What really differentiates HYPSM from other elite schools

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't think HYP even belongs in the same sentence as MIT and Stanford. MIT and Stanford are at a different level than Harvard, Yale, and Princeton - globally, professionally, network, quality of education, the talent of undergrad students, resources, opportunities, star professors, research, etc. Plus both MIT and Stanford are excellent at engineering and CS and are at the forefront of a rapidly changing world. Harvard and Yale are woefully behind. Princeton is better, but it's still not at the same level.

MIT and Stanford exist at a different level. HYP and some of the other ivies have made questionable decisions in admissions, leadership, and hiring in recent years. And everyone has noticed - certainly anyone that's been hiring recent grads. HYP are relentlessly focused on hooks - whether wealth, the prominence of parents, athletes, FGLI, and so on. Whereas MIT and Stanford have been much better at picking up the genuine best and brightest, as well as students most likely to make an impact. Neither are perfect, but both are infinitely better than HYP, which have effectively become undergrad country clubs that do a little charity on the side.

HYPSM is a very antiquated construct. There's MIT and Stanford. And then there are about 15 schools that could be used interchangeably, depending on interest and major.

Unless you are focused 100% on CS this just isn't true. And, if you are focused 100% on CS it still isn't true. If you expand the pool to include all of the true CS powerhouses Stanford and MIT are two of a half dozen but they aren't unicorns. What is true is that Stanford and MIT have managed to navigate the DEI nonsense better than the other three.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Worked with ChatGPT to arrive at some interesting insights about Harvard’s success in producing prominent business and legal alumni. Of course, all the caveats of Chat apply.

Prominent business leaders with a Harvard degree of some type:
80-90% have a Harvard MBA
10-15% have a Harvard law degree
0-5% have a Harvard undergraduate degree only
10-20% have both a Harvard undergraduate degree and an MBA.

Law:
30-50% of prominent attorneys with a Harvard law degree also attended Harvard for undergraduate school.

Basically, get a Harvard MBA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Worked with ChatGPT to arrive at some interesting insights about Harvard’s success in producing prominent business and legal alumni. Of course, all the caveats of Chat apply.

Prominent business leaders with a Harvard degree of some type:
80-90% have a Harvard MBA
10-15% have a Harvard law degree
0-5% have a Harvard undergraduate degree only
10-20% have both a Harvard undergraduate degree and an MBA.

Law:
30-50% of prominent attorneys with a Harvard law degree also attended Harvard for undergraduate school.

Basically, get a Harvard MBA.

+1 also stop viewing undergrad as life or death.

[Anonymous]

Of course HYPSM gives great advantages throughout life. Instant credibility…that can be fumbled.

The notion undergraduate degrees from HYPSM are meaningless comes from insecurity and envy.

Yet one does not need HYPSM for a wonderful life.

Anonymous wrote:People seemed to have contradicted themselves. Sometimes they say attending hypsm doesn’t give one any advantage for their future and careers while other times they argue those who attend hypsm are wealth strivers, which implies elite colleges do bring extra wealth to you. I hope people were just coping because otherwise DCUM is even dumber than I thought.

[Anonymous]

I know HYP belong in the same sentence as M & S. You argue HYP barely break the top 20. I disagree. Not so secretly you want fewer apps to HYP so you and your family have a better shot at admission.

Anonymous wrote:I don't think HYP even belongs in the same sentence as MIT and Stanford. MIT and Stanford are at a different level than Harvard, Yale, and Princeton - globally, professionally, network, quality of education, the talent of undergrad students, resources, opportunities, star professors, research, etc. Plus both MIT and Stanford are excellent at engineering and CS and are at the forefront of a rapidly changing world. Harvard and Yale are woefully behind. Princeton is better, but it's still not at the same level.

MIT and Stanford exist at a different level. HYP and some of the other ivies have made questionable decisions in admissions, leadership, and hiring in recent years. And everyone has noticed - certainly anyone that's been hiring recent grads. HYP are relentlessly focused on hooks - whether wealth, the prominence of parents, athletes, FGLI, and so on. Whereas MIT and Stanford have been much better at picking up the genuine best and brightest, as well as students most likely to make an impact. Neither are perfect, but both are infinitely better than HYP, which have effectively become undergrad country clubs that do a little charity on the side.

HYPSM is a very antiquated construct. There's MIT and Stanford. And then there are about 15 schools that could be used interchangeably, depending on interest and major.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I know HYP belong in the same sentence as M & S. You argue HYP barely break the top 20. I disagree. Not so secretly you want fewer apps to HYP so you and your family have a better shot at admission.

Anonymous wrote:I don't think HYP even belongs in the same sentence as MIT and Stanford. MIT and Stanford are at a different level than Harvard, Yale, and Princeton - globally, professionally, network, quality of education, the talent of undergrad students, resources, opportunities, star professors, research, etc. Plus both MIT and Stanford are excellent at engineering and CS and are at the forefront of a rapidly changing world. Harvard and Yale are woefully behind. Princeton is better, but it's still not at the same level.

MIT and Stanford exist at a different level. HYP and some of the other ivies have made questionable decisions in admissions, leadership, and hiring in recent years. And everyone has noticed - certainly anyone that's been hiring recent grads. HYP are relentlessly focused on hooks - whether wealth, the prominence of parents, athletes, FGLI, and so on. Whereas MIT and Stanford have been much better at picking up the genuine best and brightest, as well as students most likely to make an impact. Neither are perfect, but both are infinitely better than HYP, which have effectively become undergrad country clubs that do a little charity on the side.

HYPSM is a very antiquated construct. There's MIT and Stanford. And then there are about 15 schools that could be used interchangeably, depending on interest and major.

