Has anyone here been to Harvard?

[FishmanGeertz]

Harvard university is the single most prestigious college in the entire world. Only about 5% of applicants are accepted because it's requirements are so staggeringly high. Not to mention full time tuition can cost >$250,000 for a bachelors degree. And their graduate schools are even costlier.

Has anyone here been to Harvard university, Yale, Princeton, MIT, or any other ivy-league college? Harvard's alumni include many of the wealthiest and most powerful people in the world. Such as Bill Gates, Barack Obama, Mark Zuckerberg, Ben Bernanke, and so forth.

Is it true that Harvard requires a GPA of almost 4.0 and an SAT score of 2200/2400? The requirements to these schools are so high and restrictive, that fewer than 5% of applicants are accepted.

Is the coursework at these colleges more difficult compared to other schools?

 

[Pengwuino]

I know one of the math guys is an MIT grad. I think it's two-fish but I'm not sure.

Harvard and MIT and the likes do take in the cream of the crop, but there is no strict GPA/SAT requirement as far as I know. I think whoever I'm thinking of on this forum that went to MIT will have something to say about coursework at MIT compared to Harvard though.

 

[FishmanGeertz]

I know one of the math guys is an MIT grad. I think it's two-fish but I'm not sure.

Harvard and MIT and the likes do take in the cream of the crop, but there is no strict GPA/SAT requirement as far as I know. I think whoever I'm thinking of on this forum that went to MIT will have something to say about coursework at MIT compared to Harvard though.

MIT primarily focuses on physics/math, engineering, science, and technology, which is why most of the geniuses and brainiacs in the academic world can be found there. I believe I read somewhere that Harvard/MIT requires a GPA of almost 4.0, and a minimum SAT score of 2200 out of a "perfect" score of 2400. As well as a comparable score on the ACT. Very few people score above 2000 on the SAT. And every year, only three or four people get a perfect score on the test, out of millions of the high school graduates who take it.

For some reason, I was never given the SAT upon my HS graduation. I might score average/above average on the reading and writing segments, but I assure you that I would get a miserable score on the math part. My math skills are abysmal! Not to mention that you are not given enough time to complete the test, and are "rushed" through it.

Most of the students going to the "prestigious" colleges come from families which are very wealthy. Sometimes they give the school a $500,000 donation and they'll immediately accept their kid. Regardless of how he did in high school.

 

[Pengwuino]

MIT primarily focuses on physics/math, engineering, science, and technology, which is why most of the geniuses and brainiacs in the academic world can be found there.

No they aren't. I personally can't name a single big name at MIT. That's not to say there are none, I just have a horrible memory .

On a more serious note, the greatest minds are scattered throughout the world. Take a look, find the biggest names in physics and look at where they are at. They'll be at many many different universities.

Most of the students going to the "prestigious" colleges come from families which are very wealthy. Sometimes they give the school a $500,000 donation and they'll immediately accept their kid. Regardless of how he did in high school.

Do you have any proof to back this up? This was a nice thought when I was a 14 year old thinking about college, but I've yet to hear of any evidence clearly showing this.

 

[FishmanGeertz]

No they aren't. I personally can't name a single big name at MIT. That's not to say there are none, I just have a horrible memory .

On a more serious note, the greatest minds are scattered throughout the world. Take a look, find the biggest names in physics and look at where they are at. They'll be at many many different universities.



Do you have any proof to back this up? This was a nice thought when I was a 14 year old thinking about college, but I've yet to hear of any evidence clearly showing this.

If you have enough money, you can buy practically anything. Even your way into college.

 

[flyingpig]

Do you have any proof to back this up? This was a nice thought when I was a 14 year old thinking about college, but I've yet to hear of any evidence clearly showing this.

Unless someone actually does a statistics on this, I don't think so. I know someone from Brown and he tells me there are quite a few big donors who attend Brown. He himself doesn't come from a rich family since he has like 4 brothers, but I think his dad is an alumni from Brown Math Dept.

Check your competitions

http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/cornell-university/720850-whats-lowest-gpa-youve-ever-seen-someone-get-accepted-into-cornell.html

http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/uc-transfers/912252-lowest-gpa-admitted-you-have-ever-heard.html

Also I found this http://web.mit.edu/ir/cds/2005/c.html

 

[Vanadium 50]

I went to MIT. None of my friends were from families that were what I would call rich, but a few were well-off. That is, their families' money was new and earned, not old and inherited. Nobody was making million-dollar donations to anyone or anything.

There were big names at MIT: Guth, Chomsky, Ting, Jaffe, Thomas, Friedman, Kendell, Shull.

