Do Ivy League Schools Really Matter?

[supernova1203]

So I am in high school here in Canada, my grades are good enough to get me into any school and program in Canada, I want to go into engineering or physics for my bachelors degree, my question is does it matter weather or not i get into an ivy league school? is it a big deal or not?

Even though i got the grades and intellect I am kinda paranoid @_@

Will it make a big difference in the curriculum?

What about future prospects? Will employers look me differently? (ill defiantly go into grad school eventually as well) (yes Canada has its ivy league as well)

P.s. i looked at the list of all the astronauts (yes ALL of them, list of astronauts from nasa, from 1960s to present day) and none of them were from any ivy league schools, which makes me feel a lot better, proof that you don't have to go into one of these super hyped fancy schmancy schools to reach for your dreams

 

[Mapes]

(yes Canada has its ivy league as well)

?

The Ivy League is an athletic conference in the U.S.

Are you asking whether it matters whether one goes to a higher-ranked school or a lower-ranked school? Yes, of course it makes a difference. But as you said, it's certainly not necessarily a crippling difference if one goes to a lower-ranked school.

 

[supernova1203]

there's a difference between a high ranked school and an ivy league school.

cal tech is high ranked, but its certainly no harvard is it?

i could give more examples

 

[DR13]

cal tech is high ranked, but its certainly no harvard is it?

Depends on the subject. CIT has the edge in math, science, etc. Even schools like Georgia Tech, Texas, Michigan, etc have the edge on Harvard when it comes to engineering. You can't judge a school on name alone. Look at the program and see if the college is the right fit for you.

 

[Mapes]

cal tech is high ranked, but its certainly no harvard is it?

Depends on how much one likes putting snow chains on one's tires (tip of the hat to RPF*).

*Technically, Princeton vs. Cal Tech.

 

[twofish-quant]

You need to think in terms of individual schools. Harvard and MIT are *very* different schools. I loved MIT in a twisted way, but I know of very intelligent, smart people for whom MIT was total hell.

Will it make a big difference in the curriculum?

As far as physics goes, the undergraduate curriculum is pretty standard. Schools however have very different cultures, and that makes a big difference, but that often involves individual things.

What about future prospects? Will employers look me differently? (ill defiantly go into grad school eventually as well)

It's complicated. The misconception is that employers will see Harvard on the resume and kiss your feet, but it doesn't work that way. Where a school will help you get a job is...

1) employers don't hire people from Harvard because they think that Harvard people are smarter. They hire them because it's unlikely that you will find someone totally incompetent from Harvard. Think of it like Best Buy. You buy electronics from a superstore rather than from someone at the side of the road, not because the electronics is "better", but because you run into a much smaller chance of running into a dud.

2) some schools are better at marketing their students. You can think of a university as "Brains R' US". If you are an employer and you talk to a school that is good at marketing, they'll set up interviews, work with you to get the students that you want, etc. etc.

3) if there are alumni from the school that you go to that have the jobs you want, you can find all sorts of useful information from them.

Where a school will help you is getting your resume to the people that matter. Also, you have to study this for yourself, because some big name schools are bad at this, and some no-name schools are good at this. One thing that is weird, considering the thread with Nano-Passion is that Rutgers and Baurch are schools that I think are particularly good at career services.

One trend that I see is that there are so many smart people ending up outside the big name schools, that I think that over time it's going to matter a lot less. In 1940, the admission rate for Harvard was 85% (!), where as it's now 6% and heading down.

http://101grads.com/2011/06/04/college-statistics-from-live-and-learn-in-the-new-yorker/

Your chances of getting in if you have a relative that went to Harvard is 30%

http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2011/5/11/admissions-fitzsimmons-legacy-legacies/

P.s. i looked at the list of all the astronauts (yes ALL of them, list of astronauts from nasa, from 1960s to present day) and none of them were from any ivy league schools, which makes me feel a lot better, proof that you don't have to go into one of these super hyped fancy schmancy schools to reach for your dreams

It depends on what your dreams are. People that don't go to a relatively small number of law schools don't make it to be Supreme Court justices. Also I don't know of too many people with big name physics Ph.D.'s working in Wall Street. My guess is that they end up with academic jobs.

