"Smartness" of fellow students and whether it matters

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think your question mixes up a lot of things - tests scores, rankings, intelligence of fellow students, and whether that affects your experience. Especially in classes that are discussion based or have any competition, yes, the caliber of your students is a huge factor. A Harvard caliber student would probably still do great at a SLAC down in the 50s on the rankings - I don’t think intellectually there’s that much difference among those students. But that student going to San Diego State would get a way worse education just bc their peers are not as stimulating and challenging.

You're right that their classroom discussion would be worse, but wrong to assume that means their education would be worse. San Diego State's professors still mostly have PhDs, and the student with high test scores (assuming they also work hard) is going to attract a lot of interest from those professors, which will lead them to great opportunities that they might not have gotten if they'd gone to the T30 university.

DP. Sure, the instructors at SDSU have PhDs and the knowhow to guide the motivated student who seeks out deeper understanding, which can lead to unique opportunities, but day in, day out, the courses are taught at a lower level, the discussion is non-existent, the scores are lower and the curves more generous. Meanwhile Harvard runs a seminar that can get freshman to graduate level math in one year. No one can replicate that camping out in office hours. Someone who lacks confidence can benefit from being top dog for a bit, but most people learn from their peers, not just their professors.

I went to a no name school, and you are just flat out wrong to think there aren't Harvard-smart kids everywhere. There are. There really are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think your question mixes up a lot of things - tests scores, rankings, intelligence of fellow students, and whether that affects your experience. Especially in classes that are discussion based or have any competition, yes, the caliber of your students is a huge factor. A Harvard caliber student would probably still do great at a SLAC down in the 50s on the rankings - I don’t think intellectually there’s that much difference among those students. But that student going to San Diego State would get a way worse education just bc their peers are not as stimulating and challenging.

You're right that their classroom discussion would be worse, but wrong to assume that means their education would be worse. San Diego State's professors still mostly have PhDs, and the student with high test scores (assuming they also work hard) is going to attract a lot of interest from those professors, which will lead them to great opportunities that they might not have gotten if they'd gone to the T30 university.

DP. Sure, the instructors at SDSU have PhDs and the knowhow to guide the motivated student who seeks out deeper understanding, which can lead to unique opportunities, but day in, day out, the courses are taught at a lower level, the discussion is non-existent, the scores are lower and the curves more generous. Meanwhile Harvard runs a seminar that can get freshman to graduate level math in one year. No one can replicate that camping out in office hours. Someone who lacks confidence can benefit from being top dog for a bit, but most people learn from their peers, not just their professors.

I went to a no name school, and you are just flat out wrong to think there aren't Harvard-smart kids everywhere. There are. There really are.

Yup. Some just can't afford to go anywhere other than their local public university, or it wouldn't even occur to them to go any farther from home than commuting distance because they have relatives or friends they want to stay close to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think your question mixes up a lot of things - tests scores, rankings, intelligence of fellow students, and whether that affects your experience. Especially in classes that are discussion based or have any competition, yes, the caliber of your students is a huge factor. A Harvard caliber student would probably still do great at a SLAC down in the 50s on the rankings - I don’t think intellectually there’s that much difference among those students. But that student going to San Diego State would get a way worse education just bc their peers are not as stimulating and challenging.

You're right that their classroom discussion would be worse, but wrong to assume that means their education would be worse. San Diego State's professors still mostly have PhDs, and the student with high test scores (assuming they also work hard) is going to attract a lot of interest from those professors, which will lead them to great opportunities that they might not have gotten if they'd gone to the T30 university.

DP. Sure, the instructors at SDSU have PhDs and the knowhow to guide the motivated student who seeks out deeper understanding, which can lead to unique opportunities, but day in, day out, the courses are taught at a lower level, the discussion is non-existent, the scores are lower and the curves more generous. Meanwhile Harvard runs a seminar that can get freshman to graduate level math in one year. No one can replicate that camping out in office hours. Someone who lacks confidence can benefit from being top dog for a bit, but most people learn from their peers, not just their professors.

If the discussion is non-existent it's only because the classes are too big to allow for it, not because the students aren't bright enough or motivated enough. There's plenty of good, intelligent conversation taking place in the classrooms at places like Catholic U, Washington College, Mary Washington, Elon, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think your question mixes up a lot of things - tests scores, rankings, intelligence of fellow students, and whether that affects your experience. Especially in classes that are discussion based or have any competition, yes, the caliber of your students is a huge factor. A Harvard caliber student would probably still do great at a SLAC down in the 50s on the rankings - I don’t think intellectually there’s that much difference among those students. But that student going to San Diego State would get a way worse education just bc their peers are not as stimulating and challenging.

