Why does college prestige matter to you? Rank these reasons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m just happy that people aren’t putting 3 at the top. There’s too many PhDs coming out of the Ivy league, let alone the rest of the T50, to even begin suggesting that there’s some extreme difference in education. Unless your kid is on the bounds and is highly highly intelligent (like top 0.001%) where they need specialized/accelerated instruction to the level of grad school near freshman year, you’re probably receiving a very similar education to others.

Even a standard freshman course like math 2230 at Cornell will exceed the level of rigor of any freshman math course at most lower ranked universities

Cite?

https://math.cornell.edu/lower-level-courses (scroll to bottom)

https://pi.math.cornell.edu/~allenk/courses/14/2230/

Compre this to the freshman math options at most other lower ranked schools (e.g. any VA school besides UVA)

I don't think this is true.

What do you mean? I just gave a task to compare the courses yourself; you can't disagree with that. If you want to refute me, find a comparable course at a VA school outside UVA (or MD school outside MD, etc), ignoring other elite schools of course.

In the thread it was asserted that "even a standard freshman course like math 2230 at Cornell will exceed the level of rigor of any freshman math course at most lower ranked universities. This was asserted without evidence so it can also be dismissed without evidence. The burden is not on me.

The evidence is that in VA, a state with many strong universities, only UVA (the highest ranking school) has a comparable freshman math course.

Show us the courses that you say are and aren't comparable.

The comparable course sequence is 1315/3315 at UVA. Even 2315 uses Williamson and Trotter, which is easier than Cornell's text by Hubbard and Hubbard, but they still are comparable. Every other freshman math sequence at every other VA school is not comparable.

What makes the standards at VT, W&M, W&L etc. lower in your view?

I don't know about the standards for the comparable courses (although I doubt they're at the level of the Ivy+ basic calculus classes I linked above), but the reason I said their sequences are not conpara is because none of them have a proof-based multivariable calculus and linear algebra freshman math sequence like Cornell (and similarly ranked institutions) and UVA (and UGA and UMD as a matter of fact).

You may use this as a canary in the coal mine for rigor throughout the later years of the math program - if you have such a rigorous course for freshmen, you likely have further upper level courses to challenge that course's graduates as sophomores and juniors.

Strongly agree. The most rigorous courses and offerings are located at the top 15 or 20 universities, and it applies across disciplines, not just math, though quantitative courses can be easier to compare. In humanities if one can get access to syllabi, the number and breadth of primary source use along with the textbook(s), as well as writing requirements: literature-cited writing expected throughout the semester not just one end of term paper. There are fluff classes at top universities too, but it is all relative: even the occasional easy ones are typically on par with a "normal" difficulty class at a typical non-T50 state school.

The humanities point is really moot. Essay expectations are higher, but there are plenty of top schools with light reading requirements. DC goes to Harvard and barely has to pick up a book for some of the humanities course work. It's a lot of talking about feelings of short texts these days.

Put another way…every university has “gut” classes that kids will seek out to fulfill a requirement where you have little interest.

The internet has reviews for every class, so you know which classes have more work than others.

It’s no different than the humanities majors picking Physics for poets to satisfy their science requirement.

Eh, there is no "physics for poets." Physics is just hard...

No…literally at Princeton there was a class with that title…still there anyone?

It was not considered a challenging course.

occasional dumbed-down compared to normal princeton classes happens at all elites. These classes in a T100 college would be considered normal difficulty. They are taught at elites because of the recruited athletes: that is who fills the majority of them, and the athlete tutor/course advisors push them into these unless they are actually bright athletes who are similar to the average student. Many helmet-sport and basketball athletes have SAT scores around 1100, and are not be able to handle normal elite courses: they have a couple easier courses in all disciplines to allow them to get through with a 3.3 (far below ivy medians). Occasionally a pre-law who detests stem will take Rocks for Jocks, for example, for the easy A, though it is not possible to use that course for anything other than elective credit if one is a stem major. However that Geology class uses the same text as they use at the state flagship for their earth science major requirement. The elite requires earth sci majors to do much more chem, bio, physics and math than the flagship. It is all relative. "Dumb" ivy courses are not watered down when compared to average-US-college courses.

