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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Acceptance rate is enough to indicate how prestigious, elite and desirable a college is..

Any acceptance more than 10% is not prestigious tbh

You sound like someone who was desperate to sit with the most popular kids at lunch.

Self-selection matters more to those with real talent and drive than to the insecure.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Acceptance rate is enough to indicate how prestigious, elite and desirable a college is..

Any acceptance more than 10% is not prestigious tbh

You sound like someone who was desperate to sit with the most popular kids at lunch.

Self-selection matters more to those with real talent and drive than to the insecure.

Not sure if you even understand yourselves.. nevertheless can't blame if focus is on pseudo prestige over merit

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Acceptance rate is enough to indicate how prestigious, elite and desirable a college is..

Any acceptance more than 10% is not prestigious tbh

Acceptance rate has been one of the data points that has been easiest to manipulate. Colleges induce applicants through marketing tactics and often will count incomplete applications to inflate the denominator.

[Anonymous]

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?

[Anonymous]

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.

DP. Why do you doubt it? The most elite schools are known for having more challenging coursework, stem and humanities. Any professor will tell you that. Professors have written about it. Not cornell, but one student of ours takes second semester calculus at a different ivy versus one taking the equivalent at a non-flagship in VA: they are night and day. They both are equivalent to BC calc, are the “regular “ versions (the ivy has an even more difficult proof based version) and they cover almost the same topics, yet the ivy has several topics not in the state school curriculum, and the psets /quizzes/exams are much different, with the ivy much more difficult . For people who study math or are in mathematics-heavy fields, it is not subtle how much harder the ivy is. I do not have one at UVA to know where uva falls on the spectrum of difficulty.

Where is the actual evidence?

The commonness of extremely rigorous proof-based math courses intended for first semester students at top universities, compared to their rarity elsewhere. Just about every T20 has one.

You can also look at the finals for the lowest level, easiest math courses (which are often several levels below the most rigorous freshman classes):

Precalc final at Princeton: https://exams.math.princeton.edu/syllabus/mat103/precalculus

One-semester combined calc 1 and 2 final at MIT: https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/18-01sc-single-variable-calculus-fall-2010/pages/final-exam/

Calc 2 final at Princeton: https://web.math.princeton.edu/~nelson/104/F02ans.pdf

DP. We reviewed syllabi when our first was applying to colleges, at the urging of our college professor family member who has taught at T10s and T55-60. The course offerings are more rigorous, indeed as pointed out by other posters above and on other threads , at almost all T20s. Not sure why this is surprising to anyone. The student body makeup skews much further to the top-1% students; these students are the future of intellectual thought in whatever fields they choose. Of course the top schools need these courses, and their “regular “ intro courses are also more rigorous. The vast majority of professors are about the same—it is the student level that determines how hard the professors can push the pace and depth of coursework

[Anonymous]

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.

DP. Why do you doubt it? The most elite schools are known for having more challenging coursework, stem and humanities. Any professor will tell you that. Professors have written about it. Not cornell, but one student of ours takes second semester calculus at a different ivy versus one taking the equivalent at a non-flagship in VA: they are night and day. They both are equivalent to BC calc, are the “regular “ versions (the ivy has an even more difficult proof based version) and they cover almost the same topics, yet the ivy has several topics not in the state school curriculum, and the psets /quizzes/exams are much different, with the ivy much more difficult . For people who study math or are in mathematics-heavy fields, it is not subtle how much harder the ivy is. I do not have one at UVA to know where uva falls on the spectrum of difficulty.

Where is the actual evidence?

The commonness of extremely rigorous proof-based math courses intended for first semester students at top universities, compared to their rarity elsewhere. Just about every T20 has one.

You can also look at the finals for the lowest level, easiest math courses (which are often several levels below the most rigorous freshman classes):

Precalc final at Princeton: https://exams.math.princeton.edu/syllabus/mat103/precalculus

One-semester combined calc 1 and 2 final at MIT: https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/18-01sc-single-variable-calculus-fall-2010/pages/final-exam/

Calc 2 final at Princeton: https://web.math.princeton.edu/~nelson/104/F02ans.pdf

DP. We reviewed syllabi when our first was applying to colleges, at the urging of our college professor family member who has taught at T10s and T55-60. The course offerings are more rigorous, indeed as pointed out by other posters above and on other threads , at almost all T20s. Not sure why this is surprising to anyone. The student body makeup skews much further to the top-1% students; these students are the future of intellectual thought in whatever fields they choose. Of course the top schools need these courses, and their “regular “ intro courses are also more rigorous. The vast majority of professors are about the same—it is the student level that determines how hard the professors can push the pace and depth of coursework

You'd be surprised by how underwhelming the math talent is at most T20s. It's just that Princeton swallows all the students interested in math academia and MIT the competitive math students. Harvard has math geniuses, but they're 2% of the math students. The rest are very very average.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

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.

