G
Glycerine
Guest
What about one of the service academies? They are definitely on par with the Ivies and if you get in, it's free (besides a five year commitment in the military) and you get monthly stipends.
There are some fields where UT would be just fine (for example, anything in the petroleum industry, or within the state of Texas). In other, if not most, fields, the Ivy League degree will absolutely provide a substantial advantage compared to alternatives. It's terribly unfair, but there are doors available to you as a Columbia grad that simply aren't there for a graduate of a state U, particularly in this day and age.
There's something important to note here - you don't go to college to get an education. An education might be a nice byproduct, but the reason you (assuming you're middle class) go to a university in the United States is to secure a signifier of elevated social class, or, when we're euphemizing it, that a person "has what it takes" to make it in a certain field.
Just something to keep in mind.
What about one of the service academies? They are definitely on par with the Ivies and if you get in, it's free (besides a five year commitment in the military) and you get monthly stipends.
Does anyone have any info on the UCs? Particularly Berkeley and LA? I'm also interested in those.
But, using this particular list as an example, we have the following state schools in the top 50 of the rankings:
Penn (Ivy)
Great program at a school you like for nearly free vs. marginally better program at Ivy League costs, with probably marginal subsidies? Why are you even thinking about it?
Guess what - there are also doors that are open to someone who is not in debt, which are firmly shut to someone with tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of debt. For example, buying a house, or (responsibly) having children at a somewhat early age, or having the freedom to switch careers/jobs, or not having the stress over your head of always having to pay a large chunk of your salary (whether or not you have a salary) towards student loans every month, which are not discharged even in bankruptcy. Just something to keep in mind.
Also your last paragraph is complete lunacy.![]()
No. Absolute not. I'm going to come off as close-minded and possibly stupid, but I absolutely refuse. My father was in the military, my uncle and grandfather were in the military, I lived on military bases for a fair part of my life, and I have had more than enough of a taste of that environment. I know enough to say that the military, regardless of what sector of it, is not where I want to be.
My areas of interest is not the hard sciences either, so I'm taking the Ivy Leagues seriously for that reason. If I was interested in the hard sciences, I would go to UT and laugh all the way to the bank. However, I have an interest in law and the humanities....so, I thought an Ivy might provide that edge.
Does anyone have any info on the UCs? Particularly Berkeley and LA? I'm also interested in those.
Contrary to what it may seem at first, the University of Pennsylvania is a private institution.
Possibly because it's a big decision, and one that will affect the trajectory of the rest of one's life?
No one's saying that this isn't the case. However, I will say this - I took that route, going with an essentially paid-for state school over a higher prestige, more expensive school. I can't say that I regret the decision, but at 18 years old, I had no clue what the trade-offs involved, nor did I understand how the college prestige game worked. All I had was people telling me that going to college was the important part, and that it was essentially the same anywhere. Flash forward a few years later, and I begin to realized that in many respects, that's a complete load of horse manure.
Sure. You tell yourself that.
Contrary to what it may seem at first, the University of Pennsylvania is a private institution.
Make it happen.
On the other hand, if you are interested in science, you will probably go to grad school, where science is about all you will study. Any breadth of education - exposure to humanities, arts, even other fields of science - will have to be done as an undergrad. This is what I did, and those seemingly unrelated courses, and activities done just for the enjoyment/experience of it have served me in good stead.Therefore, if you're going into the hard sciences, the decision is a simple one - you go to the university where they have the most intensive program that focuses on the sorts of questions that makes you the most excited. So, if you're into meteorology, you go to a school like Penn State, or the University of Oklahoma (my alma mater). If you're into experimental physics, do what you can to get to Berkeley. If you're into computing or theoretical physics, both Caltech and MIT are impressive options.
I agree for the most part. In grad school, it is your research advisor and your thesis/dissertation topic that is important. Run-of-the-mill state schools even can have some faculty who are real authorities in their field, and if you work with them and publish, your (grad) credentials are as good as anyone else's. Having an Ivy Leage undergrad background on top of this (not instead) is icing on the cake. It is about the experiences available to you, the things you were exposed to, and rightly or wrongly suggests that you are a higher caliber of student to begin with.As far as I understand it, it's the complete opposite: the prestige bonus is almost entirely conferred upon undergraduates, and much attenuated for grad students. Even for those on a professorial track, the Ivy League bonus comes less from the prestige of the institution itself, than from the types of projects and research you are exposed to, not to mention the available financial resources. After a certain level, though, you start running into prestige barriers, especially when it comes to things like funding one's own projects. That's not nearly as much of a problem for the undergrads, provided that they developed a robust social network.
Depends. Computer Science and Engineering at San Jose State? You are sure as hell going to have Silicon Valley right beside you even with other more "prestigious" institutions like Stanford being close by and Cal Poly being nearby Los Angeles.
More apt would be getting an MBA at Santa Clara University. Santa Clara University is considered a 'regional college or university' according to US World News and Report etc. rankings. However, it is respected in Silicon Valley (I live here, I know) and it's a joke that an MBA from SCU and some visionary from Stanford always team up to make some dream team start up. The SCU person is seen more as more the bread and butter, bookeeping, COO role and the Stanford grad is seen as the idea juice.
Also, prestige is important, it's as important as you make it. It is very real. If you only plan on doing undergrad, then your undergrad's prestige is more important than the grad school you never go to. Trump's kids "studied business at Wharton" but at the undergrad level only but they still use that name to effect.
When I talked to someone at the USC b-school she mentioned regionalism is a factor. East coast schools are better known for business, a b-degree from NYU Stern is nationally recognized and will open doors for you because the network is everywhere. She said the grads from USC tend to stay more in CA, and if that's what I wanted then great, but it was a factor to consider...or maybe it was UCLA...I forget now.![]()
[...]networking make all the difference.
If you go to an Ivy, make sure someone other than you pays (not your parents either). If your transcripts are stellar, you should have no problem getting a scholarship.
Having gone to both a state school (a rather good one), and an Ivy equivalent (it out ranks most Ivy League schools), I must admit there can be a difference. But I think it is hard for that difference to show up in a typical undergrad experience. You'll have more interesting choices in an Ivy. But if you were doing engineering or a hard science, I would say it makes little difference in undergrad. Accredited programs in these follow pretty much the same curriculum. In the liberal arts, things may be different.
If you plan to do a lot of undergraduate research or go on to grad school/professional school... Doing research or being an apprentice with the people leading their fields is quite different from a mentoring perspective than simply working with researchers or practitioners in the field. That being said, there are great researchers and practitioners at state schools too.
Also, your competition will be tougher at a top 10 school. If you are used to being at the head of the class, things may be different for you. From a planning perspective, getting into Harvard Law after State U liberal arts is better than Harvard Undergrad followed by State U Law. Of course two Ivys back to back is better still.
Another thing I noticed is that Stanford had a lot more people with entrepreneurial aspirations than Virginia Tech. But if you join the right clubs, and hang out with the right crowd, you could be part of a college start-up anywhere.
Whatever you decide, try your best to get scholarships.
I wish i had known how true this is. I am a horrible networker. Even if you go to Stanford, and work for Intel for some time, if you don't keep in touch with the people you meet, finding jobs becomes a difficult task.
Doesn't bother me in the slightest. I rank pretty high, but my school is absolutely cutthroat, I know my worth. We get "prodigy" kids on a regular basis, the kind that make the news for solving thirty-year old math problems, or working with prestigious research institutions and sweeping world competitions.
I like the advice about networking, that's definitely something I'm going to work to improve, after all the things I've heard here.
What school do you attend, if you don't mind me asking?.
.She dun like to tell you.![]()