I don't know why anyone has to go through such mental gymnastics to admit that every school has what everybody knows are gut classes that fulfill requirements, that actually plenty of people take...not just the athletes described above. I don't know if it's the same as "normal difficulty" at a Top 100...but it's a fairly easy A for everyone at the top schools.

This isn't news. It's far more than just the "occasional pre-law" kid plus athletes. There is no shame in just owning it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1) Status symbol that reflects intellect and ambition

2) Networking opportunities for graduate school, jobs, and more

3) Quality of education that includes instruction from noted academics

4) Recruiting opportunities, including Wall Street and high-end consulting companies

5) Family tradition to go to a particular school or type of school

6) Student quality, including smarts, wealth, celebrity, and more

3 and only 3

and then you attend and half of the important faculty only teach graduate students or hardly teach at all. It's a cool thought, but most students are being taught by "field famous" instructors that no one has heard of.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1) Status symbol that reflects intellect and ambition

2) Networking opportunities for graduate school, jobs, and more

3) Quality of education that includes instruction from noted academics

4) Recruiting opportunities, including Wall Street and high-end consulting companies

5) Family tradition to go to a particular school or type of school

6) Student quality, including smarts, wealth, celebrity, and more

3 and only 3

and then you attend and half of the important faculty only teach graduate students or hardly teach at all. It's a cool thought, but most students are being taught by "field famous" instructors that no one has heard of.

Huh? My kids have had tenured professors in almost every class, professors with world class research rankings or professors who wrote the textbook. These people are legendary within their field. I dont care if the common public does not know them; why would they?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1) Status symbol that reflects intellect and ambition

2) Networking opportunities for graduate school, jobs, and more

3) Quality of education that includes instruction from noted academics

4) Recruiting opportunities, including Wall Street and high-end consulting companies

5) Family tradition to go to a particular school or type of school

6) Student quality, including smarts, wealth, celebrity, and more

Priority number one peer fit

Your kid would have peers at hundreds of colleges.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1) Status symbol that reflects intellect and ambition

2) Networking opportunities for graduate school, jobs, and more

3) Quality of education that includes instruction from noted academics

4) Recruiting opportunities, including Wall Street and high-end consulting companies

5) Family tradition to go to a particular school or type of school

6) Student quality, including smarts, wealth, celebrity, and more

3 and only 3

and then you attend and half of the important faculty only teach graduate students or hardly teach at all. It's a cool thought, but most students are being taught by "field famous" instructors that no one has heard of.

Huh? My kids have had tenured professors in almost every class, professors with world class research rankings or professors who wrote the textbook. These people are legendary within their field. I dont care if the common public does not know them; why would they?

tenure sure. World famous...yeah okay bud
-Graduate of Princeton in Math, the world famous professors were for grad courses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1) Status symbol that reflects intellect and ambition

2) Networking opportunities for graduate school, jobs, and more

3) Quality of education that includes instruction from noted academics

4) Recruiting opportunities, including Wall Street and high-end consulting companies

5) Family tradition to go to a particular school or type of school

6) Student quality, including smarts, wealth, celebrity, and more

3 and only 3

and then you attend and half of the important faculty only teach graduate students or hardly teach at all. It's a cool thought, but most students are being taught by "field famous" instructors that no one has heard of.

Huh? My kids have had tenured professors in almost every class, professors with world class research rankings or professors who wrote the textbook. These people are legendary within their field. I dont care if the common public does not know them; why would they?

tenure sure. World famous...yeah okay bud
-Graduate of Princeton in Math, the world famous professors were for grad courses.

