<p>^ it’s typically the population that attends or attended top institutions that would say this. How else could they justify an education that was overpaid for that could have been attained at a top 100 university for substantially lower cost = ]. Fact of the matter is, is that this argument of who offers a better education is extremely subjective. Obviously its a punch to those who attended top school and get offended when they see someone write that a state school education is just as good as theirs (which i firmly agree with).</p>
<p>
- Between 45-50% of students at top universities receive financial aid. For such students, the cost may be less than their state flagships; this was certainly the case for me.</p>
<ol>
<li>I agree with modestmelody about it depending on the field. In my field, relatively few schools offer a strong program (Berkeley, Brown, Chicago, Johns Hopkins, Michigan, NYU, Penn, UCLA, Yale). Even the most dedicated student at Ohio State is going to be at a crippling disadvantage against a student from Brown or Michigan. When graduate programs can only admit 2-3 applicants a year, the student from Ohio State simply is NOT likely to get in. There are too many other great applicants from great programs. To imply that a good student could cobble together an equally good program at Ohio State is extraordinarily naive.</li>
</ol>
<p>Hillary2012’s experience is all well and good, but his/her UGA -> Yale leap is considerably less surprising for law school. A tremendous amount of law school admissions rests on GPA and LSAT scores; it’s no secret that ones undergraduate college matters relatively little.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Please, if you’re going to be an attorney, pay closer attention to what people are saying. That is not at all true.</p>
<p>O.K., so we’re back at it again? Dang.</p>
<p>I was looking over some of the tables on the Payscale.com site and the derived Forbes magazine “Top Colleges for Getting Rich” site:
[Top</a> Colleges - Salary Potential By School Type](<a href=“http://www.payscale.com/best-colleges/top-colleges.asp]Top”>Best Schools by Type - College Salary Report)
[Top</a> Colleges For Getting Rich - Forbes.com](<a href=“http://www.forbes.com/2008/07/30/college-salary-graduates-lead-cz_kb_0730topcolleges.html]Top”>Top Colleges For Getting Rich)</p>
<p>The dominance of the “elite” schools in the Forbes study is interesting enough. All the 8 Ivies are there in the top 20. What I find more interesting is the spread between starting and mid-career salaries in the payscale.com tables. In the mid-career averages, HALF the Ivies crack the $120K threshold, a better rate even than the top 10 engineering schools. None of the top 10 state universities do, and most are not significantly above the $100K mark. </p>
<p>Average starting salary for the 8 Ivies is $60,475, compared to $52,380 for the top 10 state universities. Average mid-career salary for the 8 Ivies is $120,125, compared to $100,410 for the top 10 state universities. Median starting pay for the 8 Ivies is 15% higher than median starting pay for the top 10 state universities. By mid career, it is 20% higher.</p>
<p>Of course, it might only be Satan in the shape of Goldman-Sachs that is driving up the Ivy medians with a few bonuses the size of Berkeley’s entire operating budget.</p>
<p>“A tremendous amount of law school admissions rests on GPA and LSAT scores; it’s no secret that ones undergraduate college matters relatively little.”</p>
<p>But only if you believe that colleges are all alike in their ability to teach the average law-school-bound undergrad. I, for one, don’t believe it.</p>
<p>
I don’t think of myself as carrying water for the Ivies. I would not recommend them (or similar schools) categorically to every good student. Not at all.</p>
<p>However, if you read through this thread carefully, you’ll see that a fair amount of evidence has been cited. We may differ in what we think are the most important criteria. We may differ in how we interpret the implications of some data (such as average faculty salaries), or in how we account for outcomes (such as the high rate of Ph.D. production among some LACs). But it’s not as if people are just blowing smoke to justify their big college debts.</p>
<p>Look at the salary data I just posted. If the cost difference is $25K/year at a state university and $50K/year at an Ivy (assuming NO aid), then maybe you’ll rack up $100K in marginal debt (though in fact the average debts are far, far lower). If the benefit difference is $20K/year by mid-career, even if we’re comparing the average Ivy to the best state universities, then the cost/benefit analysis starts looking fairly good for the Ivies.</p>
<p>In fact, the average debt after 4 years at Harvard is now much less than $10,000. Average debt for all types of colleges after 4 years? About $20,000. That or a little less is about what it is for Brown graduates, too, if your family earns more than $85K/year and you still qualify for aid.</p>
<p>Average debt at Harvard, Yale, Stanford, Dartmouth and several others, for the classes of 2012 and after, is now 0.</p>
<p>Glad to have added fuel to the fire I suppose.</p>
<p>All I know is that I paid a grand total of $0.00 for my undergraduate education and I ended up at the exact same place as people who paid $200,000 or more.</p>
<p>It’s a good feeling to know that I chose UGA, and I beat out people from Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford, blah blah blah for a seat in the class.</p>
