What are the Lifetime Advantages of Attending Top Colleges

[Drosselmeier]

<p>marite:</p>

<p>

I think I understand some of what you are driving at. In certain ways, elite schools are more diverse than state universities because they attract students from all over the country instead of all over the state. Yet, despite the large proportion of students on financial aid at top schools, there is a lack of diversity in the way the students approach their education and the acquisition of knowledge.

Absolutely. And while this lack of diversity can go far to mold a student’s approach to knowledge, it likely can’t help that student appreciate other approaches due to its lack of variety in cultural context.</p>

<p>I am not saying the elite environment is innately hampered here. I am saying it possibly can be hampered depending on how you value it. Someone may have a sincerely held worldview that they value above everything. But they may avoid the elites because they think their worldview, and the way it causes one to approach knowledge, does not really exist at the elites. Imagine if most of the country valued this worldview in the same way. Would the elites be elites then? I don’t think so.</p>

<p>

It is not surprising. Whether poor or well-off, the students are all high achievers who have gone through more or less the same high school curricula. Meanwhile, at the state universities, there are the same high achievers, possibly in the Honors college as well as the students who need remedial algebra. Educationally speaking, there is a bigger spread among state university students than at top schools.

That’s right. And as I have said here previously, I am wondering if this intellectual diversity offers a value, a genuine value (especially since it probably more accurately reflects the real world), that cannot be had at the elites.</p>

<p>Again, I’d rather go to an elite just to enter an intellectual cocoon for a bit. But maybe that’s because I’ve been brainwashed into thinking the cocoon is preferable above all. Someone else might see a better intellectual value in State U than I can see. I am trying to remain open to this possibility, rather than just assume the elites are truly elite.</p>

<p>

As well, students at top universities are more likely to be from the same age cohort, whereas at state universities, you have students fresh out of high school as well as students who work full time or part-time, older returning students with not a lot of book knowledge but plenty of real-life experience. This can lead to more interesting classroom discussions than in top colleges where all the 18-years old have had more or less the same (lack of) experience. This is a very different kind of diversity than skin color or financial status.

Wow. You’ve really hit the thing out of the ballpark, marite.</p>

[ICargirl]

<p>I agree that the difference isn’t as drastic as The GFG’s post implies. A better comparison might be a local sports league that has multiple levels based on ability. There is no reason why the kid in the top league should go down two divisions in order to help raise the level of play. </p>

<p>I fail to see where I am losing out by going to an Ivy, except financially ,and that was a personal choice by me and my parents. I certainly have met a much more diverse group of people here than I did in my suburban public high school - and while it isn’t, perhaps, the same kind of diversity I would find at a state school, conversely, they aren’t finding the same kind of diversity I am, either. </p>

<p>My best subject is English. In my high school, we did not have tracking in English until Junior year. Maybe I raised the level of the class for other people in those first two years, but I sure as heck didn’t get as much out of it as I could have. Sure, I had good teachers - but when half the class didn’t do the reading and some people are struggling with comprehension, the class isn’t going to be taught on as high a level. Of course, by college the difference would have diminished somewhat - and the weakest students in that class did not get into Rutgers. However, the point still remains that the general level of your classmates matters. </p>

<p>I think one problem here is that we are speaking as if all kids who go to elites are scheming rich snobs fitting some cookie-cutter pattern who thought they were too good for the rest of society, and that just isn’t fair. Being a “mensch” and being an Ivy Leaguer are not mutually exclusive.</p>

[Alumother]

<p>I think toneranger’s post #617 is the primary debate of this thread. Some people think that on average you can differentiate between elite and generic State U because the kids and faculty will have measurable intellectual ability differences. Again ON AVERAGE. And that measurable difference will have a positive effect on the educational experience at the elites. Some people think that difference does not exist, or if it does it doesn’t matter, and that the other factors of State U education negate the difference and that as a result there is nothing about the elites that can be said to be “better” other than the connections, halo, club effect.</p>

[marite]

<p>Icargirl:</p>

<p>I agree with you, especially the last sentence (as the parent of an Ivy Leaguer, I live in hope!)</p>

[dstark]

<p>SBmom, I agree with most of what you wrote in your last post.</p>

<p>The problem is the word “elite”. There is an implication that other schools that are not “elite” are therefore inferior. For many students that want a different experience, that just isn’t true.</p>

<p>My “elite” school may be a school that you would never consider and vice versa. Our educations will be very different, but you can’t say one is superior to the other. </p>

<p>Yet, we do this all the time.</p>

[Bibsburg]

<p>Many people have said that a person is the same regardless of where he/she goes to school; in other words, it’s the person but not the school that determines success.</p>