You mean the really famous professors weren't lining up to teach 18 year olds. I'm shocked. SHOCKED!!!
I mean why would they want to teach people who had demonstrated dedication and commitment to math rather than recent high school graduates of inconsistent quality?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m just happy that people aren’t putting 3 at the top. There’s too many PhDs coming out of the Ivy league, let alone the rest of the T50, to even begin suggesting that there’s some extreme difference in education. Unless your kid is on the bounds and is highly highly intelligent (like top 0.001%) where they need specialized/accelerated instruction to the level of grad school near freshman year, you’re probably receiving a very similar education to others.

Even a standard freshman course like math 2230 at Cornell will exceed the level of rigor of any freshman math course at most lower ranked universities

Cite?

https://math.cornell.edu/lower-level-courses (scroll to bottom)

https://pi.math.cornell.edu/~allenk/courses/14/2230/

Compre this to the freshman math options at most other lower ranked schools (e.g. any VA school besides UVA)

I don't think this is true.

What do you mean? I just gave a task to compare the courses yourself; you can't disagree with that. If you want to refute me, find a comparable course at a VA school outside UVA (or MD school outside MD, etc), ignoring other elite schools of course.

In the thread it was asserted that "even a standard freshman course like math 2230 at Cornell will exceed the level of rigor of any freshman math course at most lower ranked universities. This was asserted without evidence so it can also be dismissed without evidence. The burden is not on me.

The evidence is that in VA, a state with many strong universities, only UVA (the highest ranking school) has a comparable freshman math course.

Show us the courses that you say are and aren't comparable.

The comparable course sequence is 1315/3315 at UVA. Even 2315 uses Williamson and Trotter, which is easier than Cornell's text by Hubbard and Hubbard, but they still are comparable. Every other freshman math sequence at every other VA school is not comparable.

What makes the standards at VT, W&M, W&L etc. lower in your view?

I don't know about the standards for the comparable courses (although I doubt they're at the level of the Ivy+ basic calculus classes I linked above), but the reason I said their sequences are not conpara is because none of them have a proof-based multivariable calculus and linear algebra freshman math sequence like Cornell (and similarly ranked institutions) and UVA (and UGA and UMD as a matter of fact).

You may use this as a canary in the coal mine for rigor throughout the later years of the math program - if you have such a rigorous course for freshmen, you likely have further upper level courses to challenge that course's graduates as sophomores and juniors.

Strongly agree. The most rigorous courses and offerings are located at the top 15 or 20 universities, and it applies across disciplines, not just math, though quantitative courses can be easier to compare. In humanities if one can get access to syllabi, the number and breadth of primary source use along with the textbook(s), as well as writing requirements: literature-cited writing expected throughout the semester not just one end of term paper. There are fluff classes at top universities too, but it is all relative: even the occasional easy ones are typically on par with a "normal" difficulty class at a typical non-T50 state school.

The humanities point is really moot. Essay expectations are higher, but there are plenty of top schools with light reading requirements. DC goes to Harvard and barely has to pick up a book for some of the humanities course work. It's a lot of talking about feelings of short texts these days.

Put another way…every university has “gut” classes that kids will seek out to fulfill a requirement where you have little interest.

The internet has reviews for every class, so you know which classes have more work than others.

It’s no different than the humanities majors picking Physics for poets to satisfy their science requirement.

Eh, there is no "physics for poets." Physics is just hard...

No…literally at Princeton there was a class with that title…still there anyone?

It was not considered a challenging course.

Not only "physics for poets" but I recall other courses that would satisfy the Princeton science requirement for non-STEM majors including "rocks for jocks" (Geology) and "AstroGut" (Astronomy)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:College prestige does not matter to me as a parent. Just want a great education that leads to a good job.

+2. I also have not seen "prestige" really result in any of these "reasons" listed. What does matter? Wealth and connections of the student's families.

