Why the Ivies, Stanford, and MIT are Different from Other Top Schools

College Search & Lists
61

<p>^^ Agree with Sam Lee’s post completely.</p>

<p>UChicago’s aid policy (I can’t speak for the other non-Ivy schools) is–well, not exactly abysmal, but it is remarkably stingy compared to what the Ivies offer, in particular HYP (and Stanford). The only reason I’d take any of the Ivies I applied to over UChicago would purely be for financial reasons, because with a brother in college already, money is a huge factor. In fact, I only applied to the Ivies I applied to for financial reasons; if money weren’t a concern, I’d have sent in my deposits to UChicago already.</p>

<p>So you might as well say that the Ivies “steal” students from other schools, as well. It works both ways.</p>

62

<p>Come on guys the Ivy League is an athletic conference. There are plenty of non ivy schools equal or superior to some of the Ivy League schools in one aspect or another. These are all fine schools but the Ivy distinction is way over rated. And everyone knows that some ivy admits would have dropped down the pecking order a whole bunch if they were not legacies, so job candidates with brand name pedigrees get only so much milage out of the distinction. It is far more uniformly difficult and therefor impressive to scarf up one of the merit scholarships you mention at these other top 20 schools. These merit scholarships are not being given for parental pedigree or accuracy of your slap shot like admissions to your preferred list of schools sometimes is.</p>

63

<p>

No, it’s a competitive market. It’s a very interesting one, because both the schools and the applicants have something the other wants. This is why some applicants will pay a great deal of money to go to certain schools, and certain schools will pay just about the same amount of money to get certain applicants to go there.</p>

64

<p>Davida, I think there’s a lot of elite prep schools that for years lazily depended on their connections to certain NE unis and LACs and are now doing a great disservice to their students because they simply know very little about higher education. I have friends whose children went to various elite preps and I’m amazed at the advice some of them were given. IE: Don’t try and get off waitlist at JHU, Richmond is more prestigious. Chicago as a safety. Harvey Mudd as a safety. Elon is a top school. Don’t worry, grandad went to Dartmouth, you’ll get in easily. I could go on. In short, just because your prep school counseled you and your friends on ‘top’ schools, doesn’t mean they actually knew a darned thing. I would imagine that many of these schools are reeling from no longer being able to rely on being a feeder school for the ivies and are trying to make old ways(make connections as feeder schools) fit a new order. You and your friends may have smirked at others who had to ‘settle’ for ‘step down’ schools but in reality, you’re going to have to grow out of your very small prep school vision and embrace reality. There’s a whole world of elite intellectual powerhouses out there, producing next generation brainiacs and leaders…and they span from ivies to publics. And in short, it doesn’t matter how or why these kids end up where they do, it doesn’t make the institution any less of a powerhouse.</p>

65

<p>Hekau, I don’t know what schools you consider prep schools, but the ones that send a high percentage of their class to HYPSMBBCDP are incredibly well informed about college admissions, higher education, etc. At the school I went to (or schools I considered elite prep schools - not just overpriced private schools that have low placement numbers) the kind of advice that you reported (which is hearsay) would have NEVER been given. And, the whole connections nonsense really only applies to certain smaller LAC’s, and it’s not really about “connections” but rather familiarity with the quality of the applicants coming from the given prep school that allows them to be more generous in their acceptances.</p>

<p>As far as the comment on legacies, legacies apply to other top privates outside of the ivy League as well whether it be Duke, U Chicago, Northwestern, Vanderbilt, whatever…It’s not something unique to the ivies. So, you are very uninformed. Also, it’s not more impressive to scarf up a merit scholarship because it is only offered at certain schools. HYP offers no merit scholarships, so it is more impressive that someone took a merit scholarship at Duke instead of going to Yale if they have the money and want to go to Yale more? No. I think there are a number of outside scholarships that are very impressive though, which have no relationship to what school you attend.</p>