<p>I have to disagree with this statement to a certain extend. If it had not been this friend of mine in highschool, I would never had become arguably the top academic student in my school. Going to Ivy schools or other elite universities like MIT will give me a better learning environment. There will be more people to motivate me, to challenge me, and to inspire me. Morever, the professors at the elite schools are also just better than State U’s. After all, they are the schools that have more Nobel Laurets and who would want to miss the chance to study from them?</p>

[Chipper]

<p>For my family, the only reason we would consider investing in an “ivy” or “elite” is for my son to have the the opportunity to find “soulmates” - those who love discussing and debating numerous topics on many levels. </p>

<p>This, to me, was the best part of the college experience. </p>

<p>My fear - that environment no longer exists - not at any price. </p>

<p>I fear that too many admission commitees are selecting bright “high achievers” at the expense of and truly gifted more “moderate achievers”. </p>

<p>My son sees this difference every day in his high school. Many of the students choosing to go to the “elites” have composed outstanding resumes, but are unlikely to engage in the types of philosophical discussions he enjoys. Too many of the highest achievers are busy rushing to the next “activity” or studying to “waste their time” on such discussions.</p>

<p>Others, simply do not have the ability to go beyond the assignments of the class. They are working at the limit of their ability - spending inordinate amounts of time studying to “make the grade”. </p>

<p>Several of his friends who have chosen the “ivy road” have been very disappointed by the isolation. They tell him that too many students spend all their time trying to keep up with classwork and none in “coffee shop types of discussions”. What little “chat time” they have seems to be spent IM’g. </p>

<p>Some of this may be personality - a recent CC thread identified the vast majority of those posting on U of Chicago’s thread were introverts. Some may be cultural - Harvard released it’s next freshman class profile and 20% of the class was Asian - my son’s experience is that the Asian students (even his close friends) do not usually participate in these discussions - thinking them a waste of precious time. He spends time with these kids in the orchestra or piano clinics but not in coffe bars.</p>

<p>Is there a college where the environment - is more conducive to this “waste of time”. Where the kids love this type of interaction and might put it ahead of classwork or violin practice or serving meals in a homeless shelter? Is there a school where the selection commitee actually values this type of student?</p>

[toneranger]

<p>To clarify my postion, I never said it was poor choice to go to an Ivy. It is clearly the right choice for many students. Those who have that choice are generally smart and have worked very hard. And they’re not all snobs (my brother went to Harvard and I actually really like him). What I have a problem with is the “I’m Michael Jordan” atitude expressed by some on the board. I guess it’s OK to make the choice to cocoon with people you think have better intellectual abilities than the rest of the population. That’s why honors colleges are popping up all over the country. But - come on, are you really think that you are THAT drastically different from the bright kids in a less “elite” school. That’s where the elitism comes through (at least to me). And, yes, I believe “whatever floats your boat” is the right way to go.</p>

[curmudgeon]

<p>

@chipper

my son’s experience is that the Asian students (even his close friends) do not usually participate in these discussions - thinking them a waste of precious time…Is there a college where the environment - is more conducive to this “waste of time”. Where the kids love this type of interaction and might put it ahead of classwork or violin practice or serving meals in a homeless shelter? Is there a school where the selection commitee actually values this type of student/

Wowser. Yes, please tell us where the underachieving genius coffeeshop crowd will be who can’t be bothered with dreary ol’ classwork , who paint racial and ethnic stereotypes with a broad brush and care not a whit for their fellow man. I’d like to know, too. Check, please! LOL. ;)</p>

[Northstarmom]

<p>"have composed outstanding resumes, but are unlikely to engage in the types of philosophical discussions he enjoys. Too many of the highest achievers are busy rushing to the next “activity” or studying to “waste their time” on such discussions.</p>

<p>Others, simply do not have the ability to go beyond the assignments of the class. They are working at the limit of their ability - spending inordinate amounts of time studying to “make the grade”. </p>

<p>Several of his friends who have chosen the “ivy road” have been very disappointed by the isolation. They tell him that too many students spend all their time trying to keep up with classwork and none in “coffee shop types of discussions”. What little “chat time” they have seems to be spent IM’g. “”</p>

<p>Are these students really going to Ivies or are they going to other top 25 colleges? I ask because I keep in touch with my Ivy alma mater, both by visiting and by interviewing students applying there. I have found that the students who get in enjoy philosophical conversations as well as diving into ECs.</p>

<p>That was the best part of my Ivy experience: being around very smart people who were passionate about intellectual issues and ECs. Outside of that kind of atmosphere, many people find me weird, “too intense,” too analytical, too interested in talking in depth about things that they consider boring. In undergrad, and at reunions, are rare opportunities for me to be around people who think like me. They may not like exactly the same things that I do, but they do share the trait of being very passionate and analytical about whatever their EC and intellectual interests are.</p>

