An undergraduate degree doesn't hold the same weight it used to, am I right?

russiaruns123 · May 19, 2011, 2:59am

I’m not exactly sure where to start this topic, so I decided this might be the best place given the choices offered by this website.

Note that the example I use later on in this thread may be flawed because I’m not entirely sure about all the institutions/degrees, but the concept still remains the same, and that is the basis of this thread.

Basically, back in the day an undergraduate degree in whatever you’re studying used to hold a lot of weight against competition, but as more and more people attend college I’m beginning to realize that it’s almost a given to have an undergraduate degree, so in order to stay on top of the competition (or if you’re like me and just love learning) you’d have to go above and beyond to get a masters and/or Ph.D in your studies.

The Ph.D in itself is a very important distinction, whereas the bachelor’s degree doesn’t hold much weight anymore, and so does it really matter where you get the bachelor’s as long as you concentrate on getting a great Ph.D degree?

I’m a senior in high school and I had the opportunity to attend an Ivy League university (I’m not saying this because the Ivy League is “Omg, you must be a genius for attending one of those schools! They’re the greatest!”, because it doesn’t take a genius to attend one of those schools), but I chose Texas A&M University because financially it was a better outcome for me and I would be able to get straight into graduate school from there. See, this is where the graduate degree comes in. Doing extremely well at Texas A&M University by getting a 4.00 GPA with tons of research and a few internships under my belt, as well as some positions of authority in clubs, with a good amount of community service would do me a lot of good, which is something I think everyone could agree on.

I’ll use the Harvard Graduate Medical school for example. Let’s say I chose to go to Harvard for my undergraduate degree and I struggled to get a very high GPA, and in my class of extremely hard-working pre-meds I had to work really hard to make my resume look good and whatnot, mainly because those are the people I’m competing against to get into the Harvard Graduate Medical School. My selection into the Medical School just got a ton harder knowing the competition I’m faced with; however, by attending Texas A&M University and knowing that I could get a 4.00 GPA and rack up my resume should really put me at an edge in this case. Admissions are done demographically (this is an assumption; I’ve just heard this assumption by others too many times to ignore it), and so at this point, the student who stands out at Texas A&M University with the 4.00 GPA, extremely high MCAT score and an amazing array of club positions, research done, etc. has a much higher chance to get into the Harvard Medical School than the Harvard undergraduate who is fighting against all his extremely competitive peers. In the end, given that all his/her peers and he/she strive to get the optimal resume out of Harvard to get into the Harvard Medical School doesn’t it pose as a much harder choice for the Harvard Medical School assuming they should all have similar stats?

See, on one side of the spectrum we have this one student from Texas A&M University, who was very smart to begin with, but used his resources wisely to look like a big-shot at this good school (Doesn’t have the prestige of the Ivy, but prestige doesn’t necessarily correlate with how good the school is), and stands out of all the respective applicants he goes against. On the other side of the spectrum, we have a lot of Harvard undergrads hoping to get into the Harvard Medical School while all posing similar stats that, for the most part, won’t dazzle the committee. There might be that one stand-out applicant, but the majority won’t.

With that said, would it be wise to go to Texas A&M University to get an undergraduate degree over going to Harvard for the undergraduate degree? Sure, the name Harvard carries some weight, but in reality this is JUST an undergraduate degree now, and the wise thing to do would be to move on to the Harvard Medical School (well, you could pick any great graduate school, this is just my example), but given the rates of getting into the school, the Texas A&M University student finds himself at the Harvard Medical School, and due to the Harvard undergraduate’s unsuccessful attempt at getting in he finds himself at none other than the Texas A&M Medical School. Boom, the tables just turned, but who’s favored: The student with the Bachelor’s from A&M and a medical degree/Ph.D from Harvard, or the student with the Bachelor’s from Harvard and a medical degree/Ph.D from A&M?

Should students looking for success really be concentrating on their undergraduate studies as much as they are right now, or should they be shifting their focus to the graduate studies, that are bound to come sooner or later?

So, as a stated once before, an undergraduate degree doesn’t hold much weight anymore, and so it’s advisable to go above and beyond to get the graduates degree, right?.. because as it seems, it doesn’t really matter much where the undergraduate degree comes from, as long as you use all your resources to push yourself to become the very best, and in the end attend a great graduate school.