 

[eri]

Harvard doesn't have any GPA or SAT requirements - if you have a diploma or GED and took the SAT and three subject tests, you can apply. However, they turn down 4.0 (unweighted) students, valedictorians, and perfect SAT scorers every year. You don't need perfect grades to get in, and perfect grades won't necessarily get you in. Everyone applying has the highest grades in the hardest classes and very high test scores - you need a lot more than that to get in.

As for buying your way in, Meg Whitman got her two sons into Princeton for the price of a $30,000,000 dorm (both of whom got kicked out of said dorm). I think one of them graduated; both had horrible academic reputations and were, by all accounts, a-holes.

 

[qspeechc]

George W. Bush graduated from Yale and then Harvard business school. Either he didn't get in on merit or he's much smarter than he's letting on.

More to the point, you have to be an exceptional student to get into a university like Harvard, becuase that's where all the top students in the world want to go (so the competition is very tough). Ivy league schools do have very many excellent researchers, but that's not to say they have all of them, there are plenty top professors elsewhere. Ivy league universities probably have more top researches in general.

About the level of difficulty of the Ivy league universities, people who went there give conflicting opinions. What is undeniable is that you are surrounded by other brilliant students and staff, which must play a very big part in your education and their prestige.

 

[Mapes]

Is the coursework at these colleges more difficult compared to other schools?

MIT's OpenCourseWare Project puts MIT coursework online, so you can compare for yourself.

 

[clope023]

Harvard university is the single most prestigious college in the entire world. Only about 5% of applicants are accepted because it's requirements are so staggeringly high. Not to mention full time tuition can cost >$250,000 for a bachelors degree. And their graduate schools are even costlier.

Has anyone here been to Harvard university, Yale, Princeton, MIT, or any other ivy-league college? Harvard's alumni include many of the wealthiest and most powerful people in the world. Such as Bill Gates, Barack Obama, Mark Zuckerberg, Ben Bernanke, and so forth.

Is it true that Harvard requires a GPA of almost 4.0 and an SAT score of 2200/2400? The requirements to these schools are so high and restrictive, that fewer than 5% of applicants are accepted.

Is the coursework at these colleges more difficult compared to other schools?

I did not but just pointing out MIT isn't an ivy league college, actually from what I hear they hate being compared to the ivy's.

 

[Leptos]

I had a friend that went to one of the top 10 high schools in the nation and had a 97 average with an SAT score of 2360, 5s in all his AP exams, and ridiculous amounts of extracurriculars and summer programs, and yet he still got rejected by Harvard so I guess it was a "bad roll of the die" for him.

 

[rhombusjr]

It is absolutely not true that these school require a 4.0 to get in. If you look at their admissions pages they explicitly state this. IIRC, the average GPA for admitted MIT freshman is ~3.8 and average SAT scores is ~2200. So for every 4.0, 2400 student they admit, there's also a 3.6, 2000 student they admit (hypothetically anyway). Scores and grades are by no means THE criteria by which top schools base their admittance. There are students who apply early to MIT and CalTech and get immediately accepted by one and rejected flat off by the other.

One thing that they try to teach you at MIT is to hate prestige.

I'm not quite sure what tuition cost has to do with anything; my school costs ~$50k/year and is ranked about 80-90 places below top schools.

 

[Shackleford]

Don't get the mistaken impression that only the top minds go to Harvard or MIT. As someone said, they're everywhere. I would say those universities, and others, simply have a higher concentration of top minds.

 

[Leveret]

MIT primarily focuses on physics/math, engineering, science, and technology, which is why most of the geniuses and brainiacs in the academic world can be found there. I believe I read somewhere that Harvard/MIT requires a GPA of almost 4.0, and a minimum SAT score of 2200 out of a "perfect" score of 2400. As well as a comparable score on the ACT. Very few people score above 2000 on the SAT. And every year, only three or four people get a perfect score on the test, out of millions of the high school graduates who take it.

Can you back up any of these statements with factual evidence? Statistically speaking, a small fraction of the world's "geniuses and braniacs" attend Harvard or MIT (there are 7000 undergrads at Harvard, and around 4000 at MIT; using a definition of "genius" that would encompass all of these students, there are well over 11000 geniuses in the world). I have never heard of a university that requires both the SAT and the ACT, and although it's certainly possible one might exist, Harvard is not it. Finally, I personally know three people who got perfect SAT scores and one with a perfect ACT score, despite my having attended to a relatively small high school.

Pardon me for saying so, but you seem to be just regurgitating facts that are either of dubious veracity or that are taken out of context, and I'm not entirely sure what kind of response you're looking for here. If it's information you're after, a lot of your admissions-related questions can probably be answered here:
http://www.admissions.college.harvard.edu/apply/faq.html

 

[thegreenlaser]

I think ivy leagues are quite a bit blown out of proportion as far as how good they are. I mean, just think about it logically: If they only accept the best of the best as students, then it's really not that shocking that their graduates are good. It's like buying a sports car and then saying to your friend with his minivan, "Hey look, I can go faster than you. I must be a way better driver than you!"

