S/O Education Life - How important is it to get into "Top-Tier" University?

[Jenny Piaaree]

I didn't read the article, but the discussion got me to thinking... just how important is it to future prospects to get into a "top-tier" university? My dad always drilled it into us that we needed to have top grades in high school so we could get into a top college. I about killed myself my senior year with a heavy class load, graduated at the top of my class, and was accepted into a UC. Many of my classmates took it easy and were either also accepted into a UC or went to California State universities, other colleges, or CC. Looking back, I don't see that those who went to "lower" tier schools fared any worse. I think my dad, though well-meaning, was mistaken. I think I would have benefited more had I focused on being more well-rounded socially and in other areas rather than being so single-mindedly focused on academics.

 

For my kids, I want them to be more balanced than I was. I still believe in academics (or I wouldn't be on this board! :)), but I don't think it's the end-all, be-all that my dad stressed. I want my kids to be able to support themselves, of course, and if that entails a bachelor's degree, then I don't see any problem with going to two years of CC and then transferring to a four-year college/university. And, having been to a UC, I would likely steer them to a smaller college where you can get a more personal academic experience. It just seems to me that for most practical purposes it doesn't matter much where the degree is from. What do you all think? Am I overlooking something?

[Jenn in CA]

>> It just seems to me that for most practical purposes it doesn't matter much where the degree is from.

 

Agreeing here. And transferring, in particular, doesn't hurt at all.

 

Perhaps a big-name school is more important for a graduate degree but personally I don't think for a bachelors that the name matters. I could also imagine if you want a business degree that certain schools might give you more connections for jobs after but I think most majors the school name won't help you get a job. But I could be wrong.

 

I went to UCLA and it's fun to say I went there (at least when our teams are doing well), but that's about it.

[Photo Ninja]

I think that, in general, it is not necessary to go to a top tier university. There may be some advantages if there is a grad school attached that pulls from the undergrads, but that can also happen in non-top tier schools. There are times that name dropping can give an advantage with some companies, but it will depend on the major and career goals. There is networking with some top tier schools, between the school and successful alumni that can be an advantage at times. But again, I don't think that is going to matter for all majors and students, and the same thing can happen at other universities. It used to be that top tier schools had large endowments and could offer better scholarships, but I don't think that is still the case today. I could be wrong, though.

 

My dh's company sends him out to universities to interview interns and possible new employees. They have some universities they like to hire from, and those are not top tier schools. The reason given is that they have found that students they have hired from top tier schools have, in general, had a lower work ethic and too high of expectations. They have not wanted to work for what entry level positions are paid and seem to want to step into the position of an experienced employee when they have no experience. They have also found that the students in non-top tier schools have learned to do with less, and thus tended to be better problem solvers than students in top tier schools that have the latest and greatest equipment in their labs. Usually the students from top tier school shave little to no work experience because they never had to work, but the students from state schools usually did have work experience, and it showed in their attitudes and expectations. This is just this firm's experience, but dh has also experienced a difference in attitude between students at name schools and those at state universities. He won't even go back to one top tier school because he said it was a waste of his time, and that students at a couple of the state universities were better educated and more interested in a job. Again, I am sure this is not always happening, but it did change how he thought of top tier schools.

 

It seems like it is better to get an undergrad degree, then to go to the highest tier grad school the student can enter. I think that makes a lot more difference than for an undergrad degree.

[wapiti]

Without regard to specific majors, IMO it depends entirely on what you plan to do with the degree, particularly during the first 5-10 years after graduating. If you are planning to apply to grad school or look for certain types of jobs, particularly in a different geographic location, name can make a big difference. Once you've been accepted into grad school, or you've been working in a field for several years, I don't think it matters much at all.

 

One factor to keep in mind, that is not something high school seniors (or even college seniors for that matter) think about is where their college classmates will be in 20 years. Sometimes, this is the factor that matters most - finding a job in middle age through someone you've known for decades, a college buddy. The question is, if you were trying to decide between no-name school and top-tier school, which school is most likely to give you connections who will be successful enough in their own right to help you decades down the road. I'm not saying I know the answer to this, but it's something to at least think about.

 

just my two cents!