Sunny19 · May 19, 2011, 4:35am

Getting a undergraduate degree from Texas A&M then getting a graduate degree from Havard would hold more weight since these days only obtaining a bachelors degree doesn’t give you a great shot in the job market. It seems that if anyone wants to obtain a decent job that pays well you need to at least get a Masters. Based on what my father has informed me (he’s a doctor) if you plan on going to medical school it really doesn’t matter where you obtain an undergraduate degree as long as you have a strong GPA, good club/volunteer/internships to back you up and score very well on the MCAT so you can get into a good graduate school which does matter when getting your Ph.D in medicine.

Getting into medical school is highly competitive. I know a girl who has been going to UF for the past four years and maintained a 4.0 throughout school but when she applied to UF’s medical school she was denied admission.
Of course getting a Masters or Ph.D doesn’t mean your going to get a good job as soon as you graduate but it definitely betters you chances.

As for the top Texas A&M student vs the “struggling” Harvard undergrad student I’m not sure who Harvard admissions would chose but I’m guessing they would go with the Texas student only because I think they would expect the Harvard student to be just as strong as the Texas student since the student already gained undergrad admissions into the school so why not work even harder to be on top again when they want to go for grad.

Momwaitingfornew · May 19, 2011, 7:24am

Your underlying assumption that you can get a 4.0 at TAMU is flawed. College in general is much tougher than high school. Yes, it may happen, but it’s just as likely to happen at Harvard as at TAMU. You seem to think that you’ll be smarter than everyone else at TAMU. I think you’ll find that isn’t the case and that you’ll be challenged academically.

Undergraduate institution prestige DOES matter, although it’s not as important as some on CC would like you to think. If you majored in the sciences and got, say, a 3.7 GPA at Harvard, and a similar student went to TAMU and got a 3.9, most likely you, the Harvard student, would have the advantage, not because of the name but because of the education and opportunities. But that’s not to say that going to TAMU will keep you out of a top graduate/medical program. It’s just that going to TAMU won’t make it *easier[/].

I get the feeling that you’re trying to justify going to TAMU over Harvard. Don’t. You should attend the best university for you personally, whether that’s because of finances, campus environment, or anything else.

proletariat2 · May 19, 2011, 7:04pm

I’m in a similar situation to you, with Michigan State swapped from A&M and ecology or evolutionary biology grad school swapped for med school. My reason for choosing MSU over more prestigious schools was purely financial. Med school admissions are, like all admissions, fairly complicated, and I’ll be honest that I don’t know much about them. My impression is that prestige is not a huge deal for them, and I’ll agree with you that I think that for those who plan to get graduate degrees, prestige of the undergraduate institution is probably not a big deal at all.

On the other hand, I don’t think going to Texas A&M is going to help you a whole lot, either. If you like it, you’ll probably do well, which is great, but the same is true of Harvard. Clearly, you’re pretty smart and motivated, which equips you to take advantage of opportunities there that other students may not take advantage of. You probably won’t have much trouble doing research and all that. On the other hand, as above posters said, don’t assume it will be easy. Maybe it’s because I took 20 credits of rather difficult classes, but this past semester at MSU was pretty tough for me. And Harvard, which is somewhat grade-inflated, won’t necessarily have legions of struggling pre-meds, and it’s not like Harvard Med School will only choose a couple of those if more are extraordinarily qualified. I wouldn’t assume your GPA would differ enormously between the two, barring extraordinary circumstances (such as physical or mental illness). Demographics are important, but I think you assign them too much weight. (I feel like I should reiterate here that I don’t know a whole lot about med school admissions.) And Harvard probably also has more easily accessible opportunities to help you get into med school.

In short, I think you’ll do fine at either one. Try to be happy and work hard at A&M, and don’t look back on your decision with too many regrets.

Oyama · May 21, 2011, 2:30pm

I’d even argue the opposite. The Ivys are known for grade inflation, which takes emphasis off class rank and just nominal GPA for grad/professional school admissions. Personally, I think it’d probably be easier to achieve a 3.7 in Harvard than at TAMU because of that fact.