DP. Why do you doubt it? The most elite schools are known for having more challenging coursework, stem and humanities. Any professor will tell you that. Professors have written about it. Not cornell, but one student of ours takes second semester calculus at a different ivy versus one taking the equivalent at a non-flagship in VA: they are night and day. They both are equivalent to BC calc, are the “regular “ versions (the ivy has an even more difficult proof based version) and they cover almost the same topics, yet the ivy has several topics not in the state school curriculum, and the psets /quizzes/exams are much different, with the ivy much more difficult . For people who study math or are in mathematics-heavy fields, it is not subtle how much harder the ivy is. I do not have one at UVA to know where uva falls on the spectrum of difficulty.

Where is the actual evidence?

The commonness of extremely rigorous proof-based math courses intended for first semester students at top universities, compared to their rarity elsewhere. Just about every T20 has one.

You can also look at the finals for the lowest level, easiest math courses (which are often several levels below the most rigorous freshman classes):

Precalc final at Princeton: https://exams.math.princeton.edu/syllabus/mat103/precalculus

One-semester combined calc 1 and 2 final at MIT: https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/18-01sc-single-variable-calculus-fall-2010/pages/final-exam/

Calc 2 final at Princeton: https://web.math.princeton.edu/~nelson/104/F02ans.pdf

DP. We reviewed syllabi when our first was applying to colleges, at the urging of our college professor family member who has taught at T10s and T55-60. The course offerings are more rigorous, indeed as pointed out by other posters above and on other threads , at almost all T20s. Not sure why this is surprising to anyone. The student body makeup skews much further to the top-1% students; these students are the future of intellectual thought in whatever fields they choose. Of course the top schools need these courses, and their “regular “ intro courses are also more rigorous. The vast majority of professors are about the same—it is the student level that determines how hard the professors can push the pace and depth of coursework

You'd be surprised by how underwhelming the math talent is at most T20s. It's just that Princeton swallows all the students interested in math academia and MIT the competitive math students. Harvard has math geniuses, but they're 2% of the math students. The rest are very very average.

You’re missing the point.
The average student in average math are not “average”. I have kids at ivies and spouse and I went ourselves. The average student has gotten much smarter since we attended. It is very different than what our siblings and nephews have experienced at lesser schools that are not close toT30.

[Anonymous]

As the parent of a kid who turned down a more prestigious school, this thread is really weird.

[Anonymous]

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.

DP. Why do you doubt it? The most elite schools are known for having more challenging coursework, stem and humanities. Any professor will tell you that. Professors have written about it. Not cornell, but one student of ours takes second semester calculus at a different ivy versus one taking the equivalent at a non-flagship in VA: they are night and day. They both are equivalent to BC calc, are the “regular “ versions (the ivy has an even more difficult proof based version) and they cover almost the same topics, yet the ivy has several topics not in the state school curriculum, and the psets /quizzes/exams are much different, with the ivy much more difficult . For people who study math or are in mathematics-heavy fields, it is not subtle how much harder the ivy is. I do not have one at UVA to know where uva falls on the spectrum of difficulty.

Where is the actual evidence?

The commonness of extremely rigorous proof-based math courses intended for first semester students at top universities, compared to their rarity elsewhere. Just about every T20 has one.

You can also look at the finals for the lowest level, easiest math courses (which are often several levels below the most rigorous freshman classes):

Precalc final at Princeton: https://exams.math.princeton.edu/syllabus/mat103/precalculus

One-semester combined calc 1 and 2 final at MIT: https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/18-01sc-single-variable-calculus-fall-2010/pages/final-exam/

Calc 2 final at Princeton: https://web.math.princeton.edu/~nelson/104/F02ans.pdf

DP. We reviewed syllabi when our first was applying to colleges, at the urging of our college professor family member who has taught at T10s and T55-60. The course offerings are more rigorous, indeed as pointed out by other posters above and on other threads , at almost all T20s. Not sure why this is surprising to anyone. The student body makeup skews much further to the top-1% students; these students are the future of intellectual thought in whatever fields they choose. Of course the top schools need these courses, and their “regular “ intro courses are also more rigorous. The vast majority of professors are about the same—it is the student level that determines how hard the professors can push the pace and depth of coursework

You'd be surprised by how underwhelming the math talent is at most T20s. It's just that Princeton swallows all the students interested in math academia and MIT the competitive math students. Harvard has math geniuses, but they're 2% of the math students. The rest are very very average.

surprise!!! Many students aren't going into math or stem. My son scored 5s on all science and math AP exams and does equally as well in STEM--but zero desire to major in it. T10s definitely provide an advantage in his program.

[Anonymous]

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.

DP. Why do you doubt it? The most elite schools are known for having more challenging coursework, stem and humanities. Any professor will tell you that. Professors have written about it. Not cornell, but one student of ours takes second semester calculus at a different ivy versus one taking the equivalent at a non-flagship in VA: they are night and day. They both are equivalent to BC calc, are the “regular “ versions (the ivy has an even more difficult proof based version) and they cover almost the same topics, yet the ivy has several topics not in the state school curriculum, and the psets /quizzes/exams are much different, with the ivy much more difficult . For people who study math or are in mathematics-heavy fields, it is not subtle how much harder the ivy is. I do not have one at UVA to know where uva falls on the spectrum of difficulty.

