Stanford or UMBC?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Stanford. Her average peer at Stanford will be overwhelmingly of higher academic caliber than her average peer at UMBC. Also, the resources at Stanford are simply in a different league altogether--the two schools aren't even in a comparable cohort of schools.

-Professor at research u.

Another prof here.
Unless you or your daughter are somehow concerned she couldn't cut it at stanford, it's worth it. She'd be exposed to a completely different, really special peer group at Stanford that would be her network starting out and later on. And the standards she be held to would be really extreme.

I have had many PhD students, and honestly my experience is that middle of the road students from places like Stanford often outpace the 4.0 students from places like UMBC. I don't think it's because the stanford students are necessarily more gifted, but that they learned something good at these places.

I agree that it's not a guaranteed ticket to greatness, and UMBC is in no way a ticket to something other than greatness. But you're definitely tilting the odds in making this choice. At least from the perspective of a researcher. Iv'e worked in industry too and I think the needs are a little bit more different. But if you daughter wants to be a biology major (did I read that?) then she wants to do research (or medicine, which will be similar). Stanford will be worth it.

Yet research shows the exact opposite. A top student at UMD outpaces a middle student from an Ivy.

Funny how 1 persons perception is so inaccurate, I suspect that is why eyewitness accounts are so inaccurate.

Not all UMD's are the same. UMBC is very different than College Park.

For medicine, I care where my doctors go to school. If I had a choice between Stanford and UMBC, I'd choose the Stanford doctor. In many professions, it doesn't matter where you go to school but for medicine it does.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Stanford. Her average peer at Stanford will be overwhelmingly of higher academic caliber than her average peer at UMBC. Also, the resources at Stanford are simply in a different league altogether--the two schools aren't even in a comparable cohort of schools.

-Professor at research u.

Another prof here.
Unless you or your daughter are somehow concerned she couldn't cut it at stanford, it's worth it. She'd be exposed to a completely different, really special peer group at Stanford that would be her network starting out and later on. And the standards she be held to would be really extreme.

I have had many PhD students, and honestly my experience is that middle of the road students from places like Stanford often outpace the 4.0 students from places like UMBC. I don't think it's because the stanford students are necessarily more gifted, but that they learned something good at these places.

I agree that it's not a guaranteed ticket to greatness, and UMBC is in no way a ticket to something other than greatness. But you're definitely tilting the odds in making this choice. At least from the perspective of a researcher. Iv'e worked in industry too and I think the needs are a little bit more different. But if you daughter wants to be a biology major (did I read that?) then she wants to do research (or medicine, which will be similar). Stanford will be worth it.

Yet research shows the exact opposite. A top student at UMD outpaces a middle student from an Ivy.

Funny how 1 persons perception is so inaccurate, I suspect that is why eyewitness accounts are so inaccurate.

Not all UMD's are the same. UMBC is very different than College Park.

For medicine, I care where my doctors go to school. If I had a choice between Stanford and UMBC, I'd choose the Stanford doctor. In many professions, it doesn't matter where you go to school but for medicine it does.

I would take a self confident UMBC doctor to a self defeated Stanford doctor any day of the week. Truthfully I don't choose a doctor by where they attended school but where they practice, how much research they have published and personal recommendations... When it matters... Meaning not for a cold but for cancer.

I was just pointing out your point has been disproven in research.... And at the time of the research umCP was ranked about the same as UMBC is today.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Stanford. Her average peer at Stanford will be overwhelmingly of higher academic caliber than her average peer at UMBC. Also, the resources at Stanford are simply in a different league altogether--the two schools aren't even in a comparable cohort of schools.

-Professor at research u.

Another prof here.
Unless you or your daughter are somehow concerned she couldn't cut it at stanford, it's worth it. She'd be exposed to a completely different, really special peer group at Stanford that would be her network starting out and later on. And the standards she be held to would be really extreme.

I have had many PhD students, and honestly my experience is that middle of the road students from places like Stanford often outpace the 4.0 students from places like UMBC. I don't think it's because the stanford students are necessarily more gifted, but that they learned something good at these places.