I went to an ivy with no weakth and no connections, and met many who were from similar backgrounds. Trust me that it was the school’s premiere reputation that landed me at a top law school and my pellgrant friend at a top med school. It is a completely different world. My 18 year old self had no idea the doors that would fly open just because of where I was. Faculty made calls for me. My kid is at a different ivy and entering a niche field and faculty are fostering connections to summer internships. The advantage cannot be overstated. Truly.

Ok probably true but hopefully you agree T25 including Uva are not significantly different from T10

UVA is a commoner school and should be nowhere near Princeton Harvard uchicago, etc. that’s a Virginia brain issue

As an armchair psychologist, it is clear to me that you went to chicago but were rejected from HYPSM and you feel inferior to people who went there and so try to make yourself feel better by acting like you are better than anyone that is more than 2 rankings lower than chicago on USNWR.

UVA is pretty comparable to low end ivy and in the end, there are few if any roads that are closed to you because you went to UVA instead of HYPSM. Your terminal degree will make more of a difference.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m just happy that people aren’t putting 3 at the top. There’s too many PhDs coming out of the Ivy league, let alone the rest of the T50, to even begin suggesting that there’s some extreme difference in education. Unless your kid is on the bounds and is highly highly intelligent (like top 0.001%) where they need specialized/accelerated instruction to the level of grad school near freshman year, you’re probably receiving a very similar education to others.

Even a standard freshman course like math 2230 at Cornell will exceed the level of rigor of any freshman math course at most lower ranked universities

Cite?

https://math.cornell.edu/lower-level-courses (scroll to bottom)

https://pi.math.cornell.edu/~allenk/courses/14/2230/

Compre this to the freshman math options at most other lower ranked schools (e.g. any VA school besides UVA)

I don't think this is true.

What do you mean? I just gave a task to compare the courses yourself; you can't disagree with that. If you want to refute me, find a comparable course at a VA school outside UVA (or MD school outside MD, etc), ignoring other elite schools of course.

In the thread it was asserted that "even a standard freshman course like math 2230 at Cornell will exceed the level of rigor of any freshman math course at most lower ranked universities. This was asserted without evidence so it can also be dismissed without evidence. The burden is not on me.

The evidence is that in VA, a state with many strong universities, only UVA (the highest ranking school) has a comparable freshman math course.

Show us the courses that you say are and aren't comparable.

The comparable course sequence is 1315/3315 at UVA. Even 2315 uses Williamson and Trotter, which is easier than Cornell's text by Hubbard and Hubbard, but they still are comparable. Every other freshman math sequence at every other VA school is not comparable.

What makes the standards at VT, W&M, W&L etc. lower in your view?

I don't know about the standards for the comparable courses (although I doubt they're at the level of the Ivy+ basic calculus classes I linked above), but the reason I said their sequences are not conpara is because none of them have a proof-based multivariable calculus and linear algebra freshman math sequence like Cornell (and similarly ranked institutions) and UVA (and UGA and UMD as a matter of fact).

You may use this as a canary in the coal mine for rigor throughout the later years of the math program - if you have such a rigorous course for freshmen, you likely have further upper level courses to challenge that course's graduates as sophomores and juniors.

Strongly agree. The most rigorous courses and offerings are located at the top 15 or 20 universities, and it applies across disciplines, not just math, though quantitative courses can be easier to compare. In humanities if one can get access to syllabi, the number and breadth of primary source use along with the textbook(s), as well as writing requirements: literature-cited writing expected throughout the semester not just one end of term paper. There are fluff classes at top universities too, but it is all relative: even the occasional easy ones are typically on par with a "normal" difficulty class at a typical non-T50 state school.

The humanities point is really moot. Essay expectations are higher, but there are plenty of top schools with light reading requirements. DC goes to Harvard and barely has to pick up a book for some of the humanities course work. It's a lot of talking about feelings of short texts these days.

Put another way…every university has “gut” classes that kids will seek out to fulfill a requirement where you have little interest.