In fact, I'd say if these ivy league schools aren't producing better graduates after being so selective about who they take in, then they're doing a very poor job. I would say the quality lies in the students rather than the school. For some reason though, people are just obsessed with ivy league schools...

 

[johng23]

I think ivy leagues are quite a bit blown out of proportion as far as how good they are. I mean, just think about it logically: If they only accept the best of the best as students, then it's really not that shocking that their graduates are good. It's like buying a sports car and then saying to your friend with his minivan, "Hey look, I can go faster than you. I must be a way better driver than you!"

In fact, I'd say if these ivy league schools aren't producing better graduates after being so selective about who they take in, then they're doing a very poor job. I would say the quality lies in the students rather than the school. For some reason though, people are just obsessed with ivy league schools...

The reason that people are obsessed with them is because a degree is a credential. You're arguing that the ivy degree is largely a reflection of the fact that the individual was talented to begin with. I don't think many ivy league grads would disagree.

Your ivy league degree signals to potential employers or grad schools that you were able to complete difficult work with some level of success. Is it true that some schools which lack prestige have coursework which rivals the ivy leagues in terms of difficulty? I don't doubt it. But if the potential employer's or grad schools aren't aware of that, it won't count for anything.

Particularly in the work world, I have heard it said that your undergrad degree only matters for your first job or two...UNLESS you went to an ivy/MIT etc. I can believe that.

There are many paths to success - there are brilliant people who went to no name schools and ended up doing well. But, if you have the option, going to the well-regarded school is just going to make it easier.

 

[twofish-quant]

Has anyone here been to Harvard university, Yale, Princeton, MIT, or any other ivy-league college?

I got my undergrad at MIT and I took some courses at Harvard.

 

[twofish-quant]

I believe I read somewhere that Harvard/MIT requires a GPA of almost 4.0, and a minimum SAT score of 2200 out of a "perfect" score of 2400. As well as a comparable score on the ACT.

MIT publishes its stats...

http://www.mitadmissions.org/topics/apply/admissions_statistics/index.shtml

Some people with perfect SAT scores don't get in. Some people with 650 math do get in.

I assure you that I would get a miserable score on the math part. My math skills are abysmal! Not to mention that you are not given enough time to complete the test, and are "rushed" through it.

There are a lot of places where you can learn to take the SAT.

Most of the students going to the "prestigious" colleges come from families which are very wealthy. Sometimes they give the school a $500,000 donation and they'll immediately accept their kid. Regardless of how he did in high school.

Not true. It is possible to get into a priority queue for admissions to these schools if you have a relative that is an alumni. On the other hand, if you get a 550 on the Math SAT, then you aren't getting into MIT, and it wouldn't matter if you did since you'd likely drop out in the first year. Now if your family can afford a $500K donation, they can probably afford tutors to make sure that you don't get a 550 on the Math SAT, but that's something different.

 

[twofish-quant]

George W. Bush graduated from Yale and then Harvard business school. Either he didn't get in on merit or he's much smarter than he's letting on.

The latter. Part of being a successful politician is to be able to act stupid. People don't like to vote for people that think they are smarter than they are, so you need to learn to act stupid if you want to go into politics.

 

[johng23]

The latter. Part of being a successful politician is to be able to act stupid. People don't like to vote for people that think they are smarter than they are, so you need to learn to act stupid if you want to go into politics.

He sounded a lot different when he was a bit younger. Think what you will about the dementia hypothesis in this video, or whether or not he is reading in the old clips. I found this interesting either way.

 

[twofish-quant]

I went to MIT. None of my friends were from families that were what I would call rich, but a few were well-off. That is, their families' money was new and earned, not old and inherited. Nobody was making million-dollar donations to anyone or anything.

No one that I knew from the US at MIT had parents that were obviously loaded, however, I did know quite a few people from other countries that had parents that were really, really rich (i.e. father is a friend of the President of major Latin American country). However, even in those cases, I never got the feeling that they or anyone else were unqualified or they directly bought their way in.

If your parents are loaded, they can afford the best teachers for you, and I did get the sense that the people that got admitted from country X had an education that 99% of the people of their countries couldn't even begin to dream about, but that's something quite different. Not to say that it's better. I'm seriously worried that with budget cuts, the US is starting to look like Latin America.

 

[twofish-quant]

Your ivy league degree signals to potential employers or grad schools that you were able to complete difficult work with some level of success. Is it true that some schools which lack prestige have coursework which rivals the ivy leagues in terms of difficulty? I don't doubt it. But if the potential employer's or grad schools aren't aware of that, it won't count for anything.