I agree that it's not a guaranteed ticket to greatness, and UMBC is in no way a ticket to something other than greatness. But you're definitely tilting the odds in making this choice. At least from the perspective of a researcher. Iv'e worked in industry too and I think the needs are a little bit more different. But if you daughter wants to be a biology major (did I read that?) then she wants to do research (or medicine, which will be similar). Stanford will be worth it.

Yet research shows the exact opposite. A top student at UMD outpaces a middle student from an Ivy.

Funny how 1 persons perception is so inaccurate, I suspect that is why eyewitness accounts are so inaccurate.

Not all UMD's are the same. UMBC is very different than College Park.

For medicine, I care where my doctors go to school. If I had a choice between Stanford and UMBC, I'd choose the Stanford doctor. In many professions, it doesn't matter where you go to school but for medicine it does.

I would take a self confident UMBC doctor to a self defeated Stanford doctor any day of the week. Truthfully I don't choose a doctor by where they attended school but where they practice, how much research they have published and personal recommendations... When it matters... Meaning not for a cold but for cancer.

I was just pointing out your point has been disproven in research.... And at the time of the research umCP was ranked about the same as UMBC is today.

I don't know that that is true. No one has broken down where you went to college vs. success in x profession, just lifetime earnings. Being a successful PhD student is not related to long term earnings.

[Anonymous]

Personally I would have a hard time turning Stanford down. However it's really what medical school you attend that is important. For admissions she will need stellar grades which will be easier in an environment where she feels confident she will flourish. Is she perhaps uncertain about being far from home?
Not all kids want to start out across country. On the other hand, I would not assume that all the kids are brilliant at Stanford and it would be a uniformly rigorous environment. They have a reputation for grade inflation and a heavy emphasis on legacy, connections and athletic hooks so it is like most big schools a mix of talent level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Stanford. Her average peer at Stanford will be overwhelmingly of higher academic caliber than her average peer at UMBC. Also, the resources at Stanford are simply in a different league altogether--the two schools aren't even in a comparable cohort of schools.

-Professor at research u.

Another prof here.
Unless you or your daughter are somehow concerned she couldn't cut it at stanford, it's worth it. She'd be exposed to a completely different, really special peer group at Stanford that would be her network starting out and later on. And the standards she be held to would be really extreme.

I have had many PhD students, and honestly my experience is that middle of the road students from places like Stanford often outpace the 4.0 students from places like UMBC. I don't think it's because the stanford students are necessarily more gifted, but that they learned something good at these places.

I agree that it's not a guaranteed ticket to greatness, and UMBC is in no way a ticket to something other than greatness. But you're definitely tilting the odds in making this choice. At least from the perspective of a researcher. Iv'e worked in industry too and I think the needs are a little bit more different. But if you daughter wants to be a biology major (did I read that?) then she wants to do research (or medicine, which will be similar). Stanford will be worth it.

Yet research shows the exact opposite. A top student at UMD outpaces a middle student from an Ivy.

Funny how 1 persons perception is so inaccurate, I suspect that is why eyewitness accounts are so inaccurate.

Not all UMD's are the same. UMBC is very different than College Park.

For medicine, I care where my doctors go to school. If I had a choice between Stanford and UMBC, I'd choose the Stanford doctor. In many professions, it doesn't matter where you go to school but for medicine it does.

I would take a self confident UMBC doctor to a self defeated Stanford doctor any day of the week. Truthfully I don't choose a doctor by where they attended school but where they practice, how much research they have published and personal recommendations... When it matters... Meaning not for a cold but for cancer.

I was just pointing out your point has been disproven in research.... And at the time of the research umCP was ranked about the same as UMBC is today.

I don't know that that is true. No one has broken down where you went to college vs. success in x profession, just lifetime earnings. Being a successful PhD student is not related to long term earnings.

The measurement was by published articles. Also they follow drop out rates from programs. A top student at UMD is more successful than everybody in IVY minus the top 5 percent because of perceived success... aka confidence is shaken when a top student falls to the middle. It's how ivys justify athletes, they don't mind being on the bottom/middle. No self confidence problem there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Stanford. Her average peer at Stanford will be overwhelmingly of higher academic caliber than her average peer at UMBC. Also, the resources at Stanford are simply in a different league altogether--the two schools aren't even in a comparable cohort of schools.

-Professor at research u.