Also, it helps to have an entrepreneurial spirit. If MIT rejects you and Frank's Backalley Physics School and Tattoo Parlor accepts you, then screw MIT and turn Frank's Physics School into #1.

 

[twofish-quant]

cal tech is high ranked, but its certainly no harvard is it?

It isn't. In some areas (say planetary science), it's light years better.

 

[Pengwuino]

One thing I'd like to add to what twofish said is that it's not great schools that makes someone great - it's great people who make schools great. If you give a crumby, unmotivated student an education and degree from MIT (not that he has a chance of graduating anyhow but let's assume he cheated his whole way through), he won't be successful in life. If you put a talented, motivated student in a 2nd tier university, he's still going to be successful.

 

[Sankaku]

http://101grads.com/2011/06/04/college-statistics-from-live-and-learn-in-the-new-yorker/

Your chances of getting in if you have a relative that went to Harvard is 30%

The original article linked on that page is very much worth reading.

http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/atlarge/2011/06/06/110606crat_atlarge_menand?currentPage=all

There was a paragraph that stood out to me:

"If you are friendly toward Theory 2, on the other hand, you worry that the competition for slots in top-tier colleges is warping educational priorities. You see academic tulip mania: students and their parents are overvaluing a commodity for which there are cheap and plentiful substitutes."

Tulip Mania could be renamed Ivy Mania in this case. This quote does not do justice to the whole article, but I liked the phrase. Humans like simple measurements in a complex world. Fixating on an Ivy League school (or equivalent) is a easy way to bypass having to make mature and difficult decisions about your future. You just let public opinion set your path...

 

[twofish-quant]

If you give a crumby, unmotivated student an education and degree from MIT (not that he has a chance of graduating anyhow but let's assume he cheated his whole way through), he won't be successful in life.

Don't know if this is true. People are too complicated to make general statements. For example, you could have someone that would thrive at a small liberal arts college but fall apart at MIT, or vice versa.

One thing that I did learn at MIT is to be extremely cynical about the "cult of success." I'm seeing a lot of high school students go through the same sort of brainwashing that I went through, and it's really complicated to see what happens at the other end.

Also, life is not fair. There are people that just get lucky or unlucky.

Oddly enough, I feel more comfortable being a miserable failure.

If you put a talented, motivated student in a 2nd tier university, he's still going to be successful.

On the other hand, put that same person in a country that falls apart due to civil war, and they probably won't be, by any conventional definition of success. Had people made slightly different decisions in 2007, then we'd all be on the street selling apples.

The other thing is that by the time I got into college I was throughly brainwashed by my parents and teachers going back to elementary school. What my college was probably made a lot less difference in my life than who my parents were and where I was born.

I hate success.

 

[supernova1203]

Schools however have very different cultures, and that makes a big difference
.

Yep. that's what i heard, a lot of people up here in Canada are dying to get into some of these ivy league schools(U of T) but iv also heard horror stories about the environment, and a completely different(bad) culture and vibe, its not considered the best learning environment from what i can gather so far.

 

[Norman]

With the ivy league schools (and any premiere, highest echelon schools) there is also the culture of power to consider. Rich, powerful people send their kids to these schools to meet and get to know (and often times marry) the children of other rich, power people. It is this social circle which will guarantee their continued success in the world, not simply the very good education they are receiving. This is what really sets the Harvards, Yales and Oxfords of the world apart from the other very good schools.

The schools have a vested interest in maintaining this culture of power, also. Take a look at any of the Ivy leagues schools endowments - Harvard is upwards of $20 Billion and Yale is somewhere in near $10 Billion. That is a lot of money at their disposal to maintain their interests.