I don't think that's how it works.

Just to give an example of how it works. My employer wants to buy some brains. When you want to buy some brains you go to the local brain store, where there is this nice person that helps you buy some brains. It's like buying bananas or stereos. If you want to buy bananas, you go to a supermarket. It could be there is someone else selling bananas at the road-side, but you don't have time to drive around looking for people. You just pop off to the supermarket to buy bananas.

When companies look for employees they do the same thing. Also, it's not that Ivy League people are necessarily *smarter*, but you can be reasonably sure that if you get a graduate from MIT or Harvard that they won't be a total disaster. Same with supermarkets. One reason people buy bananas from supermarkets is that you can be reasonably sure that you won't get sick from them. If you buy bananas from a person at the side of the road, you don't have that assurance.

What's interesting is that once you get to the interview, what school that you went to doesn't matter. The hard part is *getting* to the interview. You don't know the person at BIG INVESTMENT BANK that handles applications. The career services department at MIT does.

Also alumni networks help a lot. Once you have one person from school X making hiring decisions, then you can't talk about how lousy school X is.

Particularly in the work world, I have heard it said that your undergrad degree only matters for your first job or two...UNLESS you went to an ivy/MIT etc. I can believe that.

Once you get experience, no one cares what school you went to. It actually works the other way. If you are particularly competent but you came from no-name school, then people start looking well at no-name school.

One irony here is that you see a lot of MIT people doing quantitative finance on Wall Street, but MIT's quantitative finance is not very good.

But, if you have the option, going to the well-regarded school is just going to make it easier.

Not sure that this is true.

 

[FishmanGeertz]

I don't think that's how it works.

Just to give an example of how it works. My employer wants to buy some brains. When you want to buy some brains you go to the local brain store, where there is this nice person that helps you buy some brains. It's like buying bananas or stereos. If you want to buy bananas, you go to a supermarket. It could be there is someone else selling bananas at the road-side, but you don't have time to drive around looking for people. You just pop off to the supermarket to buy bananas.

When companies look for employees they do the same thing. Also, it's not that Ivy League people are necessarily *smarter*, but you can be reasonably sure that if you get a graduate from MIT or Harvard that they won't be a total disaster. Same with supermarkets. One reason people buy bananas from supermarkets is that you can be reasonably sure that you won't get sick from them. If you buy bananas from a person at the side of the road, you don't have that assurance.

What's interesting is that once you get to the interview, what school that you went to doesn't matter. The hard part is *getting* to the interview. You don't know the person at BIG INVESTMENT BANK that handles applications. The career services department at MIT does.

Also alumni networks help a lot. Once you have one person from school X making hiring decisions, then you can't talk about how lousy school X is.
Once you get experience, no one cares what school you went to. It actually works the other way. If you are particularly competent but you came from no-name school, then people start looking well at no-name school.

One irony here is that you see a lot of MIT people doing quantitative finance on Wall Street, but MIT's quantitative finance is not very good.
Not sure that this is true.

The only kinds of people who are accepted into schools like Harvard, MIT, Yale, and Stanford, are those with 4.0 GPA's and the highest test scores out of anyone in their state. This is a very small percentage of people. I did very well in high school (3.6) along with high test scores, but nowhere near perfect. Getting a perfect/near perfect score on almost every single test ever given to you is an almost inhuman accomplishment.

 

[zif.]

The only kinds of people who are accepted into schools like Harvard, MIT, Yale, and Stanford, are those with 4.0 GPA's and the highest test scores out of anyone in their state. This is a very small percentage of people. I did very well in high school (3.6) along with high test scores, but nowhere near perfect. Getting a perfect/near perfect score on almost every single test ever given to you is an almost inhuman accomplishment.

You keep on repeating these things, but don't back them up.

You're also, for some reason, ignoring what twofish-quant is saying despite the fact that he went to MIT.

 

[Geezer]

There are many paths to success - there are brilliant people who went to no name schools and ended up doing well. But, if you have the option, going to the well-regarded school is just going to make it easier.

Somewhat off-topic, but I wish I had known this earlier in my life (i.e., before I started my university studies). It never even occurred to me to apply to any prestigious universities for my post high school education, despite 4.3+ GPA (out of 4.0), very high test scores, etc.; I stuck with state schools. Then when it came time to apply to grad school...well, I soon discovered that where you attended as an undergrad does matter.

 

[johng23]

I don't think that's how it works.

Just to give an example of how it works. My employer wants to buy some brains. When you want to buy some brains you go to the local brain store, where there is this nice person that helps you buy some brains. It's like buying bananas or stereos. If you want to buy bananas, you go to a supermarket. It could be there is someone else selling bananas at the road-side, but you don't have time to drive around looking for people. You just pop off to the supermarket to buy bananas.