Another prof here.
Unless you or your daughter are somehow concerned she couldn't cut it at stanford, it's worth it. She'd be exposed to a completely different, really special peer group at Stanford that would be her network starting out and later on. And the standards she be held to would be really extreme.

I have had many PhD students, and honestly my experience is that middle of the road students from places like Stanford often outpace the 4.0 students from places like UMBC. I don't think it's because the stanford students are necessarily more gifted, but that they learned something good at these places.

I agree that it's not a guaranteed ticket to greatness, and UMBC is in no way a ticket to something other than greatness. But you're definitely tilting the odds in making this choice. At least from the perspective of a researcher. Iv'e worked in industry too and I think the needs are a little bit more different. But if you daughter wants to be a biology major (did I read that?) then she wants to do research (or medicine, which will be similar). Stanford will be worth it.

Yet research shows the exact opposite. A top student at UMD outpaces a middle student from an Ivy.

Funny how 1 persons perception is so inaccurate, I suspect that is why eyewitness accounts are so inaccurate.

Not all UMD's are the same. UMBC is very different than College Park.

For medicine, I care where my doctors go to school. If I had a choice between Stanford and UMBC, I'd choose the Stanford doctor. In many professions, it doesn't matter where you go to school but for medicine it does.

I would take a self confident UMBC doctor to a self defeated Stanford doctor any day of the week. Truthfully I don't choose a doctor by where they attended school but where they practice, how much research they have published and personal recommendations... When it matters... Meaning not for a cold but for cancer.

I was just pointing out your point has been disproven in research.... And at the time of the research umCP was ranked about the same as UMBC is today.

I don't know that that is true. No one has broken down where you went to college vs. success in x profession, just lifetime earnings. Being a successful PhD student is not related to long term earnings.

The measurement was by published articles. Also they follow drop out rates from programs. A top student at UMD is more successful than everybody in IVY minus the top 5 percent because of perceived success... aka confidence is shaken when a top student falls to the middle. It's how ivys justify athletes, they don't mind being on the bottom/middle. No self confidence problem there.

Links? Your description makes it really hard to understand what is meant by "success".

[Anonymous]

Dollars aside, the question is not so simple (I can't get a clear picture on the net out of pocket comparison that the OP is making as it is not as simple as "I have a full ride" versus "no merit dollars" because need-based aid in the form of grants not loans at places like Stanford can be very meaningful). It is also not as simple as, "where you go undergrad really doesn't matter." If you held this view you wouldn't apply to Stanford in the first place. If your end-state ambition is to be a doctor, then where you go the medical school and where you do residency clearly matter more to your success. They trick, however, is getting onto that path. Places like Harvard and Stanford medical school take a significantly higher percentage of students from their own undergraduate programs. This is a little known fact and can be material. When I was at Harvard Medical, my class of 160 was drawn 40 from Harvard Undergrad, with the next highest representation from Yale and Stanford at roughly 10 each. I am not saying that Harvard is the only good medical school in the country and in many ways the state medical programs (UMichigan and UCSF for example) are also outstanding. But these schools too had a disproportionate number of undergrads from fancy places like Stanford and Harvard.

You do not have to be in the top 5% of your class at Stanford to get into a phenomenal Medical School. My wife is on the admissions committee at a prominent Top 10 east coast medical school. The candidates that she sees and accepts from highly competitive undergraduate programs tend to be in the top quarter of their class.

Taking a cheap shot at Ivy athletes should not provide any comfort. People with proven commitment to things that are hard - and being a division I athlete is hard - are very attractive to medical schools. A team captain with a good GPA and strong boards will often trump an academic grinder with little else. My two football playing roommates from undergrad, one of whom is a chief of neurosurgery and the other leading a major orthopedics surgery group, would disagree very strongly with the assertions made by some on this board.

The best way to increase your chances for success is to chose a school where you believe you will fulfill your academic potential. This is not entirely measured in GPA or class rank. I would include access to research opportunities, a rich and varied curriculum, superior faculty, and stimulating and challenging peers as a part of a winning formula. If you are fearful that you will not rise to the challenge of a place like Stanford, then you are probably not going to distinguish yourself sufficiently at a lower ranked school to get into one of the better medical schools.

[Anonymous]

It's interesting how much weight and heft people are giving the so-called Ivy and "elite" institutions given that they educate such a small number of the U.S. student population. In fact, the weight given seems outsize to their actual impact.