[EmilyK]

I think it depends on what you end up doing with your life and career. I wish it weren't the case in some ways, but with what I do for a living I have to make a lot of first impressions on clients and referral sources. For some people, having gone to a "known" school and grad school means something. It lets them know (correctly) that I have lived in different parts of the country. Some people are impressed with the schools, for other people it just communicates to them that I'm like them (maybe they or their kids didn't go to these exact schools, but something similar). My husband gets similar reactions even though he went someplace different undergrad.

 

I also am (reluctantly) coming back around to the following point of view. I have recently reconnected with a bunch of college friends with whom I've fallen out of touch, and gotten closer to some ones that I had stayed in touch with. Aside from the career and networking aspects, I think for many/all of us it was a transformative experience (largely positive) living away from home, getting to know all these smart, interesting people.

 

I didn't go to the hardest (from an admissions perspective) schools that I was admitted to. I made my decision largely based on money (tuition remission and merit scholarship).

[Corraleno]

For my kids, I want them to be more balanced than I was. I still believe in academics (or I wouldn't be on this board! :)), but I don't think it's the end-all, be-all that my dad stressed. I want my kids to be able to support themselves, of course, and if that entails a bachelor's degree, then I don't see any problem with going to two years of CC and then transferring to a four-year college/university. And, having been to a UC, I would likely steer them to a smaller college where you can get a more personal academic experience. It just seems to me that for most practical purposes it doesn't matter much where the degree is from. What do you all think? Am I overlooking something?

:iagree:

I was a National Merit Scholar and could have gone to a top tier school, but instead I chose a small LAC (one of the schools in the Colleges That Change Lives book, actually) that offered me a full ride, and I'm really glad I did. I had no trouble getting accepted at every grad school I applied to (including Berkeley & UCLA, which were ranked 2nd & 7th at the time), so the lack of a big name on my transcript didn't seem to hurt. Oh, and my transcript also included CC courses I'd taken at 16 & 17.

 

My kids will almost certainly go to the local state uni. It's a good school for DS's planned majors, and probably for DD as well, and it's tuition-free, so they can save their money for grad school.

 

Jackie

[Zanyan]

I'm not concerned at all about whether or not a university is top tier. I have no problem with the idea of my kids going to a CC first before transferring to a university. That being said, my dd's intended major (dance with an emphasis in classical ballet) does not easily allow for that pathway. Her major of choice seriously limits her choices, and definitely requires her to enter a 4 year college as a freshman (or defer while she tries for a career as a professional ballet dancer).

 

My son, 16, is already planning on going to the local CC when he's older and feels more ready. He has no idea what he wants to major in nor does he have any idea what he wants to be when he grows up, so CC is, in my mind, the best choice for him to pursue while he figures all that out. My niece could follow that path as well, and that would work well for her intended major, architecture. She could study art, take CAD classes, and get some GE out of the way and then transfer to a 4 year university.

 

Dh and I both got our degrees from CSUs, and we've both been very successful in our chosen careers. :001_smile:

Edited November 14, 2010 by Zanyan

[Jamee]

I got accepted to a top univeristy, but after HS graduation, my parents informed me I would not be going. I still have regrets and what-ifs, but it also means I most likely wouldn't have met my husband, so it worked out.

 

I think the biggest advantage to top universities would be the alumni associations and connections you receive by being a "grad." DH went to a top univiersity and the connections he has available to him are huge, although that has never been a priority of his. It's more important though that one goes to a college that is going to meet your needs. I believe it'd make more sense to go to a smaller, lesser-known school that specializes in what you want to do, over someplace huge where you'll just be lost in the crowd. Of course, scholarships could be very persuasive too.

[creekland]

I think it all depends on what a person wants to do. If they want a "basic" degree to prepare them for a local job that needs a "basic" degree (any major or field) then a local college with a good rep is perfect. The vast majority of people will probably fall into this category.

 

If they want to relocate elsewhere they are more likely to need a college recognized where they want to be. That could be a college in that area with a good rep or a nationally good rep college.

 

If they want a specific, more unusual, major, they need to seek out schools with a good rep within that field. Those may or may not be "top tier" overall.

 

If they want a Top 10 grad school they need to look for schools that get students there (can be small or large).