When companies look for employees they do the same thing. Also, it's not that Ivy League people are necessarily *smarter*, but you can be reasonably sure that if you get a graduate from MIT or Harvard that they won't be a total disaster. Same with supermarkets. One reason people buy bananas from supermarkets is that you can be reasonably sure that you won't get sick from them. If you buy bananas from a person at the side of the road, you don't have that assurance.

What's interesting is that once you get to the interview, what school that you went to doesn't matter. The hard part is *getting* to the interview. You don't know the person at BIG INVESTMENT BANK that handles applications. The career services department at MIT does.

Also alumni networks help a lot. Once you have one person from school X making hiring decisions, then you can't talk about how lousy school X is.



Once you get experience, no one cares what school you went to. It actually works the other way. If you are particularly competent but you came from no-name school, then people start looking well at no-name school.

One irony here is that you see a lot of MIT people doing quantitative finance on Wall Street, but MIT's quantitative finance is not very good.



Not sure that this is true.

Your tone suggests that you disagree with me but barely anything in your post contradicts what I was saying. You disagree that going to a well regarded school will make things easier, yet you say yourself that employers lean towards ivy league grads because they are "safe". And you apparently disagreed with my point that grades will be more impressive to employers if you went to an ivy, but then implied that it would in fact be easier to get interviews. Once you're at the interview, are there bigger factors that come into play? Sure, but I never denied that.

The only kinds of people who are accepted into schools like Harvard, MIT, Yale, and Stanford, are those with 4.0 GPA's and the highest test scores out of anyone in their state. This is a very small percentage of people. I did very well in high school (3.6) along with high test scores, but nowhere near perfect. Getting a perfect/near perfect score on almost every single test ever given to you is an almost inhuman accomplishment.

You're idolizing these people way too much. I go to Stanford now, and I can tell you that there are plenty of people here who are absolutely nowhere near the level you are imagining. For undergrad at least, there are a ton of other factors that schools care about. And if most of the people really DID score perfectly on every exam ever, then it has to be a result of extensive tutoring because there is no school in the world that is populated solely with "inhuman" intellects.

 

[vhbelvadi]

Most of the students going to the "prestigious" colleges come from families which are very wealthy. Sometimes they give the school a $500,000 donation and they'll immediately accept their kid. Regardless of how he did in high school.

Interesting I didn't know that.
But would it not tarnish the institution's image?

 

[vhbelvadi]

I think ivy leagues are quite a bit blown out of proportion as far as how good they are. I mean, just think about it logically: If they only accept the best of the best as students, then it's really not that shocking that their graduates are good. It's like buying a sports car and then saying to your friend with his minivan, "Hey look, I can go faster than you. I must be a way better driver than you!"

In fact, I'd say if these ivy league schools aren't producing better graduates after being so selective about who they take in, then they're doing a very poor job. I would say the quality lies in the students rather than the school. For some reason though, people are just obsessed with ivy league schools...

I couldn't have said it better myself. I think this problem isn't limited to the US, it's all over the world. It's a problem with humankind!

 

[FishmanGeertz]

Your tone suggests that you disagree with me but barely anything in your post contradicts what I was saying. You disagree that going to a well regarded school will make things easier, yet you say yourself that employers lean towards ivy league grads because they are "safe". And you apparently disagreed with my point that grades will be more impressive to employers if you went to an ivy, but then implied that it would in fact be easier to get interviews. Once you're at the interview, are there bigger factors that come into play? Sure, but I never denied that.




You're idolizing these people way too much. I go to Stanford now, and I can tell you that there are plenty of people here who are absolutely nowhere near the level you are imagining. For undergrad at least, there are a ton of other factors that schools care about. And if most of the people really DID score perfectly on every exam ever, then it has to be a result of extensive tutoring because there is no school in the world that is populated solely with "inhuman" intellects.

Many of the wealthiest, most powerful, and most successful people in the world graduated from ivy-league colleges. The alumni of these schools include US presidents, just about everyone working at wall-street making 7-figure salaries, corporate CEO's and executives, famous scientists and engineers, and so forth.

Good luck getting one of those 6-7 figure jobs working on wall-street in New York with an MBA from some flaky state college. There is a 99.99% chance that won't hire you unless you went to Wharton or Harvard business school, and graduated the top of your class. Or if you are closely related to someone who works there and can "pull some strings" to get you hired. Which is the case with most of the people working there. It's called "nepotism."

 

[flyingpig]

^Thank goodness that doesn't happen in grad school right? Right...?

