<p>Just throwing out there that the percentage of HYP grads who become the president of the U.S. or Mexico is itself, really, really small. So, what are those slackers doing?! ;)</p>
<p>Also, I’m seconding the comment that grad program ratings are really field-dependent. The Ivies are at the top in many fields but not all, and sometimes are even shoulder-to-shoulder with state schools. In clinical psych, for example, Wisconsin and Minnesota are <em>easily</em> in the same breath as Upenn, Harvard, and Yale. In school psych, there is only one Ivy-affiliated program (Columbia-Teacher’s College), and while it’s not considered “bad,” it’s not considered the “top,” either. In fact, often the individual PERSON you work with matters more than your school, and you often actually apply to <em>specific people</em> in a department.</p>
<p>This is true for graduate studies. For undergrad, it may not matter that much…As I recall, OP did not mention about getting into graduate school.</p>
<p>The OP is worried that other students with even lower scores (SAT and lesser ECs) may be even “luckier” and get into a more prestigious ivy. </p>
<p>Get over this attitude quickly… </p>
<p>You are already very fortunate. You got in and you got a great financial aid package that ORMs (SATs > 2300) - that did NOT get accepted or
did get accepted and had to pay in full would be certainly VERY envious of.</p>
<p>To the OP: you are a very fortunate and blessed young person. You should be thrilled about your scholarship to JHU, one of the finest universities in the world, and very optimistic about your future.</p>
<p>You can’t control every variable of life to arrive at a particular result. You’ve already gained a real “brass ring” in life. Don’t let ignorant, limited people undermine you.</p>
<p>I am currently doing a paid internship in the USDA Forest Service, Alaska Region office, surrounded by cubicles full of GS-13 regional program managers, and my boss’ boss is a GS-15. Not one person I’ve talked to here has an Ivy League degree.</p>
<p>YMMV, but lots of people get high-level government jobs with ordinary, average state-school diplomas.</p>
<p>Thanks for the responses. You guys are really talking some sense into my head…and I bet I sounded like an ungrateful little girl. But I’m not…I’m definitely going to make the best out of everything.
Last night, I began talking to people in the class of 2015 and there are SO many impressive people…one who published 2 novels, one who did critical research with a prominent professor at Duke, and many who attended Harvard SM but still applied ED to Hopkins.
Im just going to try to stay focused on my goals and stop letting the irrelevant chatter of those around me get to me. I sometimes forget that this world can be full of so much negativity.</p>
<p>OP, Just want to chime in with others who say go to Hopkins and to ignore the small minded who question your decision to turn down more “prestigious” universities. 4 years ago my son decided to go to USC after he was awarded a full tuition scholarship there, and despite being accepted at 13 other “more prestigious” colleges, including 2 Ivys. Even his principal had the nerve to ask him “you’re going WHERE?? Why?”
This week he was accepted at both Cal Tech and Stanford U into one of their most competitive PHD programs. Going to USC did not hurt him in the least because he knew what his long term goal was and kept his eye on the ball. He was able to do important research in his field of interest with 2 prominent scientists, publish, as lead author, a paper in a scientific journal, and speak at 3 national conventions, all with the full support of his dept who were thrilled to have him. So OP, go to Hopkins, take full advantage of all they offer you, and don’t look back!</p>
<p>Reread my post (#100). I was not using “the HYP roots of Mexican politicians as a sign of how HYP can help their graduates do great things.” I was using it to refute the earlier erroneous statement that only in America were people concerned with the educational prestige of their poltical leaders. Mexican voters apparently care a lot about that too, perhaps even more so than in the US. Considering the tiny number of Mexicans who get graduate degrees at selective US colleges in the first place, the fact that Mexican voters have elected five Ivy grads in a row as president has to be more than random coincidence.</p>
<p>“the fact that Mexican voters have elected five Ivy grads in a row as president has to be more than random coincidence.”
I think you are treating elections in Mexico as if there were a wide range of qualified candidates who run for public office there- [on the contrary- one party was in power for decades] and as if their elections are completely democratic, which they are not. The rich and powerful, who ran and still run Mexico, send their kids to the best colleges that money[ read DA’s] can buy. And when they return, they too continue the legacy of “winning” elections!</p>
<p>^^That might explain it all if nearly all the prominent Mexican politicians had attended selective US colleges, but that’s not the case. Mostly just the big winners do. </p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Right. That is the PRI party. And when the PAN party finally drove them out and won the presidency in the historic election of 2000 (which was declared the fairest election in Mexican history by outside observers) they did it with an Ivy grad of their own. And the PAN repeated their victory in 2006 with a different Ivy grad. </p>
<p>Moreover, in an LA Times article several years ago (about the elections for Governor of Baja California as I recall) the reporter came right out and said that Mexican voters tend to be impressed with political candidates who have been educated at top US colleges (not solely Ivy). It doesn’t guarantee a win, but it’s a definite factor in their favor in the eyes of many Mexican voters.</p>
<p>Sorry, but the assertion that only Americans care about or are impressed with with the educational achievements of their political leaders is simply wrong.</p>
<p>I see a lot of people on here (on this thread and others) constantly trying to cite stats about X% of HYP in this field, X% held this office, etc. etc. etc. I would just point out the basic fallacy in this argument that these people mostly went to university 30+ years ago. </p>
<p>Back then, yes there was a much bigger differential between these schools and many others, but now it’s a whole different story. The university landscape is far more diverse and if you fast forward 30 years you’ll see that in these stats that so many people on here like to cite.</p>
<p>You are correct to some degree rocketman, no question. At the same time, voters today are largely ignorant of the rise of other universities in quality, and reputations are very long lasting in this area. The real fallacy is isolating attending an Ivy League school rather than recognizing that, as menloparkmom points out, many of these people come from politically or economically (or both) powerful families to begin with. Therefore going to an Ivy League school is far more likely anyway. In other words, since these families know that it is best to keep the resume as “spotless” as possible, why would they let their kid go anywhere else?</p>
<p>But even if the person stood their ground and went to a non-Ivy school for some reason, it is quite likely they would still be successful in their political runs. But since these factors are all conflated and entangled and virtually impossible to separate because there is not enough data to do a reliable analysis, one will never know. So arguing about it is just a matter of opinions that cannot be resolved in any meaningful way. Way too many uncontrollable variables. Having said that, I will bet that in any poll ever taken, when asked why people voted for a certain candidate I bet “Because he went to Harvard” never came up enough to register the slightest blip on the data scale.</p>