 

Then there's challenge... some students love academic challenge and others just want to get things done. Some want research and finding new things and others prefer to use the findings others have made. (NOTE: Neither type is right or wrong, they are just different.) Different colleges work better for each type. In general, the level of education at a community college (or lower level school) will not match that of a top tier school, but that level is not always needed to do a specific job. It is more of what a student prefers for their education.

 

When I think back to my high school 20th reunion, students that tended to be more successful (meaning supporting themselves in a job they like) did go to better (but not necessarily Ivy) schools. Locally "better" was just as good as nationally "better."

 

As an engineer, hubby has found that not all engineering programs are equal. There are certain schools that produce well-prepared grads and others that don't. I suspect that is true in all fields, so IMO the key is finding a good school within a desired major.

[TravelingChris]

Both dh and I went to a top school (where we met). He is a PhD scientist but the specific area he works in probably does not have others from his college working in the field. His contacts for jobs, I think, will mainly be from his recent work and contacts from all the conferences and working groups he has attended. I may be completely wrong but I think that most of the other physics majors at his university went into academia and he is probably going to be working for a contractor when he retires. (He works in applied physics).

 

FOr my son, the ability to get into a grad school will depend on his research, his GRE, his grades, and probably contacts in the department (which he will make). For my next child, who is wanting to become a prosecutor, the main thing we are looking for in a college is many opportunities to write, discussion classes, personal contact, and a grading system that allows her to do well. Whether this is a top ten school or not, it won't matter. Her law school acceptance will go with LSAT score, GPA, and recommendation letters. The thing I am being careful about is the GPA- I am strongly going to not recommend any school which is reputed to be a hard grading school or one that keeps touting how they don't inflate the grades.

[8filltheheart]

My personal opinion is that it probably depends on your major and future goals. For example, I don't think engineering majors planning on working in industry vs. research will be impacted long term by their undergraduate education as much as say someone pursuing a law degree.

 

For engineering majors, relationship with industry is probably of greater importance than name recognition with the avg person. Schools with strong co-op programs indicate a serious commitment to training and employment.

 

That said, wanting to pursue research vs industry.....yes, school will matter. Probably not so much at the undergraduate level as at the grad level.

[Jane in NC]

It really depends on the student.

 

I'm not sure that everyone uses the term "top tier" uniformly. For some people, "top tier" means a very small list of schools (Ivies and and similarly competitive schools) but to others "top tier" means the top one or two public universities within their state.

 

Obviously not everyone needs to attend a top tier university however it is defined. To me the most important thing is finding the right fit for your student.

 

For my son, the right fit was a small liberal arts school. It was clear from his college visits that he was going to be happiest in this environment. But most LACs would not work given his interest in an esoteric major, archaeology.

 

Attending the community college as the OP suggests was not an option given his interests. Further, as we have discussed many, many, many times here, not all community colleges offer coursework that is of a high caliber. The children of the OP are quite young. Given the stress on California's university system at the moment, there is no guarantee that the UC system or California's CCs will look anything like they do now in ten or twelve years. Plans cannot be written in stone.

 

Further, you might have a child like mine who wanted to move to a different region of the country for college. My son's roommate is from Asia. His friends are from around the country and the world. Our community college or regional university would never present this sort of outside the classroom learning opportunity that he has. To me, it would have been sad to have excluded these possibilities from his life.

Edited November 14, 2010 by Jane in NC

[delaney]

I have a friend who has an uncle that works at Princeton and she keeps going on about the "buddies" out there getting you the good jobs. Well maybe, but the fact is many of the "buddies" were taking higher wages and are now unemployed! I think the buddy system is a thing of the past and it is more a matter of internships and training and school has no bearing. DH recruits from UVA and Virginia Tech because they are convenient but the interns he picks are the ones that turn around 20 hours worth of work in a day and work weekends to complete jobs. Plus a lot of the training he needs are Microsoft certifications and those are not related to where you go to college in any way. After listening to Art Robinson I am convinced that many of the college professors are from the bottom of their fields and that the community college offers teaching that comes from CURRENT and real world experience. For me that is very valuable.