Lastly, demographics-based admission is not true (if you were implying that med schools try to admit from a wide variety of schools). There’s a reason why the Ivys and other top schools are the main feeders into other top schools. An applicant from an unknown university is going to be hard-pressed with a 4.0 to match up with another with a comparable GPA from a known school. Of course TAMU is known and respected, but it really doesn’t stand up to comparison with Harvard at the undergraduate level–few schools do.

juillet · May 21, 2011, 6:58pm

There’s a reason why the Ivys and other top schools are the main feeders into other top schools

It’s not really because the schools don’t admit people from lower-ranked schools, though; it’s more because people who go to top schools are more likely to be motivated (and have the money) to go to top medical and law schools. A lot of students at your local state university simply want to move on and get a middle management job or may have lower sights for their career, like being a nurse or an entry-level engineer. There’s a selection bias at hand that makes it difficult to conclude what role prestige has in admissions.

It matters for sure, but not as much as people here on CC seem to think it does, and going to Texas A&M is definitely not going to keep you out of a top medical school.

I will say, however, that you should not follow the fallacy that if master’s degree recipients get jobs then PhD recipients should really get jobs. It doesn’t actually work that way. Don’t get a PhD unless you want to do research of some kind - either as a professor at a university, or leading a research team in industry. In the sciences there is even a lot of research you can do with an MS; you won’t be leading the team, but there are many research associate positions at major medical centers and universities that pay well and don’t require more than an MS.

warblersrule · May 21, 2011, 7:10pm

Yes, this seems to be a common fallacy. I’ve often heard it said on CC that certain majors (e.g. many of the humanities) are useless without further education. Graduate school gears one toward research and a career in academia – a PhD rarely opens doors that an undergraduate degree doesn’t, and I’ve often heard complaints from graduates that it actually overqualified them for many of the jobs they applied for.

Oyama · May 21, 2011, 10:43pm

I just want to underscore the entire overqualification notion – too many of my friends graduating with Masters are having tough times applying for jobs that aren’t there. They’re being forced to apply to entry-level Bachelors’-level positions and not getting any positive feedback, and it is most likely because their education (and thus volatility to leave when the economy gets back to pre-2007 levels) makes them a possible liability.

sakky · May 22, 2011, 1:04am

And I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again, if that truly is a problem, you can always choose to omit your graduate degree. If that introduces a time gap in your resume that you have to explain, you can always fill it with one of your side activities (which you ought to have anyway).

For example, I know a guy who embarked upon a PhD program in CS. While a student, he also ran a software and IT consulting service on the side to make some extra pocket money. When he decided to apply for jobs at companies where he felt his PhD studies might hurt him, he simply chose to omit it, and instead plugged the time gap with his consulting service. Nobody needs to know what he was really doing all those years.

juillet · May 22, 2011, 11:22am

That’s sometimes possible (although it’d be more difficult to explain an 8-year gap in the humanities than a 4 or 5-year gap for a science PhD), but how is any of that relevant to a post in which an undergraduate says that they feel they need a grad degree to get a job? That’s good advice for someone who already has a PhD and is trying to get a job in an industry where it’s a liability. But why take the risk in the first place that you’ll be unemployable, unless someone knows they want to be faculty?

A PhD is a credential to do very specific kinds of jobs - academia, leading research teams in industry or public life. It’s a research degree. If one does not have a burning desire to do research, one should not go for a PhD.

sakky · May 22, 2011, 12:13pm

It’s relevant to the notion, as proposed within the thread, that a graduate degree will hurt your chances for obtaining certain jobs. If you believe that is truly the case, then draw up 2 versions of your resume, and submit the version that omits your graduate degree to those jobs.

Keep in mind that my post was a direct response to somebody who posited the notion that a master’s degree, rather than a PhD, might be harmful to your career. It’s hard to imagine many employers considering a master’s degree to be a negative signal - as a master’s degree is often times merely an ‘enhanced’ bachelor’s - but even in the rare cases where it might be, you can choose to omit it, and the small time-gap necessary to obtain the master’s degree seems readily explainable through one of your side activities. {For example, I know one woman who said that she decided to ‘explore’ Europe for a year after undergrad without elaborating on the fact that her ‘exploration’ consisted of earning a master’s degree at Oxford.}

However, I certainly agree with your larger general point that one should not embark upon an (unfunded) PhD unless you truly care about the (relatively few) jobs that a PhD qualifies you to take. To be sure, there are a few non-research positions for which a PhD would be highly suitable - higher education administration being a prime example (as faculty members tend to disrespect anybody who doesn’t hold a PhD themselves). But certainly most jobs have little use for a PhD.

An undergraduate degree doesn't hold the same weight it used to, am I right?

CONNECT WITH US