<p>Where do we draw the line then for top schools? does this mean that schools like emory and vanderbilt are not top schools because they dont have ivy/top ten status? Is a school like BC any more different than Fordham in terms of quality of education? or Michigan have a signifacant advantage over a school such as Northeastern for job opportunities after college? </p>
<p>You can see why some people choose not to go to top schools and why the OP has had second thoughts of applying becuase of this inherent elitism and entitlement that is instilled upon you when attending a “top school”. Its prevelant throughout this thread.</p>
<p>
There is a great deal of overlap between schools of similar calibers. For example, smart students at Duke could have educations equivalent to one at Harvard, smart students at Carolina could have educations equivalent to one at Duke, smart students at Penn State could have educations equivalent to one at Carolina, and smart students at Boston U could have educations equivalent to one at Penn State. What this does NOT mean, however, is that a smart student at Boston U would necessarily have an education equivalent to one at Harvard. </p>
<p>
Nonsense. Nobody is saying people at top schools are “entitled” to anything. Posters are merely saying, quite reasonably, that students at top colleges have greater access to good professors, intelligent student bodies, resources, and research opportunities.</p>
<p>
Whoever dies with the most toys wins, I suppose.</p>
<p>There are people who never go to college at all and die as multi- multi-millionaires. So is college a waste of money altogether, for most people?
I’m sure that is very satisfying. You deserve praise and respect.
I would think part of the satisfaction, though, is knowing you beat the odds. Or do you not think of it that way?</p>
<p>I believe that college is only a waste of money if you pay an exorbitant amount of money to attend. Especially if you have cheaper options.</p>
<p>Everyone who got into Yale beat the odds - no matter what school they came from.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, if the only purpose is going to college is to rack up the highest starting salary. I happen to think that there’s a life of the mind component as well which has nothing to do with what the college graduate winds up making.</p>
<p>So Hillary, why are you going to Yale? It is a very expensive law school. Since it is top ranked, I understand they offer very few, if any, scholarships. If your stats are good enough to get into Yale, I’m sure another law school would probably have accepted you and offered a substantial scholarship. I’m sure you could have gotten an equally as good an education a lot cheaper. </p>
<p>So why did you choose Yale?</p>
<p>morrismm, </p>
<p>I don’t want to speak for Hillary, but the answer quite a few students I know who have made similar choices would be “because I can afford it since I got my undergraduate degree for a very affordable price”.</p>
<p>For many people, parents and students alike, the arguments for choosing lesser-lights schools apply to undergraduate education only.</p>
<p>Affording it makes it possible to choose Yale, but says nothing about why one would so choose.</p>
<p>If Hillary just finished her first year of law school, wouldn’t that make her Hillary2011? Something doesn’t add up here…I know a lot of young Yale lawyers and the one thing you can cont on is the total clarity of their arguments.</p>
<p>Midmo and perhaps Hillalry–why? Are the graduate schools that are higher ranked better? Why? And if so, why aren’t the undergrad schools that are higher ranked better?</p>
<p>hmom5: post 137–Hillary will be starting Yale in the fall</p>
<p>morrismm: I’m afraid I don’t really understand your questions, but the reasoning behind some full-pay students’ decision to attend a lesser-ranked school for undergraduate education is because they believe that the credentials/experience/recommendations so earned will be sufficient to gain entry into top-ranked graduate and professional programs–assuming they put together a very good record. Many people (myself included) believe the reputations and contacts of the terminal degree are far more important for one’s career than the undergraduate program. Since top-ranked professional programs will be full-pay, paying for those programs will be far easier if the student/parents saved money on the undergraduate program.</p>
<p>I realize this reasoning may not apply to families who are eligible for need-based aid, and it is not all that relevant for PhDs in many fields. However, I know quite a few pre-med majors (whose parents are themselves MDs and in some cases medical college professors) who chose flagship public U in order to save the money for medical school. Either they don’t really think it is important to attend a top-ranked medical school, or they don’t think graduating with a top record from a flagship public is a great deterrent. I think many pre-law students follow the same reasoning.</p>
<p>midmo-you may not have understood my questions because you have not read the full thread. </p>
<p>My questions were aimed at Hillary. Your answer, which I have heard many times before and even considered as a parent sending 3 kids to private undergrad schools, may have helped her/him formulate an answer to my question.</p>
<p>But please, do not answer for Hillary.</p>