[8filltheheart]

I am convinced that many of the college professors are from the bottom of their fields and that the community college offers teaching that comes from CURRENT and real world experience. For me that is very valuable.

 

Our CC experiences have been the opposite of that assessment. Our experience (in 2 different states) has been that the CC is the bottom of the barrel educationally, the very dregs of educational quality.

 

All CCs are obviously not equal; however, the ones here are professed to be very good. :confused: If they are good, I would hate to see poor.:tongue_smilie: The students are unengaged, poorly educated, etc. Our disabled ds is making the top grades in his classes with no effort. (and he is not even in the remedial courses. I can't even imagine what goes on in those!!) I have been appalled at just how little he has to do to earn credit hrs (and even more appalled at how much I paid for him to learn essentially nothing.)

[memphispeg]

From what I've seen so far. I think that the top-tier small liberal arts colleges offer the best education possible to smart-motivated kids who are not sure what they want to specialize in. The classes are small and intense and there is lots of attention on the student's learning. The big Ivies are probably best suited to focussed kids who know where they are going before they get to college. To do well they must be extraordinarily well-prepared in high school. The work and teaching is v. rigorous but, there's not much individual attention. From what I've seen it is good for students who work v. hard on their own or are good at getting study groups together. In short, true adults. The top-tiered schools have need-blind admissions policies, something that is important in this economy.

Many of the large state schools have nice honor's program tracts that can give a small-school-like experience. But, there'll be 100 people in Chem 101. Unless a kid is prepared, it would be easy to get lost in the shuffle. Going to the big state schools does not lead to a prestige name on the diploma so, resume building and net-working are a must during the undergrad. years. Assertiveness training is probably a must as well.

[Corraleno]

After listening to Art Robinson I am convinced that many of the college professors are from the bottom of their fields and that the community college offers teaching that comes from CURRENT and real world experience. For me that is very valuable.

Can you explain the thinking behind this? :confused:

 

In my experience, university professors need to maintain an active research and publication schedule in order to get and keep tenure. Some of them may not be great teachers, but that's precisely because there is so much emphasis on research, publishing, bringing in grant money, etc. With the exception of a few really old guys, most of the profs I knew at university were actively conducting research, publishing books and articles, and stayed very current with developments in the field. CC professors, OTOH, are generally overworked and (very) underpaid and therefore haven't got the resources to pursue research or the time to write and publish.

 

Jackie

[Laura Corin]

Leaving aside whether the teachers are good, it's stimulating to be around other students who are as bright or brighter than you. I went to a second-tier university to study French and drama. The drama department was highly thought of and you needed high grades from school to get in. The French department was easy to get into. The difference in the quality of debate between the two departments was marked: the drama department was full of bright sparks; in the French department, it was hard to get an informed opinion out of my fellow students.

 

That experience of lively debate was important in letting me see how exciting intellectual pursuits could be. It helped me to see what kind of path I should take.

 

Laura

Edited November 14, 2010 by Laura Corin

[regentrude]

After listening to Art Robinson I am convinced that many of the college professors are from the bottom of their fields and that the community college offers teaching that comes from CURRENT and real world experience.

 

I would be interested in hearing on what you base these assumptions and about which fields you are talking. The competition for a position as an assistant professor at a university is fierce, and tenure is rewarded only if you do research that is "CURRENT" and modern enough to a) get published and to b) qualify for outside grants. Any faculty who does not meet these criteria won't be around for long.

In what capacity would you think the people are employed who are top in their fields, for instance in math and theoretical physics, or linguistics or history?

[creekland]

After listening to Art Robinson I am convinced that many of the college professors are from the bottom of their fields and that the community college offers teaching that comes from CURRENT and real world experience. For me that is very valuable.

 

Our experience has been 100% the opposite. CC profs here are looking to provide the minimum education needed for people to get jobs, that's true (if that's what you mean by real world), but higher level college profs provide not only education for jobs, but also education for those wishing to do research or delve more deeply into their subject of choice.

[Laura in CA]

Leaving aside whether the teachers are good, it's stimulating to be around other students who are as bright or brighter than you.