EDIT: check this out http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/massachusetts-institute-technology/1044538-official-2015-ea-results-thread.html

First hand of real people and your competitions

 

[clope023]

Many of the wealthiest, most powerful, and most successful people in the world graduated from ivy-league colleges. The alumni of these schools include US presidents, just about everyone working at wall-street making 7-figure salaries, corporate CEO's and executives, famous scientists and engineers, and so forth.

Good luck getting one of those 6-7 figure jobs working on wall-street in New York with an MBA from some flaky state college. There is a 99.99% chance that won't hire you unless you went to Wharton or Harvard business school, and graduated the top of your class. Or if you are closely related to someone who works there and can "pull some strings" to get you hired. Which is the case with most of the people working there. It's called "nepotism."

Twofish got his phD from UTAustin...

 

[johng23]

Interesting I didn't know that.
But would it not tarnish the institution's image?

He's overstating it. They won't accept a donor's kid REGARDLESS of how they did in high school, but of course it is a factor out of many. If your parent is a donor that's probably going to increase your chances.

But schools also have their high profile rejections to show that they are not doing this sort of thing. For example, Brown has a 24 hour study center called the "Friedman study center" which was built a few years back. Soon after, little Friedman got rejected.

I'm sure if Friedman was on the borderline or a little below it, he would have been fine. But he must have been really dumb.

 

[rhombusjr]

Many of the wealthiest, most powerful, and most successful people in the world graduated from ivy-league colleges. The alumni of these schools include US presidents, just about everyone working at wall-street making 7-figure salaries, corporate CEO's and executives, famous scientists and engineers, and so forth.

Good luck getting one of those 6-7 figure jobs working on wall-street in New York with an MBA from some flaky state college. There is a 99.99% chance that won't hire you unless you went to Wharton or Harvard business school, and graduated the top of your class. Or if you are closely related to someone who works there and can "pull some strings" to get you hired. Which is the case with most of the people working there. It's called "nepotism."

CFO of Bristol-Meyrs Squibb graduated from Drexel and Temple. Not Ivy.
http://www.bms.com/ourcompany/leadership/Pages/charles_bancroft_bio.aspx

President/CEO of IBM graduated from Johns Hopkins. Decently ranked, but not Ivy.
http://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/biography/10055.wss

Former President of the United States Ronald Reagan graduated from Eureka College.

President of MIT graduated from Rochester and Georgetown. Good schools, but not Ivy.
http://web.mit.edu/hockfield/hockfieldcv.pdf
The last president graduated from West Virginia University.

Chairman of Bank of America: University of Tennessee

President/COO of Goldman Sachs: American University

Physicist Leonard Susskind: City College of New York (although his Ph.D. is from Cornell)


Also, there are more colleges than just Ivies and "flaky state colleges." Likewise, there are more jobs out there than just Wall Street CEOs. They make up like, <0.001% of the population of the US. Is everyone else just a bum then? (Answer: No)

Goldman Sachs frequently hires students from my school for finance positions and my school ranks in the ~80-100 range.

Its important to remember that theses schools have very low admittance percentages because so many people apply to them. Harvard accepts ~2000 people per year. If 27,000 people apply, they're still only going to accept ~2000 people because they don't have room for 20,000 people on campus. If 5,000 people are qualified to get in, they still only accept ~2,000 people. The people they reject aren't necessarily "unqualified" to go there, they just don't have room for all of them. 30-40 years ago, admissions rates for Ivies was around 30%.

MIT primarily focuses on physics/math, engineering, science, and technology, which is why most of the geniuses and brainiacs in the academic world can be found there. I believe I read somewhere that Harvard/MIT requires a GPA of almost 4.0, and a minimum SAT score of 2200 out of a "perfect" score of 2400. As well as a comparable score on the ACT. Very few people score above 2000 on the SAT. And every year, only three or four people get a perfect score on the test, out of millions of the high school graduates who take it.

For some reason, I was never given the SAT upon my HS graduation. I might score average/above average on the reading and writing segments, but I assure you that I would get a miserable score on the math part. My math skills are abysmal! Not to mention that you are not given enough time to complete the test, and are "rushed" through it.

Uhh, you do know that you have to register to take the SAT, right? And sign up for it yourself? High schools just don't hand you the test when you graduate. Also, most people take the SAT in the junior year so that they have the scores for college applications. If only "three or four" people get perfect scores, how does that explain the ~10,000+ people who get into Ivies every single year?