The internet has reviews for every class, so you know which classes have more work than others.

It’s no different than the humanities majors picking Physics for poets to satisfy their science requirement.

Eh, there is no "physics for poets." Physics is just hard...

No…literally at Princeton there was a class with that title…still there anyone?

It was not considered a challenging course.

Not only "physics for poets" but I recall other courses that would satisfy the Princeton science requirement for non-STEM majors including "rocks for jocks" (Geology) and "AstroGut" (Astronomy)

I too just lie and use common jokes to disparage geology as course titles...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1) Status symbol that reflects intellect and ambition

2) Networking opportunities for graduate school, jobs, and more

3) Quality of education that includes instruction from noted academics

4) Recruiting opportunities, including Wall Street and high-end consulting companies

5) Family tradition to go to a particular school or type of school

6) Student quality, including smarts, wealth, celebrity, and more

Priority number one peer fit

Your kid would have peers at hundreds of colleges.

How do you know ? If PP is a top 1% kid and they want half the undergrads in their range, they need an elite/T0

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1) Status symbol that reflects intellect and ambition

2) Networking opportunities for graduate school, jobs, and more

3) Quality of education that includes instruction from noted academics

4) Recruiting opportunities, including Wall Street and high-end consulting companies

5) Family tradition to go to a particular school or type of school

6) Student quality, including smarts, wealth, celebrity, and more

Priority number one peer fit

Your kid would have peers at hundreds of colleges.

How do you know ? If PP is a top 1% kid and they want half the undergrads in their range, they need an elite/T0

Top 1%, eh they have a lot of choices
Top 0.01%, they can go to like MIT, Stanford, Caltech, or Princeton.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m just happy that people aren’t putting 3 at the top. There’s too many PhDs coming out of the Ivy league, let alone the rest of the T50, to even begin suggesting that there’s some extreme difference in education. Unless your kid is on the bounds and is highly highly intelligent (like top 0.001%) where they need specialized/accelerated instruction to the level of grad school near freshman year, you’re probably receiving a very similar education to others.

Even a standard freshman course like math 2230 at Cornell will exceed the level of rigor of any freshman math course at most lower ranked universities

Cite?

https://math.cornell.edu/lower-level-courses (scroll to bottom)

https://pi.math.cornell.edu/~allenk/courses/14/2230/

Compre this to the freshman math options at most other lower ranked schools (e.g. any VA school besides UVA)

I don't think this is true.

What do you mean? I just gave a task to compare the courses yourself; you can't disagree with that. If you want to refute me, find a comparable course at a VA school outside UVA (or MD school outside MD, etc), ignoring other elite schools of course.

In the thread it was asserted that "even a standard freshman course like math 2230 at Cornell will exceed the level of rigor of any freshman math course at most lower ranked universities. This was asserted without evidence so it can also be dismissed without evidence. The burden is not on me.

The evidence is that in VA, a state with many strong universities, only UVA (the highest ranking school) has a comparable freshman math course.

Show us the courses that you say are and aren't comparable.

The comparable course sequence is 1315/3315 at UVA. Even 2315 uses Williamson and Trotter, which is easier than Cornell's text by Hubbard and Hubbard, but they still are comparable. Every other freshman math sequence at every other VA school is not comparable.

What makes the standards at VT, W&M, W&L etc. lower in your view?

I don't know about the standards for the comparable courses (although I doubt they're at the level of the Ivy+ basic calculus classes I linked above), but the reason I said their sequences are not conpara is because none of them have a proof-based multivariable calculus and linear algebra freshman math sequence like Cornell (and similarly ranked institutions) and UVA (and UGA and UMD as a matter of fact).

You may use this as a canary in the coal mine for rigor throughout the later years of the math program - if you have such a rigorous course for freshmen, you likely have further upper level courses to challenge that course's graduates as sophomores and juniors.