<p>By comparison, one of my friend’s tells me that her D at a flagship state university conducts most of her on-campus friendships through IMing. The D has attended a few meetings of ECs, but is not heavily involved in anything. The students I have met who are in general very involved in activities at our public universities are heavily involved in Greek activities or varsity athletics. I’m not an athlete, and I have never wanted the socializing and similarities that go with being an undergraduate frat/sorority member, so for me, I would not have been happy in a college that had lots of people pursuing things like that.</p>

<p>My thoughts are that many students who end up at places like Ivies had a prior educational experince of being exposed to plenty of diversity from students who were intellectually dissimilar from them. Being in a place like an Ivy provides a rare opportunity to finally be around a group of students who share ones passion about academics and intellectual/artistic ECs.</p>

<p>The majority of such students who won’t end up on faculties of places like Ivies, so their chance of being around a large group of like minded people as college students is a once in a lifetime opportunity.</p>

<p>(I’m not saying that they can not find similar-thinking peers at less competitive universities. What I’m saying is that they won’t find a large proportion of such students because of the differences in the selection factors. For people who are intense, analytical, passionate about ECs and accademics, being in schools like Ivies can be a wonderful way to finally have peers who don’t regard one as being a brown noser, curve buster or wierdo for simply acting the way that comes naturally.)</p>

[simba]

<p>“we are speaking as if all kids who go to elites are scheming rich snobs fitting some cookie-cutter pattern who thought they were too good for the rest of society, and that just isn’t fair. Being a “mensch” and being an Ivy Leaguer are not mutually exclusive.”</p>

<p>“I agree with you, especially the last sentence (as the parent of an Ivy Leaguer, I live in hope!)”</p>

<p>ditto</p>

[Northstarmom]

<p>"Morever, the professors at the elite schools are also just better than State U’s. "</p>

<p>It matters how you define “better.” Professors at elite universities are likely to be much better at doing research and getting grants than are professors at less highly ranked universities. That’s because the top national universities’ select professors based on their research.</p>

<p>It’s possible that professors at less highly ranked universities are better teachers and mentors than are many Ivy and similar professors who may be much more interested in research than teaching.</p>

[simba]

<p>"The problem is the word “elite”. </p>

<p>The top schools don’t describe themselves as ‘elites’…the word is created by us.</p>

[dstark]

<p>Simba, your last post reminds me of a sign I saw in a store window.</p>

<p>"If you think you are hot stuff, take a walk in a cemetary. Those people buried there thought they were hot stuff once too. "</p>

[Momwaitingfornew]

<p>“Being a “mensch” and being an Ivy Leaguer are not mutually exclusive.”</p>

<p>ICargirl has a point here that I wish people would listen to.</p>

<p>Several people on the “elite” side of the debate have stated that they believe that there are super bright students at State U’s. Not all state students are like that, but, yes, some are. I have yet to hear something complimentary about Ivy Leaguers from those who are defending State U’s. So far, Ivy Leaguers/“elite” college students have been accused of being homogenous, cookie cutter learners, rich elitists, and a host of other adjectives that are far from admiring. Why is it necessary to belittle the achievement of those who attend prestigious schools in order to defend the education at state schools? </p>

<p>Dstark says, “We rank schools and the truth is that’s just a way for people to make money.”</p>

<p>Is it so difficult to admit that the quality of education may vary from institution to institution? Do people really think that Ivy League/top universities play numbers games to get in the top slots without having anything to back up the rank? Do they really think that education is a for-profit business?</p>

<p>As I’ve said a couple of times on this thread, students generally choose the best school for them, either because of “fit” or educational program or financial reasons or even to stay close to home. Ivy Leaguers and their ilk choose their schools because 1. they got in and 2. they want the particular challenge of that kind of education. Yeah, not all will be “mensches”, but certainly many of them will be; attending a state school doesn’t automatically confer mensch status, either. </p>

<p>The competitive nature of the top schools ensures that all kids there will be bright achievers. At a state school, one <em>cannot</em> guarantee that all kids will be bright achievers simply because of why these schools were founded. These universities exist to provide a college education to a broad spectrum of students, from the very bright to the adequate, mostly but not entirely citizens of the state. This is an admirable goal. However, because of this mission, the quality of the classroom environment cannot possibly be the same as an Ivy League one. There is <em>nothing</em> wrong with this, but it should be acknowledged as a very real difference. </p>

<p>The topic of this thread is “What are the Lifetime Advantages of Attending Top Colleges?” It is stated as a positive, non-elitist question. It does not in any way imply that state u. graduates cannot succeed in life or that they are dumb. It does not say that top college graduates are “better.” All it asks is for the advantages. Pretty simple, it seems to me, so I’m surprised by how defensive some people have become.</p>

[marite]

<p>I confess I still feel uneasy about the title of the thread, not because I do not believe that there are some life-long advantages to attending certain colleges, but because that was not the criterion on which we (parents and kids) selected the colleges. For me, the criterion was: what are the advantages of selecting College X or College Y for my particular child as he is now?</p>