Since people in these fora tend to equate "success" with wealth and power" let's take a look at where the leaders of the top 10 Fortune 500 companies went to school.

Doug McMillon (Wal-Mart Stores) — University of Arkansas (BS), University of Tulsa (MBA)
Rex Tillerson (Exxon Mobil) — University of Texas at Austin (BS)
John S. Watson (Chevron) — University of California, Davis (BA), University of Chicago (MBA)
Warren E. Buffett (Berkshire Hathaway) — University of Nebraska (BS), Columbia University (MS)
Tim Cook (Apple) — Auburn University (BS), Duke University (MBA)
Greg C. Garland (Phillips 66) — Texas A&M University (BS)
Mary Barra (General Motors) — General Motors Institute/Kettering University (BS), Stanford University (MBA)
Mark Fields (Ford Motor) — Rutgers University (BA), Harvard University (MBA)
Jeff Immelt (General Electric) — Dartmouth College (BA), Harvard University (MBA)
Joe Gorder (Valero Energy) — University of Missouri-St. Louis (BA), Our Lady of the Lake University (MBA)

Additionally, Forbes list of 30 Under 30 listing the most influential people in their fields under 30 has a wide majority of people who did not attend Stanford, Yale Harvard and any other of these storied schools.

http://www.businessinsider.com/where-fortune-500-ceos-went-to-college-2015-3

[Anonymous]

This is the PP/Stanford alum....

I'm reading this conversation with interest...not just because of the Stanford connection, but because of the emphasis on "success."

College is also a time of exploration, learning about different people, culture, values. It is not just a means to an end. You can get a great education anywhere, and I'd say OP's DC is going to do well no matter where she goes. This is a question about the journey. This may be my Stanford/liberal arts education talking -- while we were all high-achieving students -- many of us also understood that the journey is as important as the destination, maybe even more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's interesting how much weight and heft people are giving the so-called Ivy and "elite" institutions given that they educate such a small number of the U.S. student population. In fact, the weight given seems outsize to their actual impact.

Since people in these fora tend to equate "success" with wealth and power" let's take a look at where the leaders of the top 10 Fortune 500 companies went to school.

Doug McMillon (Wal-Mart Stores) — University of Arkansas (BS), University of Tulsa (MBA)
Rex Tillerson (Exxon Mobil) — University of Texas at Austin (BS)
John S. Watson (Chevron) — University of California, Davis (BA), University of Chicago (MBA)
Warren E. Buffett (Berkshire Hathaway) — University of Nebraska (BS), Columbia University (MS)
Tim Cook (Apple) — Auburn University (BS), Duke University (MBA)
Greg C. Garland (Phillips 66) — Texas A&M University (BS)
Mary Barra (General Motors) — General Motors Institute/Kettering University (BS), Stanford University (MBA)
Mark Fields (Ford Motor) — Rutgers University (BA), Harvard University (MBA)
Jeff Immelt (General Electric) — Dartmouth College (BA), Harvard University (MBA)
Joe Gorder (Valero Energy) — University of Missouri-St. Louis (BA), Our Lady of the Lake University (MBA)

Additionally, Forbes list of 30 Under 30 listing the most influential people in their fields under 30 has a wide majority of people who did not attend Stanford, Yale Harvard and any other of these storied schools.

http://www.businessinsider.com/where-fortune-500-ceos-went-to-college-2015-3

This is all well worn, but does not apply whatsoever to the decision of an individual. While it is clearly true that the majority of leaders in most fields (as measured by lifetime earnings or other) come from places other than the most selective colleges, this is to be expected given the relative sample sets. In other words, there will of course be more "winners" from the pool representing 99.7% of the undergrad population than there will be from the 0.3% (the approximate percentage of high school graduates who will matriculate at the Ivys plus Stanford plus MIT). If you look at the entire list you reference, you will find that pound-for-pound, these most selective colleges are overrepresented by at least a factor of 10. If you were to look at the same list for the field of medicine, highly selective undergraduate programs will be even more disproportionately represented. Successful people clearly can come from all types of backgrounds and choices. The question at hand is what choice made by an individual will give him/her the highest probability of success, recognizing of course it is what that individual does with the opportunity that is the biggest determinant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Stanford. Her average peer at Stanford will be overwhelmingly of higher academic caliber than her average peer at UMBC. Also, the resources at Stanford are simply in a different league altogether--the two schools aren't even in a comparable cohort of schools.