P.S. I would actually say that Oxford or Cambridge is the "single most prestigious college in the entire world." :P

 

[bleedblue1234]

Well I'm heading to Hopkins and some of my friends are going to Harvard/MIT/Columbia/Swarthmore/Dartmouth . All had good grades but were by no means the "best in the class" (probably ranked 20 average or so in a class of a 250ish at a great private school). There is sooooooo much more to admissions than just grades and SAT/ACT scores (although they are necessary). Essays, extracurriculers, etc all matter. And quite honestly, past the top 20 or 30, unless you have a specific goal or career field in mind, it is up to you to open the doors to success in life.

 

[Pyrrhus]

There is a over generalization in this thread. Yes, for SOME degrees, BRAND NAME does matter. For example, MBA is pretty much a degree that depends on going to top schools. You can see on job ads that they typically ask MBA from a top ranked institution. However, for science and engineering degrees BRAND NAME is not as important. For undergrad, you could go to a State school like Wisconsin, Minnesota... and receive a pretty good education compared to Ivies, and then proceed to grad school at top choices, which also include SOME state schools! (e.g. Minnesota is top 2 if not top 1 for Chem. Eng.). For graduate education, your advisor's reputation matters more than where you got your degree.Also, another important point to keep in mind when reading this thread. Some of the posters have yet to receive even a undergraduate education, and also have zero job experience or close to zero. In other words, a reader should do their own research.

 

[Zarem]

There are students who apply early to MIT and CalTech and get immediately accepted by one and rejected flat off by the other.

Yep, my friend had a 2400 SAT, never got a B in his high school life, took college math classes while in high school, and spent every summer in science camp/science research programs, and got rejected from MIT. He's about to graduate from Caltech though, funny how they choose people.

 

[Ryker]

Also, another important point to keep in mind when reading this thread. Some of the posters have yet to receive even a undergraduate education, and also have zero job experience or close to zero. In other words, a reader should do their own research.

What's more, some of the posters, specifically FishmanGeertz, who seems to make the most sweeping (and erroneous) statements, have yet to receive even a high school education, so those future readers who might be enamoured by the Ivies and stumble upon this thread should keep that in mind, as well.

 

[MissSilvy]

Geertz, only people not in science and math are more impressed by someone who went to Harvard or Brown for physics over someone who went to a fantastic state school like UIUC or UC-Berkeley. I'd stop spending so much time salivating over Ivy League nonsense and more studying if you ACTUALLY want to be one of the 'elite' in your field one day.

 

[lisab]

Geertz, only people not in science and math are more impressed by someone who went to Harvard or Brown for physics over someone who went to a fantastic state school like UIUC or UC-Berkeley. I'd stop spending so much time salivating over Ivy League nonsense and more studying if you ACTUALLY want to be one of the 'elite' in your field one day.

Excellent point! (I'd add University of Washington to your list, haha .) At the vast majority of universities, both ranked non-ranked, a quality education is within the grasp of every student. It just takes work.

 

[twofish-quant]

The only kinds of people who are accepted into schools like Harvard, MIT, Yale, and Stanford, are those with 4.0 GPA's and the highest test scores out of anyone in their state.

I didn't have a 4.0 GPA and I didn't have the highest test scores. I did do a lot of science fair type things.

Harvard and MIT looks at more than test scores and GPA's since you don't want a school full of people that are good at nothing else besides taking tests.

 

[twofish-quant]

Your tone suggests that you disagree with me but barely anything in your post contradicts what I was saying. You disagree that going to a well regarded school will make things easier

The reason I'm disagreeing is that it's often not obvious to the outsider which schools employers regard highly. For example, it's not obvious that UTexas Austin is very highly regarded among investment banks. Conversely there are some big name schools which are less highly regarded in certain areas. (PM me if you want me to name names).

And you apparently disagreed with my point that grades will be more impressive to employers if you went to an ivy, but then implied that it would in fact be easier to get interviews.

Yes, and it has nothing to do with grades. One important thing is that not everyone goes to an Ivy, and if you don't go to an Ivy, then you have to figure out *why* people that go to schools do better so that you can figure out how to get around the issue.

If you go to MIT, you have the benefit of a very tightly knit alumni network. If you go to North Podunk, you don't have the MIT alumni network, but you *can* try to create your own alumni network.

 

[twofish-quant]

The alumni of these schools include US presidents, just about everyone working at wall-street making 7-figure salaries, corporate CEO's and executives, famous scientists and engineers, and so forth.

Not true.

Good luck getting one of those 6-7 figure jobs working on wall-street in New York with an MBA from some flaky state college. There is a 99.99% chance that won't hire you unless you went to Wharton or Harvard business school, and graduated the top of your class.

Again, not true. I work on Wall Street in investment banking and I didn't go to Harvard business school. One thing that is interesting is that if you look at where people on Wall Street in quantitative positions get their graduate degrees, it's generally not from the big name schools. If you have a Harvard physics Ph.D., you are more likely to go into academia, so as far as physics Ph.D. degrees go, the people that end up working in Wall Street tend to be from the major state schools.