Strongly agree. The most rigorous courses and offerings are located at the top 15 or 20 universities, and it applies across disciplines, not just math, though quantitative courses can be easier to compare. In humanities if one can get access to syllabi, the number and breadth of primary source use along with the textbook(s), as well as writing requirements: literature-cited writing expected throughout the semester not just one end of term paper. There are fluff classes at top universities too, but it is all relative: even the occasional easy ones are typically on par with a "normal" difficulty class at a typical non-T50 state school.

The humanities point is really moot. Essay expectations are higher, but there are plenty of top schools with light reading requirements. DC goes to Harvard and barely has to pick up a book for some of the humanities course work. It's a lot of talking about feelings of short texts these days.

Put another way…every university has “gut” classes that kids will seek out to fulfill a requirement where you have little interest.

The internet has reviews for every class, so you know which classes have more work than others.

It’s no different than the humanities majors picking Physics for poets to satisfy their science requirement.

Eh, there is no "physics for poets." Physics is just hard...

No…literally at Princeton there was a class with that title…still there anyone?

It was not considered a challenging course.

occasional dumbed-down compared to normal princeton classes happens at all elites. These classes in a T100 college would be considered normal difficulty. They are taught at elites because of the recruited athletes: that is who fills the majority of them, and the athlete tutor/course advisors push them into these unless they are actually bright athletes who are similar to the average student. Many helmet-sport and basketball athletes have SAT scores around 1100, and are not be able to handle normal elite courses: they have a couple easier courses in all disciplines to allow them to get through with a 3.3 (far below ivy medians). Occasionally a pre-law who detests stem will take Rocks for Jocks, for example, for the easy A, though it is not possible to use that course for anything other than elective credit if one is a stem major. However that Geology class uses the same text as they use at the state flagship for their earth science major requirement. The elite requires earth sci majors to do much more chem, bio, physics and math than the flagship. It is all relative. "Dumb" ivy courses are not watered down when compared to average-US-college courses.

The earth sciences are dominated by state schools with top climatology, physics, and chemistry programs. You're speaking out of your ass as someone who works in industry for the geosciences. I'm not taking some random guy from Princeton unless it's Harry Hess.

I'm not sure how that disproves PP's point, given that it was about undergrad course rigor rather than graduate prestige

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m just happy that people aren’t putting 3 at the top. There’s too many PhDs coming out of the Ivy league, let alone the rest of the T50, to even begin suggesting that there’s some extreme difference in education. Unless your kid is on the bounds and is highly highly intelligent (like top 0.001%) where they need specialized/accelerated instruction to the level of grad school near freshman year, you’re probably receiving a very similar education to others.

Even a standard freshman course like math 2230 at Cornell will exceed the level of rigor of any freshman math course at most lower ranked universities

Cite?

https://math.cornell.edu/lower-level-courses (scroll to bottom)

https://pi.math.cornell.edu/~allenk/courses/14/2230/

Compre this to the freshman math options at most other lower ranked schools (e.g. any VA school besides UVA)

I don't think this is true.

What do you mean? I just gave a task to compare the courses yourself; you can't disagree with that. If you want to refute me, find a comparable course at a VA school outside UVA (or MD school outside MD, etc), ignoring other elite schools of course.

In the thread it was asserted that "even a standard freshman course like math 2230 at Cornell will exceed the level of rigor of any freshman math course at most lower ranked universities. This was asserted without evidence so it can also be dismissed without evidence. The burden is not on me.

The evidence is that in VA, a state with many strong universities, only UVA (the highest ranking school) has a comparable freshman math course.

Show us the courses that you say are and aren't comparable.

The comparable course sequence is 1315/3315 at UVA. Even 2315 uses Williamson and Trotter, which is easier than Cornell's text by Hubbard and Hubbard, but they still are comparable. Every other freshman math sequence at every other VA school is not comparable.

What makes the standards at VT, W&M, W&L etc. lower in your view?

