest hump is getting one; the second biggest hump is having relevant experience to the field.