Princeton, and to a lesser extent, Brown, are very strong in mathematics.. There is a difference between mathematics and computer science. But the major advances in computing are derived from a combination of advanced mathematics and electrical engineering.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:WUSTL and Vanderbilt are still Ivy rejects though. It’s funny how these white wannabes try to cope.

I agree with WUSTL but not Vanderbilt. The acceptance rate is too low for it to be an ivy reject and the school has many desirable factors. To me, it’s the fun alternative to lower ranked ivies like Cornell/Dartmouth/Brown just like Duke is the fun alternative for middle ivies like Columbia/Penn. WUSTL and Emory are more on the same level, semi-selective schools with not enough desirable factors other than cheaper cost to choose it over an ivy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Of course HYPSM gives great advantages throughout life. Instant credibility…that can be fumbled.

The notion undergraduate degrees from HYPSM are meaningless comes from insecurity and envy.

Yet one does not need HYPSM for a wonderful life.

Anonymous wrote:People seemed to have contradicted themselves. Sometimes they say attending hypsm doesn’t give one any advantage for their future and careers while other times they argue those who attend hypsm are wealth strivers, which implies elite colleges do bring extra wealth to you. I hope people were just coping because otherwise DCUM is even dumber than I thought.

I’m pretty sure in my case it comes from e going to a state school, making 7 figures and having multiple Ivy+ people (including one HYPSM) reporting to me. Can’t really find insecurity or envy anywhere in the equation.

[Anonymous]

I don't know about OP's crowd but everyone I knew who went to Harvard was modest about it and never mentioned it if they didn't have to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't know about OP's crowd but everyone I knew who went to Harvard was modest about it and never mentioned it if they didn't have to.

My kid is at Harvard and I agree with this. We tend to avoid saying where she attends mostly because of the reactions. I’m surprised at how nosey folks are about where kids of someone they have just met attend college. People’s attitudes change instantly — they either start fawning all over you or show their insecurity.

But I do think everyone is genuinely modest about their abilities and know they were lucky to get in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of course HYPSM gives great advantages throughout life. Instant credibility…that can be fumbled.

The notion undergraduate degrees from HYPSM are meaningless comes from insecurity and envy.

Yet one does not need HYPSM for a wonderful life.

Anonymous wrote:People seemed to have contradicted themselves. Sometimes they say attending hypsm doesn’t give one any advantage for their future and careers while other times they argue those who attend hypsm are wealth strivers, which implies elite colleges do bring extra wealth to you. I hope people were just coping because otherwise DCUM is even dumber than I thought.

I’m pretty sure in my case it comes from e going to a state school, making 7 figures and having multiple Ivy+ people (including one HYPSM) reporting to me. Can’t really find insecurity or envy anywhere in the equation.

And do you feel HYPSM is meaningless?

[Anonymous]

8 pages of interesting discussion, but the answer is still that their massive endowments are what rally differentiates HYPSM from other elite schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My kid and I walked around Harvard and MIT but didn’t take the tour. It was more to sightsee because they weren’t getting in and that wasn’t even a conversation. Great Institutions, the brand name is undeniable. But there are lots of other places with old buildings, green lawns, libraries, labs, bookstores, cafes, college-town-type strips. HYPSM just doesn’t have room for everyone and those schools don’t hold a monopoly on opportunity.

Nothing else like the Stata building.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know about OP's crowd but everyone I knew who went to Harvard was modest about it and never mentioned it if they didn't have to.

My kid is at Harvard and I agree with this. We tend to avoid saying where she attends mostly because of the reactions. I’m surprised at how nosey folks are about where kids of someone they have just met attend college. People’s attitudes change instantly — they either start fawning all over you or show their insecurity.

But I do think everyone is genuinely modest about their abilities and know they were lucky to get in.

No offense to your kid but Harvard students are not that modest. They are pretty exclusionary. When participating in conferences, they engage in gatekeeping to keep out less prestigious schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of course HYPSM gives great advantages throughout life. Instant credibility…that can be fumbled.

The notion undergraduate degrees from HYPSM are meaningless comes from insecurity and envy.

Yet one does not need HYPSM for a wonderful life.

Anonymous wrote:People seemed to have contradicted themselves. Sometimes they say attending hypsm doesn’t give one any advantage for their future and careers while other times they argue those who attend hypsm are wealth strivers, which implies elite colleges do bring extra wealth to you. I hope people were just coping because otherwise DCUM is even dumber than I thought.

I’m pretty sure in my case it comes from e going to a state school, making 7 figures and having multiple Ivy+ people (including one HYPSM) reporting to me. Can’t really find insecurity or envy anywhere in the equation.

And do you feel HYPSM is meaningless?

I don't get the obsession, especially by certain groups. For far too many kids (and families) it is really about bragging rights within their communities.

Undergraduate education is about baseline learning and having peer groups who push you to excel, it isn't about 8 schools in an athletic conference which has reached 'mythic' status in the eyes of some. These are great schools but they are all very different and none of them are absolute unicorns in any field.

Looking at student bodies they are among about 40 schools (universities and SLACs) with mostly indistinguishable student academic profiles, their students aren't all unicorns they are merely among a very very smart subset of students.

They don't do anything unique for these students either, schools mostly teach form the same books and it makes complete sense, they are teaching baseline knowledge.

Their real defining characteristics are that they are mostly located in the Northeast relatively close together and they mostly very old. The simple fact that Cornell gets the same level of attention as the others is "prima facie" evidence that there isn't something unique here; it is nothing like the others except for geography.

The fact that some people try to further define most of these schools with things like 'HYPSM' is further evidence that it is about nothing except a need for some to try and feel superior to others. The need for these things is driven by insecurity.

I also don't understand why someone would want an 'LV' bag either. It is a waste of money whose only purpose is virtue signaling.