You're right that their classroom discussion would be worse, but wrong to assume that means their education would be worse. San Diego State's professors still mostly have PhDs, and the student with high test scores (assuming they also work hard) is going to attract a lot of interest from those professors, which will lead them to great opportunities that they might not have gotten if they'd gone to the T30 university.

DP. Sure, the instructors at SDSU have PhDs and the knowhow to guide the motivated student who seeks out deeper understanding, which can lead to unique opportunities, but day in, day out, the courses are taught at a lower level, the discussion is non-existent, the scores are lower and the curves more generous. Meanwhile Harvard runs a seminar that can get freshman to graduate level math in one year. No one can replicate that camping out in office hours. Someone who lacks confidence can benefit from being top dog for a bit, but most people learn from their peers, not just their professors.

If the discussion is non-existent it's only because the classes are too big to allow for it, not because the students aren't bright enough or motivated enough. There's plenty of good, intelligent conversation taking place in the classrooms at places like Catholic U, Washington College, Mary Washington, Elon, etc.

Not my experience. I had plenty of small, upper-division classes with tenured professors at a state school similar to SDSU and there was zero engagement. Yes, there were smart students getting a good education, but they kept to themselves.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think your question mixes up a lot of things - tests scores, rankings, intelligence of fellow students, and whether that affects your experience. Especially in classes that are discussion based or have any competition, yes, the caliber of your students is a huge factor. A Harvard caliber student would probably still do great at a SLAC down in the 50s on the rankings - I don’t think intellectually there’s that much difference among those students. But that student going to San Diego State would get a way worse education just bc their peers are not as stimulating and challenging.

You're right that their classroom discussion would be worse, but wrong to assume that means their education would be worse. San Diego State's professors still mostly have PhDs, and the student with high test scores (assuming they also work hard) is going to attract a lot of interest from those professors, which will lead them to great opportunities that they might not have gotten if they'd gone to the T30 university.

DP. Sure, the instructors at SDSU have PhDs and the knowhow to guide the motivated student who seeks out deeper understanding, which can lead to unique opportunities, but day in, day out, the courses are taught at a lower level, the discussion is non-existent, the scores are lower and the curves more generous. Meanwhile Harvard runs a seminar that can get freshman to graduate level math in one year. No one can replicate that camping out in office hours. Someone who lacks confidence can benefit from being top dog for a bit, but most people learn from their peers, not just their professors.

If the discussion is non-existent it's only because the classes are too big to allow for it, not because the students aren't bright enough or motivated enough. There's plenty of good, intelligent conversation taking place in the classrooms at places like Catholic U, Washington College, Mary Washington, Elon, etc.

Not my experience. I had plenty of small, upper-division classes with tenured professors at a state school similar to SDSU and there was zero engagement. Yes, there were smart students getting a good education, but they kept to themselves.

Which school was this that we should be avoiding?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Malcolm Gladwell gave a talk about this phenomenon, with respect to students majoring in STEM and the SAT scores at their schools. At least when it comes to majoring in and graduating with a STEM degree, students do benefit from being in the top quarter of their class.

He did a podcast on scores not mattering for law school either although it wasn’t really a scientific study or anything. But I think it is completely true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Malcolm Gladwell gave a talk about this phenomenon, with respect to students majoring in STEM and the SAT scores at their schools. At least when it comes to majoring in and graduating with a STEM degree, students do benefit from being in the top quarter of their class.

He did a podcast on scores not mattering for law school either although it wasn’t really a scientific study or anything. But I think it is completely true.

My child is greatly enjoying being at CMU with a bunch of smart and intellectually curious kids after attending a W school where kids were maybe more motivated and competitive - but still lots of smart kids. He is a massive nerd, your child's mileage may vary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:SAT scores are not the be-all end all of intelligence.

But is going to a school with ambitious, high-functioning students better than going to school with a bunch of low-functioning slackers that spend all their time drinking and doing drugs...yes, obviously it is.

Regardless, why would you be surprised that Michigan would be full of top scoring students? It tops in STEM and particularly engineering across all sub-disciplines and is well renowned both nationally and internationally, both factors that attract high scoring students.

Wtf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Malcolm Gladwell gave a talk about this phenomenon, with respect to students majoring in STEM and the SAT scores at their schools. At least when it comes to majoring in and graduating with a STEM degree, students do benefit from being in the top quarter of their class.

He did a podcast on scores not mattering for law school either although it wasn’t really a scientific study or anything. But I think it is completely true.