<p>Also, the whole “Ivy League is just an athletic conference” has been thoroughly debunked. There is much more to their consortium than athletics, which is part of reason for the post initially. Financial aid policies are coordinated, admissions policies and reply dates are coordinated, the Ivy League presidents meet annually to discuss the academic environments of each school, there is an inter-Ivy library relationship where books and research materials can be shared, there are Ivy League alumni organizations which incorporate all eight schools, there is an Ivy Council (a student government which encompasses all eight institutions), social networking between the schools, etc., etc. Athletics is only a part of the “Ivy League.” Also, reputations of schools change over the years, but ivies will also maintain their status because they are in the league say 50 or so years from now. </p>

<p>Again, the fact that Chicago has the endowment and student body size that it has and refuses to provide adequate aid to middle class students is not something that should be lauded. There is a difference between the ivies giving out decent need-based aid and other schools hoarding their money and choosing to give out huge merit based scholarships to select students to steal them from schools that are putting their resources in the right place. “Stealing” is when schools offer money not based on need to get students who an institution may lose in a cross-admit battle. The ivies give out aid based on need only so clearly this doesn’t apply.</p>

66

<p>Sam Lee: Your point earlier was Ivies were impressive despite not offering better aid. But according to this statement from you, Ivies are better because they provide better FA. So which point are you trying to make?</p>

<p>It’s not a matter of “better” aid. It’s different aid. The point I was making was the difference between need-based and merit aid. I don’t know why you still don’t get that. There’s no contradiction. They are DIFFERENT financial aid policies.</p>

67

<p>Hope2getrice, the idea that someone by virtue of going to Johns Hopkins and studying IR as opposed to Brown will automatically get an advantage is uninformed. It will come down to the individual students accomplishments, transcript, interviewing skills, etc., and Brown’s IR program at the undergraduate level is certainly as good as Johns Hopkins and any differences are too slight to be significant in terms of academic quality. </p>

<p>Harvard students do not have a tougher time getting into top engineering grad programs and being at a disadvantage in comparison to WUSTL and Rice students. Not only will Harvard students likely have a slight advantage, but the institution attended in that particular case is far less important than the qualities of the individual applicant. And, Harvard and Yale students place far better in the journalism world than Northwestern’s Medill School (FYI) – do some legwork at look at biographies at top media organizations or publications - not just what some ranking says.</p>

68

<p>What people fail to understand is that the “lower” ivy = U CHicago, Northwestern, Rice, WUSTL, Northwestern, Emory, Vanderbilt, etc. thing came about largely due to U.S. News & World Report rankings and those institutions doing what they could to get stats to mirror the lower ivies so that they can maintain their ranking. One of those tactics is cross-admit stealing through what is essentially bribery to students who are often incredibly affluent. </p>

<p>Studies that have been done on alumni success (like number of people in Who’s Who type lists such as NNBD or Forbes billionaires or whatever) show that schools like WUSTL, Emory, Vanderbilt, Rice, Carnegie Mellon, Caltech, etc. do not compare at all to the lower ivies when it comes to the number of exceptionally successful alumni. Some “peer” institutions have been able to compete because admission to the ivy league has become too competitive and top students need somewhere else to go in addition to a few HUGE donations which propped up their endowment, and their geographical location – essentially they become considered equivalents to the lower ivies as a reaction to perceived east coast prestige bias. The propensity to consider WUSTL equal to Brown is largely due to wanting to be fair to all parts of the country, especially when it comes from published rankings. If you look at pure peer assessment scores though, all of the ivies outplace Rice, Vanderbilt, WUSTL, Emory, CMU, etc.</p>

69

<p>“If you look at pure peer assessment scores though, all of the ivies outplace Rice, Vanderbilt, WUSTL, Emory, CMU, etc”</p>

<p>Well, that’s the same as saying Harvard’s PA score trumps all the schools in the nation. You wanted to argue that the “lower” ivies’ PA scores are higher than those schools’ you’re trying to compare with, but failed miserably. Hence you included HYP’s PA scores so that no one would be able to argue against that.</p>

<p>Btw, you didn’t include Caltech’s PA score which trumps all the ivies besides HYP.</p>