Or if you are closely related to someone who works there and can "pull some strings" to get you hired. Which is the case with most of the people working there. It's called "nepotism."

It's called "networking."

One reason I post as much as I do is that I think that it's unhealthy to have a closed society, and the internet makes it easier to meet new people. One thing that gives you a *big* advantage if you get an MBA from Harvard is that you actually meet someone that works in Wall Street, but you can get the same thing now by reading the right internet forums.

Also, it's not a matter of pulling strings. If you send me a resume, then I can't really do anything to change the hiring process. What I *can* do is to tell you what the right e-mail address is to send your resume. I can tell you that if you send your resume to address X that someone will read it, whereas if it goes to address Y, no one will. *That's* the important information that you get at Harvard/MIT/whereever, but again you can get this information by being in the right chat rooms.

 

[twofish-quant]

Yep, my friend had a 2400 SAT, never got a B in his high school life, took college math classes while in high school, and spent every summer in science camp/science research programs, and got rejected from MIT. He's about to graduate from Caltech though, funny how they choose people.

Part of it is that it's random.

You have many more applicants than places, so in the end, there is a lot of randomness and luck in the system.

This is a big problem, and I'm trying to fix it.

Also one thing that I think is useful in going to a big name school is that it makes you a little arrogant. If you go to some schools, you start thinking, "I didn't go to school X, so I just give up." One thing that is useful in going to MIT is that when you start meeting CEO and Nobel prize winners, you start realizing that they are human, and if they can do it, and so can you, if you really want to...

One thing I learned at MIT is that some Nobel prize winners and CEO's are jerks, and I'd rather win the nice-guy not-a-jerk award than the Nobel.

If you go to some schools and you think to yourself "Hey, I'm going to start a company that will change the world", you'll learn "that's impossible." At MIT, you can't go ten feet without meeting someone that is trying to start a company that will change the world, and you'll meet people that have actually done it, and they'll tell you want they did wrong.

There's also something of the MIT spirit. For example, you figure out that in order to get a big job, you have to have connections. A lot of places will teach you to give up. At MIT, if you figure out that you need connections to do something, then you figure out what you need to do to get the connections.

Really cool place. Too bad it's too small.

 

[stonecoldgen]

to go to those unis you need a perfect GPA, a perfect SAT and a lot more, such as:

Performance of an art (Music, Dance, Drama, etc.)
Performance of a sport
Leadership
NHS
AP/IB/A-Level/etc. Courses
Community service
clubs (MuAlphaTheta, robotics, etc.)
Model UN participation
having a job, a company, having organized charity events, etc.
A kickass essay

 

[twofish-quant]

And even then, you might not get in, because you are competing against people with similar things.

Personally, I think the system is seriously broken, because you start going hyper-competitive to get into a school, and you don't have time to think or smell the flowers, or do something that *won't* help your resume.

There's not a small number of people that have perfect resumes, get into MIT and then have nervous breakdowns freshmen year when they realize that they don't have any clue what they want to do with their life.

Yes, you can play the violin while walking on water, but do you really *like* doing that.

Also, what a lot of people don't quite realize is that it's a video game. Once you get into the "I must outcompete everyone else" mentality then you can't give up once you get the big-name school admissions. It continues for the rest of your life, until you have some sort of nervous breakdown.

to go to those unis you need a perfect GPA, a perfect SAT and a lot more, such as:

Performance of an art (Music, Dance, Drama, etc.)
Performance of a sport
Leadership
NHS
AP/IB/A-Level/etc. Courses
Community service
clubs (MuAlphaTheta, robotics, etc.)
Model UN participation
having a job, a company, having organized charity events, etc.
A kickass essay

 

[russ_watters]

I went to MIT. None of my friends were from families that were what I would call rich, but a few were well-off. That is, their families' money was new and earned, not old and inherited. Nobody was making million-dollar donations to anyone or anything.

There were big names at MIT: Guth, Chomsky, Ting, Jaffe, Thomas, Friedman, Kendell, Shull.

My parents scraped their way to paying for my dad's Harvard MBA. His undergrad was at Illinois on a partial ROTC scholarship (he ended up dropping ROTC).

Yeah, there are non-rich people who go to Ivy league schools.

 

[russ_watters]

Good luck getting one of those 6-7 figure jobs working on wall-street in New York with an MBA from some flaky state college.

There is a 99.99% chance that won't hire you unless you went to Wharton or Harvard business school, and graduated the top of your class.

This is complete nonsense My sister (she's 36) has a business math BA from Penn State and a CFA cert and works a good job in finance in Boston.

Too many clearly untrue claims being thrown around about the Ivy League here. Thread locked.