I don't know about the standards for the comparable courses (although I doubt they're at the level of the Ivy+ basic calculus classes I linked above), but the reason I said their sequences are not conpara is because none of them have a proof-based multivariable calculus and linear algebra freshman math sequence like Cornell (and similarly ranked institutions) and UVA (and UGA and UMD as a matter of fact).

You may use this as a canary in the coal mine for rigor throughout the later years of the math program - if you have such a rigorous course for freshmen, you likely have further upper level courses to challenge that course's graduates as sophomores and juniors.

Strongly agree. The most rigorous courses and offerings are located at the top 15 or 20 universities, and it applies across disciplines, not just math, though quantitative courses can be easier to compare. In humanities if one can get access to syllabi, the number and breadth of primary source use along with the textbook(s), as well as writing requirements: literature-cited writing expected throughout the semester not just one end of term paper. There are fluff classes at top universities too, but it is all relative: even the occasional easy ones are typically on par with a "normal" difficulty class at a typical non-T50 state school.

The humanities point is really moot. Essay expectations are higher, but there are plenty of top schools with light reading requirements. DC goes to Harvard and barely has to pick up a book for some of the humanities course work. It's a lot of talking about feelings of short texts these days.

Put another way…every university has “gut” classes that kids will seek out to fulfill a requirement where you have little interest.

The internet has reviews for every class, so you know which classes have more work than others.

It’s no different than the humanities majors picking Physics for poets to satisfy their science requirement.

Eh, there is no "physics for poets." Physics is just hard...

No…literally at Princeton there was a class with that title…still there anyone?

It was not considered a challenging course.

occasional dumbed-down compared to normal princeton classes happens at all elites. These classes in a T100 college would be considered normal difficulty. They are taught at elites because of the recruited athletes: that is who fills the majority of them, and the athlete tutor/course advisors push them into these unless they are actually bright athletes who are similar to the average student. Many helmet-sport and basketball athletes have SAT scores around 1100, and are not be able to handle normal elite courses: they have a couple easier courses in all disciplines to allow them to get through with a 3.3 (far below ivy medians). Occasionally a pre-law who detests stem will take Rocks for Jocks, for example, for the easy A, though it is not possible to use that course for anything other than elective credit if one is a stem major. However that Geology class uses the same text as they use at the state flagship for their earth science major requirement. The elite requires earth sci majors to do much more chem, bio, physics and math than the flagship. It is all relative. "Dumb" ivy courses are not watered down when compared to average-US-college courses.

The earth sciences are dominated by state schools with top climatology, physics, and chemistry programs. You're speaking out of your ass as someone who works in industry for the geosciences. I'm not taking some random guy from Princeton unless it's Harry Hess.

I'm not sure how that disproves PP's point, given that it was about undergrad course rigor rather than graduate prestige

Most rigorous geoscience programs are at like UOklahoma and UF, not the ivies. Its one of the few industries where there's an inverse of respect by going to a state school over private universities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m just happy that people aren’t putting 3 at the top. There’s too many PhDs coming out of the Ivy league, let alone the rest of the T50, to even begin suggesting that there’s some extreme difference in education. Unless your kid is on the bounds and is highly highly intelligent (like top 0.001%) where they need specialized/accelerated instruction to the level of grad school near freshman year, you’re probably receiving a very similar education to others.

Even a standard freshman course like math 2230 at Cornell will exceed the level of rigor of any freshman math course at most lower ranked universities

Cite?

https://math.cornell.edu/lower-level-courses (scroll to bottom)

https://pi.math.cornell.edu/~allenk/courses/14/2230/

Compre this to the freshman math options at most other lower ranked schools (e.g. any VA school besides UVA)

I don't think this is true.

What do you mean? I just gave a task to compare the courses yourself; you can't disagree with that. If you want to refute me, find a comparable course at a VA school outside UVA (or MD school outside MD, etc), ignoring other elite schools of course.

