I agree with you on the ‘sophisticated, savvy consumers” sentiment. But the families and high school kids who seek prestige are doing so not because they THEMSELVES don’t see the nuances, but rather because most OTHERS in the rest of society do not.
So “attending a prestigious university” is a quick and easy shorthand signal to get other people to give you the “benefit of doubt”, and to shift the “burden of proof” away from you (until and unless you demonstrate otherwise). That ain’t nothing.
Has anyone on this thread argued for a generic ranking of colleges that applies to all kids though?
Not this thread, but the thread that’s linked to it began with exactly that premise.
So first, I think the vast majority of people know much less about the top colleges academically than many of these people are hoping. Like a true handful of colleges are used in pop culture to represent smart people colleges. And then obviously lots of people know about some sports programs. But as I recall, very few people can, say, name the actual members of the Ivy League.
Second, I think the obvious question is then who actually might matter to you? And that’s not a simple question, it depends on field, geographic location, and so on.
I think that is what the notion of generic institutional prestige amounts to. Same as talking about the “most selective” institutions as if it was even possible to simply rank these complex and varied institutions by selectivity.
I agree when you put it plainly, though, it is obvious why that doesn’t make sense. Again, to me the puzzle is why college choice conversations sometimes keep circling back to that sort of thinking when it doesn’t stand up to much scrutiny.
In the early 2000’s 7/8 ivies were in the Top 10.
In the early 2010’s 6/8 ivies were in the Top 10.
In 2026, 4/8 ivies are in the Top 10.
US News criteria has been tweaked, and I think our criteria has been tweaked as well. Prestige in education is now somewhat less tied to affluence. Is prestige getting better?
Exactly - the kid going to UIUC for CS wanted Northwestern. And he said b4 he deleted - my friends are going to Duke and Stanford.
Many would argue UIUC is superior for CS.
But the name is not going to imprrsss his friends.
What do you mean by people who have not kept up? People who don’t know that a school is supposed to be prestigious? Prestige doesn’t always come with low admission rates.
Do you mean the service academies?
Could you name a very prestigious school that has a high admission rate? (High = admits 50% or more). I cannot think of one off the top of my head.
Students may check US News for ranking. Parents may not. Mostly they have their own pre-defined school image, from their school time to their own life expeirences.
Northeastern is such a tough one. I’d say it’s popular, but the prestige isn’t there yet.
Maybe Bard, Sarah Lawrence? Bryn Mawr and Mt Holyoke are very prestigious and have A+ academics with admissions rates that are pretty high.
But I was thinking of it the opposite way. Schools with low admission rates, but still aren’t thought of as top of the class. Northeastern, Tulane, USC, U Miami, NYU, BU. And some schools with a hook like Berea College,
Missouri S&T with a 73% admissions rate.
I don’t know anyone who hires in STEM who doesn’t respect the actual education/pedagogy of what happens there. Easy to get in, very tough to get out.
Stonybrook (it squeaks in with 49%, does that still count?)
St Johns (55% or so acceptance rate) just to show that I don’t ONLY care about STEM.
Etc. Do the opinions of grad school adcoms and employers matter, or do we only care about the guy at your dry cleaners?
To a lot of people, prestige is in the eyes of the beholder.
Anyone remember the scene in Ozark when Ruth is telling Wyatt that she hopes he will go to Mizzou? To her, that was prestige. She wasn’t suggesting community college or WUSTL.
An engineering degree from Iowa State is another that would typically be well-regarded in my circles. I note it is #21 on College Transitions PhD feeders list for Engineering. Iowa State has around a 90% acceptance rate.
There are a couple of interesting quirks in that case. One is that Iowa State has a bit of a sink or swim approach to engineering–it will let a lot of people try it, no guarantee you will be able to cut it.
The other thing is Iowa State has formulaic admissions and so you pretty much know if you will be admitted, or if you will not.
I think this can sometimes be an underrated factor in determining admissions rates. If people at least perceive a lot of uncertainty they may take a shot even with what are pretty unrealistic qualifications. This is basically lottery ticket sort of reasoning. And then as such colleges reject almost all those lottery ticket applicants, their admissions rate goes way down.
It is more than that.
I note a lot of those are examples of another well-known driver of low admissions rates, namely geographic desirability. Like, a lot of people would like to go to college in Boston, NYC, Miami, or SoCal.
This can get interesting for such colleges when they are not necessarily as generically desirable as some other colleges with similar geographic desirability. Lots of well-qualified people might apply with very little chance of actually accepting an offer if they also get an offer from one of those other colleges.
So this can sometimes lead to the practice known as yield protection, where such a college will actually waitlist or outright reject a lot of highly qualified applicants when their yield model says they have little chance of actually landing them.
All that can again translate into very low overall admissions rates. But what that actually means in terms of relative institutional desirability is complex.
And of course one of the easiest “hacks” of selective US college admissions is to figure out a location you are fine with that is less generally popular than Boston et al. What are otherwise academic and resource peers in less generically popular locations may have higher admissions rates, and perhaps even more importantly, may not use as much yield protection for highly qualified applicants. They may, in fact, even offer merit instead.
On the other hand, they may not score as many points in a peer competition game.
you have to give me the question and my answer. not sure what you are referring to.
I think any school that comes to mind with 50%+ is not trending well. In other words, it is has prestige-lag… people are still catching up.