My child is greatly enjoying being at CMU with a bunch of smart and intellectually curious kids after attending a W school where kids were maybe more motivated and competitive - but still lots of smart kids. He is a massive nerd, your child's mileage may vary.

what is CMU?
- grad of T10 university, so I guess " book smarts" aren't everything

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Malcolm Gladwell gave a talk about this phenomenon, with respect to students majoring in STEM and the SAT scores at their schools. At least when it comes to majoring in and graduating with a STEM degree, students do benefit from being in the top quarter of their class.

He did a podcast on scores not mattering for law school either although it wasn’t really a scientific study or anything. But I think it is completely true.

My child is greatly enjoying being at CMU with a bunch of smart and intellectually curious kids after attending a W school where kids were maybe more motivated and competitive - but still lots of smart kids. He is a massive nerd, your child's mileage may vary.

what is CMU?
- grad of T10 university, so I guess " book smarts" aren't everything

What is google?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think your question mixes up a lot of things - tests scores, rankings, intelligence of fellow students, and whether that affects your experience. Especially in classes that are discussion based or have any competition, yes, the caliber of your students is a huge factor. A Harvard caliber student would probably still do great at a SLAC down in the 50s on the rankings - I don’t think intellectually there’s that much difference among those students. But that student going to San Diego State would get a way worse education just bc their peers are not as stimulating and challenging.

You're right that their classroom discussion would be worse, but wrong to assume that means their education would be worse. San Diego State's professors still mostly have PhDs, and the student with high test scores (assuming they also work hard) is going to attract a lot of interest from those professors, which will lead them to great opportunities that they might not have gotten if they'd gone to the T30 university.

DP. Sure, the instructors at SDSU have PhDs and the knowhow to guide the motivated student who seeks out deeper understanding, which can lead to unique opportunities, but day in, day out, the courses are taught at a lower level, the discussion is non-existent, the scores are lower and the curves more generous. Meanwhile Harvard runs a seminar that can get freshman to graduate level math in one year. No one can replicate that camping out in office hours. Someone who lacks confidence can benefit from being top dog for a bit, but most people learn from their peers, not just their professors.

I went to a no name school, and you are just flat out wrong to think there aren't Harvard-smart kids everywhere. There are. There really are.

Yup. Some just can't afford to go anywhere other than their local public university, or it wouldn't even occur to them to go any farther from home than commuting distance because they have relatives or friends they want to stay close to.

All of this 100%. My kid goes to a top Law school. Attended a "no name school with dumb kids". Yes, I can quite literally assure you that a "Harvard smart" kid is now a proud alumni of podunk U, and there are many others with similar stories. Way better to have this outcome, and zero debt, than the other way around.

[Anonymous]

I read a bit about Malcolm Gladwell's book on this topic after a few of you referenced him upthread.

And wow.

"Gladwell shares a story that a former dean of admissions at Harvard supposedly acknowledged the dilemma of “relative deprivation” among students at an elite university. As reported by Gladwell, the dean's response was to relax admissions standards for athletes, rationalizing that it would be better for everyone if the bottom of the class academically had an alternate source of personal fulfillment from their accomplishments in sports."

https://www.achieveadmissions.com/single-post/2016-1-3-big-fishsmall-pond-david-and-goliath-by-malcolm-gladwell

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Malcolm Gladwell gave a talk about this phenomenon, with respect to students majoring in STEM and the SAT scores at their schools. At least when it comes to majoring in and graduating with a STEM degree, students do benefit from being in the top quarter of their class.

He did a podcast on scores not mattering for law school either although it wasn’t really a scientific study or anything. But I think it is completely true.

That's interesting. I attended a college application webinar shared on this board and the college counselor pointed out how the Harvard Law School lists all the schools from which they accept law students. It's not all Ivies. It includes schools most here would turn their nose up at.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Test scores do not equal intelligence.

equal to combination intelligence and hardwork.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Malcolm Gladwell gave a talk about this phenomenon, with respect to students majoring in STEM and the SAT scores at their schools. At least when it comes to majoring in and graduating with a STEM degree, students do benefit from being in the top quarter of their class.

He did a podcast on scores not mattering for law school either although it wasn’t really a scientific study or anything. But I think it is completely true.

My child is greatly enjoying being at CMU with a bunch of smart and intellectually curious kids after attending a W school where kids were maybe more motivated and competitive - but still lots of smart kids. He is a massive nerd, your child's mileage may vary.

what is CMU?
- grad of T10 university, so I guess " book smarts" aren't everything

What is google?

Per google: Central Michigan University