<p>You also failed to mention that UChicago’s 4.6 peer asssessment score is higher than Columbia’s, UPenn’s, Dartmouth’s, Brown’s, and Cornell’s. Even when UChicago is almost twice less selective as those 5 schools. </p>

<p>Duke’s PA score is higher than Dartmouth’s and Brown’s.</p>

<p>Northwestern’s PA score is the same as Dartmouth’s and Brown’s.</p>

<p>“What people fail to understand is that the “lower” ivy = U CHicago, Northwestern, Rice, WUSTL, Northwestern, Emory, Vanderbilt, etc. thing came about largely due to U.S. News & World Report rankings and those institutions doing what they could to get stats to mirror the lower ivies so that they can maintain their ranking.”</p>

<p>And what people fail to understand is that the “lower” ivies are perceived higher than those schools you listed because they are associated with HYP, arguably the 3 best schools in the nation. But USNEWS statistical data have been successful in showing the world that the students at the “lower” ivies are not different when compared to their non ivies peer institutions and some of them even have lower average test scores when being compared to the schools you listed.</p>

70

<p>“Look, prestige matters to people, either for its own sake or because they think it stands for quality. And prestige is a matter of perception, primarily. The Ivies and a few others have enough prestige based on historic perception that they are able to perpetuate their position at the top of the prestige pile.”</p>

<p>Agreed, but the same set of institutions do not mean “prestige” in all parts of the country. In Dallas, SMU is highly prestigious and outranks Ivies. In parts of the South, going to the state flagship is a must. The Northeast doesn’t own the definition of the word prestige.</p>

<p>Also, I disagree that the vast majority of hs seniors / college freshmen want prestige. I submit that most are happy with going to a good-enough, local, affordable school and aren’t really worrying about prestige one way or the other.</p>

71

<p>

</p>

<p>So you came from a pretentious, overwrought environment where distinctions at this level were made. This proves what, again? Does that actually mean that those differences are real, just because you all sweated over them? Golly, I think American Airlines first class service overseas is better than United Airlines first class service overseas, but they’re still both first class cabins so is there any significant difference in the bigger picture? </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>You might be surprised when you get out in the big, big world that there are adults, who have really good, influential and well-paying jobs, who do recruiting and hiring and who have the “power” over job applicants, who are merely throwing all of these schools into one big pile of “good schools” and not sweating over the minute differences that you and your prep school environment care so much about. You might even find that there are (gasp) state flagship school grads making a ton of money who could buy and sell you and don’t particularly give a crap what school you went to as long as you can produce on the job! I’m a top 20 grad myself and I loved the experience and I wouldn’t trade it for anything - but c’mon, out in the real world, past the first job, it’s who you are, not where you went to school.</p>

72

<p>

There is certainly some truth to this, but it’s not as true as it used to be–I think there is more of a national market for prestige than there used to be (which explains how WashU became a major player, I think).</p>

73

<p>Yes, I agree (esp because I’m quite familiar with WUSTL, and it was never a slouch school). And I’d say Vandy and Emory have also benefited from that.</p>

<p>It will be interesting to know in the new recession economy, where more people are going to have to make decisions based on cost and on geographic proximity to home, whether that trend will continue.</p>

74

<p>Pizzagirl, I never “sweated” over the differences. It’s not like people spent time discussing the “distinctions” and you are correct when you say it’s about the person more than the school. But, the preferences among top schools were clear and they reflect the cross-admit battle data.</p>

75

<p>Davida, first off, I’m not a recent college grad; I’m the mother of two high schoolers. I have zero insecurities about college choices. I applied to 4 top-20 schools and got into all 4. One of them happened to be an Ivy; I turned it down to go to another of the schools because of a particular program the other school had that interested me. (OMG-turned-down-an-Ivy!) I was full-pay and finances were not an issue or consideration.</p>