 

:iagree:

 

My husband and I would like our kids to go to the "best" university they are suited for, and that we can afford. I firmly believe they would do fine at a local Cal State university, if they end up there, but with over half of the students at Cal State univs taking remedial courses, the bright, hard-working kids are often anomalies and it must be rather lonely for them. I have degrees from two of what's now sometimes called the "HYPMS" schools (Harvard-Yale-Princeton-MIT-Stanford), and I have to say, the students there were/are amazing. As Laura says above, it was very stimulating, and I'm sure I worked to a higher standard. The professors were, similarly, for the most part incredibly nice, generous people doing incredible thinking. My husband did his undergraduate work at Arizona State, and when he applied to the top physics graduate schools (at the time, UC Berkeley, Princeton, MIT, etc.), he had NO idea what his chances were or how hard he'd have to work once admitted, since he'd been the "star" at ASU without breaking a sweat ... he doesn't want that for our kids. Yes, he graduated without debt, but I also had very little debt -- the private schools in HYPMS I attended cost me *less* than the UC I applied to would have (very generous merit/need-based aid). I've spent some time at a Cal State and at one of the "lesser" UCs, and I was frankly appalled at the level of student and at what poor grammar was allowed on essays, etc. Echoing Laura Corin above, I've been in a department that is top-5 in the US, and one that is top-20, and the difference in energy and quality was marked -- in student quality, research quality, number and quality of guest speakers, etc.

 

A word about "prestige" -- yes, on days when I'm feeling like a frumpy housewife, it does help my self-esteem to think that I did, long ago, get an Ivy degree :001_smile: BUT ... I am encouraging my sons to consider some of the lesser-known LACs, Christian univs, state schools, overseas univs, etc. I hope they will apply to a wide variety of schools, and then choose the one they feel is the best fit -- and that won't break the bank.

 

~Laura

[Guest]

:iagree:

 

I firmly believe they would do fine at a local Cal State university, if they end up there, but with over half of the students at Cal State univs taking remedial courses, the bright, hard-working kids are often anomalies and it must be rather lonely for them.

 

I've taught at both the local Cal State and our UC branch, and the difference is indeed astronomical. At Cal State I had kids who were working full-time jobs and going to school at night; even when you're young and full of energy that is hard, and they often didn't finish their reading. I had kids who were homeless and living out of their cars, girls who had just had babies and brought them to class (quite discreetly) but dropped out when their kids became mobile and they couldn't afford day care, kids who had drug problems, kids who were the first ones in their families to go to college and had no idea how to find their way about a 30,000+ campus, immigrants struggling with language issues and hugely varying educational histories. Then I had a handful of the most wonderful older people who were coming back to school after careers or family raising, and a few really bright and motivated kids who weren't facing some of the enormous obstacles that most others seem to.

 

It was an eye-opening experience, to say the least.

 

I don't say this to scare anyone away from a state college, but rather to try to give people an understanding of the circumstances some of these kids are struggling with while trying to educate themselves, and as a consequence, what the faculty are dealing with. By and large the faculty are extremely devoted to helping this diverse population and to the idea that an affordable college education should be available for everyone who is motivated enough to pursue it. A fairly large segment of the student body might be kids drawn to a party school (at least at our local branch) or kids for whom school is not a priority; but equally, there is great richness in seeing some of the others work so hard to overcome what's in their way.

Edited November 15, 2010 by Guest

[Chris in VA]

My ds' major wasn't offered at the most prominent top tier schools, and we couldn't have afforded them anyway, so what's the point?

My own state school had the #2 Elementary Education school in the country back when I went--so in my major, I was better off there than at even an Ivy, for the specific teaching that would lead me in my major.

Of course there are other factors--most of which are mentioned by previous posters.

 

But what I looked for was, first, the program being offered, the rep of the program, the content of the program, the employability after college, and the affordability of the school. My eldest wasn't top tier material, either.

 

So, I'm not sure it made any diff to us--to my son, I should say! :D

 

But grad school? THAT will make a diff. Getting a master's from UCLA School of Film, for example, would be AWESOME, and open a heck of a lot more doors than from State U.