-Professor at research u.

Another prof here.
Unless you or your daughter are somehow concerned she couldn't cut it at stanford, it's worth it. She'd be exposed to a completely different, really special peer group at Stanford that would be her network starting out and later on. And the standards she be held to would be really extreme.

I have had many PhD students, and honestly my experience is that middle of the road students from places like Stanford often outpace the 4.0 students from places like UMBC. I don't think it's because the stanford students are necessarily more gifted, but that they learned something good at these places.

I agree that it's not a guaranteed ticket to greatness, and UMBC is in no way a ticket to something other than greatness. But you're definitely tilting the odds in making this choice. At least from the perspective of a researcher. Iv'e worked in industry too and I think the needs are a little bit more different. But if you daughter wants to be a biology major (did I read that?) then she wants to do research (or medicine, which will be similar). Stanford will be worth it.

Yet research shows the exact opposite. A top student at UMD outpaces a middle student from an Ivy.

Funny how 1 persons perception is so inaccurate, I suspect that is why eyewitness accounts are so inaccurate.

Not all UMD's are the same. UMBC is very different than College Park.

For medicine, I care where my doctors go to school. If I had a choice between Stanford and UMBC, I'd choose the Stanford doctor. In many professions, it doesn't matter where you go to school but for medicine it does.

I would take a self confident UMBC doctor to a self defeated Stanford doctor any day of the week. Truthfully I don't choose a doctor by where they attended school but where they practice, how much research they have published and personal recommendations... When it matters... Meaning not for a cold but for cancer.

I was just pointing out your point has been disproven in research.... And at the time of the research umCP was ranked about the same as UMBC is today.

I don't know that that is true. No one has broken down where you went to college vs. success in x profession, just lifetime earnings. Being a successful PhD student is not related to long term earnings.

The measurement was by published articles. Also they follow drop out rates from programs. A top student at UMD is more successful than everybody in IVY minus the top 5 percent because of perceived success... aka confidence is shaken when a top student falls to the middle. It's how ivys justify athletes, they don't mind being on the bottom/middle. No self confidence problem there.

Links? Your description makes it really hard to understand what is meant by "success".

I can't find the scholarly article right now and I don't even know if it is available with out access to a research library.

So here is the dumbed down version... watch 5:00-11:00.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3UEwbRWFZVc

BTW, I disagree with going to UMD in this scenario... I think with this knowledge you can coach your kid's self confidence and be an outlier (pun intended) and break this pattern. But the research still disproves your theory that "middle of the road students from places like Stanford often outpace the 4.0 students from places like UMBC."

[Anonymous]

I went to GMU and make 50% more than my UVA and Harvard counter parts. It may be a great way to get in the door and build an alumni contact network but those advantages may be a relic of the past

[Anonymous]

I don't believe your post OP. If someone was good enough to get into Stanford, the folks at UMBC would deny the student thinking they wouldn't accept.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I went to GMU and make 50% more than my UVA and Harvard counter parts. It may be a great way to get in the door and build an alumni contact network but those advantages may be a relic of the past

Typical defensive and anecdotal response. No one is arguing that you can't be successful from a variety of backgrounds. There is, however, a very real and very material difference between the educational opportunities at different schools. And contrary to what you might believe, there are many, many fields where dollars earned is not even close to the best measure of career fulfillment or success - academic medicine being a prime example. And, no amount of street smarts or school-of-hard knocks story is going to propel you in that field. I am sure that there are high end car salesmen, mortgage brokers and TV reality stars who make more money than you and have not the benefit of a GMU education. This does not discount the value of your education, however.

[Anonymous]

My youngest wants to go to med school. He got a full ride to UMBC and took it. We could have easily afforded any school for him even without the merit scholarship. However, he wants us to fund his medical school rather than undergrad and not have student loans on his head. We will not have to take loans for the medical school because we had saved enough money for 4 years of college. I think it depends on what field your kid wants to get into. My eldest went to UMD on merit scholarship as well, and we paid for his MBA from a top school.