<p>I would have had a fabulous education and a fabulous time at any of those schools; my opportunities would have been <em>different</em> and I might have wound up doing very different things if I’d gone to the others, but none of them were bad choices. I just think it’s silly to categorize schools at these levels in anything other than broad bands. They’re all excellent, and it’s jumping-the-shark to even use the term “lower Ivies.”</p>

<p>BTW, I find the use of preference rankings in cross-admit battle data amusing. Yes, I can see that in a head-to-head, x% prefer college A and y% prefer college B. That is useful for the folks at college B to know, of course, but what relevance does it have to me, the “consumer”? What, I’m supposed to adjust or design my own preferences based on what other people think? It’s descriptive data, not prescriptive.</p>

76

<p>davida1 – I remember you from discussion on professional school placements from early last year.</p>

<p>Your posting style is a little odd… I can’t decide it you are a legitimate expert in all things collegiate, or simply passing on information you have painstakingly gathered in your own (recent) undergraduate college search process.</p>

<p>Those are two very different starting points, and people who read your advice need a context in which to understand the importance, relevance and validity of your pronouncements…</p>

77

<p>DavidA, in terms of Peer Prestige, JHU and UChicago rank on the same level as Cornell and Columbia. Both rank ABOVE UPenn, Dartmouth, and Brown.
Stanford, MIT, Caltech, and Berkeley BOTH outrank Columbia AND Cornell.
and yes, this is a judge of Prestige on the Undergraduate level by the presidents of peer universities and provosts, etc.</p>

78

<p>Davida, the prep schools that I’m familiar with happen to top most people’s tippy top list…and then range down to local feeder schools for Penn, Haverford, and Williams. I stick by my claim that these schools have been thrown for a loop and are now searching for new connections…not necessarily in the best interest of their students.</p>

<p>And in the ‘real’ world happening right now, pay attention…you have a president who taught at Uchicago…but you also have Paul Krugman dismissing UChicago economics and Uchicago economists answering back in a debate over where the whole world is going to end up…if you want to see that as Chicago being less than the ivies, so be it. But you’re missing out on the real world. Other schools matter, they matter a great deal. The world isn’t shaped by a few schools, and amazingly, there’s probably a kid at some state school that’s going to make you wet your pants some day…and that’s a good thing.</p>

79

<p>Hope2getrice: Thanks, I thought Cornell and Columbia’s peer assessment score was right with JHU and UChicago. Haha, the Cornell hating that goes on here, so ridiculous.</p>

80

<p>bjomountis, Cornell is an amazingly advanced and respected school throughout the United States and the World. People here enjoy bashing Cornell because it’s developed this role as the safety Ivy, and/or the public-ish Ivy, but that’s because the people here look at Prestige through how difficult it is to enter a school, etc etc. That’s why you have people here that might hold Brown or Dartmouth to higher regards than either Penn or Cornell simply due to selectivity. What CCers forget to realize is how important the school’s ACTUAL academic capabilities are. I’m sure Brown and Dartmouth are the cream of the crop schools in the nation. However, do they have some of the amazing research resources and cutting edge facilities that Cornell has developed and is further developing for the sciences? Do they have leading faculty in such fields as out there as Hotel Management, Veterinary Sciences, and Agriculture? Cornell is a fantastic school that is widely respected by members of science, engineering, business, law etc. And in the real world, the CCers will find that a degree from Cornell often elicits a lot more respect than a degree from Dartmouth.</p>

<p>That’s not to say any of these mentioned schools are bad whatsoever. However, there are positives to schools that are non-ivy that I doubt the OP, Davida, even knew existed.</p>

<p>For example, which was the ONLY University that TOOK OVER for to monitor toxic gas levels in NYC at ground zero after 9/11 because the US Government didn’t have sufficient enough or advanced enough equipment? Johns Hopkins University.</p>

<p>Which University was the developing spot of the Atomic Bomb and also has the most respected Economics department in the World? University of Chicago. </p>

<p>The list goes on and on. Are the Ivies great? Sure! but outside of HYP, schools like Duke, Uchicago, JHU, etc, often trump and/or are equal in terms of prestige, accomplishments and academic prowess.</p>