[Snickerdoodle]

:)

[cermincantik]

 

I think the biggest advantage to top universities would be the alumni associations and connections you receive by being a "grad." DH went to a top univiersity and the connections he has available to him are huge, although that has never been a priority of his. It's more important though that one goes to a college that is going to meet your needs. I believe it'd make more sense to go to a smaller, lesser-known school that specializes in what you want to do, over someplace huge where you'll just be lost in the crowd. Of course, scholarships could be very persuasive too.

 

:iagree: about connections.

[flyingiguana]

In job searches I've been privy to I have occasionally seen some candidates from Ivy schools not taken completely seriously. Why? Because someone on the search committee once knew someone from that school who had a lot of attitude.

 

I've never seen anyone get this sort of treatment if they went to a state university.

 

But I'm in the sciences. This might be different in other areas.

 

Generally, the consensus seems to be that someone who went to that X Ivy League school thinks they're a lot smarter than they really are, just because they went to an Ivy. And to be honest, the only people I've ever known who went to Ivies (in the sciences) seem a little less hard working, a little less intelligent. It hasn't been a huge sample, but that is what I've run into.

 

It has also seemed to me that people I know who have used connections to get jobs have been using connections they made at state universities and run of the mill LACs. There's nothing peculiar to the Ivy league connections, except, possibly, that more rich people go there. But do the rich people actually connect with the others at the Ivies? Would the connections have been made through the rich families even without the college experience?

[Moni]

How important is it to get into "Top-Tier" University?

?

 

I don't know.

May be Very Important.

 

But important or not, we are choosing to opt out of the competition. ;)

 

:seeya:

[rlugbill]

I have attended various colleges and universities, so I have some background in this. Plus, I have been in the work world for many years and have known many people who have gone to Ivies and other various schools.

 

I think that perhaps because of the college rankings, people have started to view colleges on some sort of continuum from poor to good to very good to top tier colleges. Instead, I suggest that people look for a good fit between the school and the student.

 

I dated a woman who graduated from Harvard and she said most of her friends there sat around wishing they had gone to Swarthmore instead. I think they meant a place that was smaller and had a cozier atmosphere. But other people thrive at Harvard.

 

I have a colleague who went to several different state schools for graduate and professional degrees. I asked him about each school and he was positive about each one. I sort of confronted him about his positive outlook when I was asking for a critical analysis of each school's strengths and weaknesses and he said "college is what you make of it". In other words, there are opportunities and problems at every school. It's not the situation you are in, but how you deal with it that makes the difference.

 

That may be an important lesson to leave students with in choosing schools. They are no helpless victims of circumstance. They have the power to make it a great experience if they want to.

 

Personally, I was disappointed with my high school experience because of its boring suburban outlook on life. No one had interesting ideas at my high school- they all reflected the same sort of bland middle class American ideas as every other boring suburban high school. Football, cheerleaders, homeroom, lockers, pep rallies, etc. bored me to death.

 

So, I purposely sought out a more diverse interesting environment at American University in Washington DC where the students came from all over the world and there was no football team, no frats, and little school spirit. It was intellectually stimulating to me to interact with people who had very different perspectives. Most of my friends were from foreign countries.

 

Then, for law school I went to a state school, even though I was admitted to some higher-ranked private schools. Because I thought the state school had the same sort of classes and the same sort of professors as the private schools and the price was way cheaper. But, there is a big prestige factor in the law profession so I will probably never be on the Supreme Court or even be a law professor since I didn't go to one of the big name top 10 schools.

 

One compromise idea that I have sometimes thought of is to send a college student to a state school that costs less and then hire tutors to help ensure the student gets even more attention than they would have gotten at a smaller private school. It is easy to fall through the cracks and get lost at a big school. But if you do well at a state school, you still have lots of opportunities.

 

I have friends who sent their son to a state school and he joined a fraternity and then he was sort of forced to party because of his fraternity and he ended up flunking out and joined the Navy. There is a certain party atmosphere at a lot of colleges and it's easy to get wrapped up in it to the detriment of your education. We tend to think of it as individual decions, but if everyone around you is partying, it's hard not to get caught up in the party atmosphere.

 

Anyway, not sure if I got around to answering the question, but I think it's more important to discuss the various factors than to just boil it down to a simplistic equation of top tier vs. average schools. There is much more to the equation than that.