[Alumother]

<p>Marite - Same situation, although I didn’t really mind the thread title too much. I really felt D needed a mid-sized school full of students similar to her. She likes to dive in and make relationships - and I thought she would really enjoy being surrounded by many kids like her rather than being kind of unique the way she was in high school. The school needed to be large enough to be a challenge and small enough that she could get her arms around it. I never did really think about what it would do for her career, since as I said at this point she wants to join the Peace Corps, save the world, and then have many many babies:).</p>

[curmudgeon]

<p>

@dross

SBMom:</p>

<p>Quote:
It’s not so hard to find. Usually, its $$$$$. </p>

<p>Ha! Of course you’re right. But I was looking for something a little more, you know, dignified than just hard cash. Surely non-elites have more redeemable uniqueness to offer than lower prices

</p>

<p>I think I’ll respond to this one. For my D the reasons were admittedly a balancing act between money and “fit”. She would have loved to go to Yale or Amherst but the money, although barely doable , posed significant problems with her desires after UG, and limited her opps even during UG. She (and her mother) felt the limitations outweighed the positives. </p>

<p>When weighing those two schools against the school she ultimately chose, Rhodes, she considered most everything mentioned on these threads. She recognized that the top students at Rhodes were the equal of the top at the elites (as most had turned down elites), but she was also aware that the bottom at Yale was higher than the bottom at Rhodes, and that they were more likely to be intellectually energized classmates. I really don’t see that anyone can argue against that. What is, is. She realized that this would have an impact on classroom discussions, but not as much impact on dorm discussions as she would find her level of discourse among the more talented students at Rhodes.</p>

<p>The idea that the prof’s themselves may be more exciting or engaged or prepared? She felt that the easy and immediate exposure to the prof’s at Rhodes might cancel out the national rep of the prof’s at Yale. </p>

<p>Ultimately the decison for her came down to the opportunities Rhodes made available to her because of the price and who they were and what they offered (summer abroad, semester abroad, research rather than waitressing in the summer, volunteering rather than work/study at school). I am posting links to three specific things that swayed my D. There were plenty of others. </p>

<p><a href=“http://www.rhodes.edu/StJudeSummerPlus/[/url]”>http://www.rhodes.edu/StJudeSummerPlus/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p><a href=“http://www.rhodes.edu/ReligiousLifeandCommunityService/Kinney-Program.cfm[/url]”>http://www.rhodes.edu/ReligiousLifeandCommunityService/Kinney-Program.cfm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p><a href=“http://www.rhodes.edu/InternationalEducation/SemesterandYearlongPrograms/EuropeanStudies.cfm[/url]”>http://www.rhodes.edu/InternationalEducation/SemesterandYearlongPrograms/EuropeanStudies.cfm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>Had these opps not been available, and had there not been elite caliber students to challenge, excite, and push her at Rhodes - she would be at Yale in the fall. Admittedly, had the money been equal , she would be at Yale (or Amherst) in the fall. To say she wouldn’t would be just silly in our case. But I can see where another kid would chose Rhodes **even if the money was equal **, because of issues of fit and opportunity and I think some elite folks need to understand that, too. </p>

<p>So, as usual I’m on both sides of this fence. Yes, there are significant reasons to attend elite schools other than the prestige connects, but those reasons to attend can be outweighed for a particular kid, even when attendance is possible financially. At least they were for one kid. ;)</p>

<p>Maybe the analysis she made will help somebody think differently about their choice, but then again - maybe not. ;)</p>

[Northstarmom]

<p>It may be interesting to hear why I started this thread: I did it because of puzzlement in seeing so many CC parents and students who are willling to go into debt as high as $100 k in order for the kid to go to a place like Harvard. I also have been puzzled by how many students/parents seem to have the desire to twist their kids (from a very early age) into someone whom they hope that Harvard will accept.</p>

<p>Clearly such people are assuming that going to a place like Harvard would payoff big time, so I was wondering exactly what they thought the payoff is for that kind of education.</p>

<p>As for me, I’m a H grad who did my best to raise my kids to develop and follow their own strengths and talents, and then find a college that was a good fit for the people whom they really are. While I think that H offers an excellent education, I wouldn’t go $100 k in debt for a kid to go there (Full disclosure: Due to grades, my kids also did not have this option). I know people whose kids have passed up places like HPY to accept excellent merit aid at some top 30 colleges, and their decisions have made sense to me. I also have seen that those students do extremely well upon graduation. This includes getting major graduate fellowships and getting into top graduate programs.</p>

[dstark]

<p>Northstarmom, is it worth it go to into debt to the tune of $100,000, so you can work on a college newspaper, with strong students, who are motivated by their love of the activity and no other reason?</p>