In the thread it was asserted that "even a standard freshman course like math 2230 at Cornell will exceed the level of rigor of any freshman math course at most lower ranked universities. This was asserted without evidence so it can also be dismissed without evidence. The burden is not on me.

The evidence is that in VA, a state with many strong universities, only UVA (the highest ranking school) has a comparable freshman math course.

Show us the courses that you say are and aren't comparable.

The comparable course sequence is 1315/3315 at UVA. Even 2315 uses Williamson and Trotter, which is easier than Cornell's text by Hubbard and Hubbard, but they still are comparable. Every other freshman math sequence at every other VA school is not comparable.

What makes the standards at VT, W&M, W&L etc. lower in your view?

I don't know about the standards for the comparable courses (although I doubt they're at the level of the Ivy+ basic calculus classes I linked above), but the reason I said their sequences are not conpara is because none of them have a proof-based multivariable calculus and linear algebra freshman math sequence like Cornell (and similarly ranked institutions) and UVA (and UGA and UMD as a matter of fact).

You may use this as a canary in the coal mine for rigor throughout the later years of the math program - if you have such a rigorous course for freshmen, you likely have further upper level courses to challenge that course's graduates as sophomores and juniors.

Strongly agree. The most rigorous courses and offerings are located at the top 15 or 20 universities, and it applies across disciplines, not just math, though quantitative courses can be easier to compare. In humanities if one can get access to syllabi, the number and breadth of primary source use along with the textbook(s), as well as writing requirements: literature-cited writing expected throughout the semester not just one end of term paper. There are fluff classes at top universities too, but it is all relative: even the occasional easy ones are typically on par with a "normal" difficulty class at a typical non-T50 state school.

The humanities point is really moot. Essay expectations are higher, but there are plenty of top schools with light reading requirements. DC goes to Harvard and barely has to pick up a book for some of the humanities course work. It's a lot of talking about feelings of short texts these days.

Put another way…every university has “gut” classes that kids will seek out to fulfill a requirement where you have little interest.

The internet has reviews for every class, so you know which classes have more work than others.

It’s no different than the humanities majors picking Physics for poets to satisfy their science requirement.

Eh, there is no "physics for poets." Physics is just hard...

No…literally at Princeton there was a class with that title…still there anyone?

It was not considered a challenging course.

Not only "physics for poets" but I recall other courses that would satisfy the Princeton science requirement for non-STEM majors including "rocks for jocks" (Geology) and "AstroGut" (Astronomy)

I too just lie and use common jokes to disparage geology as course titles...

It's not disparaging geology. It's disparaging a specific easy intro class.

Jews for Jews and History of My Life (various modern world culture/history classes) are other classes in the genre.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:College prestige does not matter to me as a parent. Just want a great education that leads to a good job.

+2. I also have not seen "prestige" really result in any of these "reasons" listed. What does matter? Wealth and connections of the student's families.

I went to an ivy with no weakth and no connections, and met many who were from similar backgrounds. Trust me that it was the school’s premiere reputation that landed me at a top law school and my pellgrant friend at a top med school. It is a completely different world. My 18 year old self had no idea the doors that would fly open just because of where I was. Faculty made calls for me. My kid is at a different ivy and entering a niche field and faculty are fostering connections to summer internships. The advantage cannot be overstated. Truly.

Ok probably true but hopefully you agree T25 including Uva are not significantly different from T10

UVA is a commoner school and should be nowhere near Princeton Harvard uchicago, etc. that’s a Virginia brain issue

As an armchair psychologist, it is clear to me that you went to chicago but were rejected from HYPSM and you feel inferior to people who went there and so try to make yourself feel better by acting like you are better than anyone that is more than 2 rankings lower than chicago on USNWR.

UVA is pretty comparable to low end ivy and in the end, there are few if any roads that are closed to you because you went to UVA instead of HYPSM. Your terminal degree will make more of a difference.

+1