Where is the actual evidence?

The commonness of extremely rigorous proof-based math courses intended for first semester students at top universities, compared to their rarity elsewhere. Just about every T20 has one.

You can also look at the finals for the lowest level, easiest math courses (which are often several levels below the most rigorous freshman classes):

Precalc final at Princeton: https://exams.math.princeton.edu/syllabus/mat103/precalculus

One-semester combined calc 1 and 2 final at MIT: https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/18-01sc-single-variable-calculus-fall-2010/pages/final-exam/

Calc 2 final at Princeton: https://web.math.princeton.edu/~nelson/104/F02ans.pdf

DP. We reviewed syllabi when our first was applying to colleges, at the urging of our college professor family member who has taught at T10s and T55-60. The course offerings are more rigorous, indeed as pointed out by other posters above and on other threads , at almost all T20s. Not sure why this is surprising to anyone. The student body makeup skews much further to the top-1% students; these students are the future of intellectual thought in whatever fields they choose. Of course the top schools need these courses, and their “regular “ intro courses are also more rigorous. The vast majority of professors are about the same—it is the student level that determines how hard the professors can push the pace and depth of coursework

You'd be surprised by how underwhelming the math talent is at most T20s. It's just that Princeton swallows all the students interested in math academia and MIT the competitive math students. Harvard has math geniuses, but they're 2% of the math students. The rest are very very average.

surprise!!! Many students aren't going into math or stem. My son scored 5s on all science and math AP exams and does equally as well in STEM--but zero desire to major in it. T10s definitely provide an advantage in his program.

Agree the stem obsession is strange on Dcum. Many brilliant top1% kids pick other fields. And end up in great careers and/or top professional schools.
T10s provide a large advantage to all majors.

[Anonymous]

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.

DP. Why do you doubt it? The most elite schools are known for having more challenging coursework, stem and humanities. Any professor will tell you that. Professors have written about it. Not cornell, but one student of ours takes second semester calculus at a different ivy versus one taking the equivalent at a non-flagship in VA: they are night and day. They both are equivalent to BC calc, are the “regular “ versions (the ivy has an even more difficult proof based version) and they cover almost the same topics, yet the ivy has several topics not in the state school curriculum, and the psets /quizzes/exams are much different, with the ivy much more difficult . For people who study math or are in mathematics-heavy fields, it is not subtle how much harder the ivy is. I do not have one at UVA to know where uva falls on the spectrum of difficulty.

Where is the actual evidence?

The commonness of extremely rigorous proof-based math courses intended for first semester students at top universities, compared to their rarity elsewhere. Just about every T20 has one.

You can also look at the finals for the lowest level, easiest math courses (which are often several levels below the most rigorous freshman classes):

Precalc final at Princeton: https://exams.math.princeton.edu/syllabus/mat103/precalculus

One-semester combined calc 1 and 2 final at MIT: https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/18-01sc-single-variable-calculus-fall-2010/pages/final-exam/

Calc 2 final at Princeton: https://web.math.princeton.edu/~nelson/104/F02ans.pdf

DP. We reviewed syllabi when our first was applying to colleges, at the urging of our college professor family member who has taught at T10s and T55-60. The course offerings are more rigorous, indeed as pointed out by other posters above and on other threads , at almost all T20s. Not sure why this is surprising to anyone. The student body makeup skews much further to the top-1% students; these students are the future of intellectual thought in whatever fields they choose. Of course the top schools need these courses, and their “regular “ intro courses are also more rigorous. The vast majority of professors are about the same—it is the student level that determines how hard the professors can push the pace and depth of coursework

You'd be surprised by how underwhelming the math talent is at most T20s. It's just that Princeton swallows all the students interested in math academia and MIT the competitive math students. Harvard has math geniuses, but they're 2% of the math students. The rest are very very average.

So, by your logic there are only like 200ish kids in any college class in the entire country with any math talent I guess?

How would 99% of us be underwhelmed…99% of us can barely remember how to do any basic calculus because we never needed it past HS/college.

[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: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.

DP. Why do you doubt it? The most elite schools are known for having more challenging coursework, stem and humanities. Any professor will tell you that. Professors have written about it. Not cornell, but one student of ours takes second semester calculus at a different ivy versus one taking the equivalent at a non-flagship in VA: they are night and day. They both are equivalent to BC calc, are the “regular “ versions (the ivy has an even more difficult proof based version) and they cover almost the same topics, yet the ivy has several topics not in the state school curriculum, and the psets /quizzes/exams are much different, with the ivy much more difficult . For people who study math or are in mathematics-heavy fields, it is not subtle how much harder the ivy is. I do not have one at UVA to know where uva falls on the spectrum of difficulty.

Where is the actual evidence?

The commonness of extremely rigorous proof-based math courses intended for first semester students at top universities, compared to their rarity elsewhere. Just about every T20 has one.

You can also look at the finals for the lowest level, easiest math courses (which are often several levels below the most rigorous freshman classes):

Precalc final at Princeton: https://exams.math.princeton.edu/syllabus/mat103/precalculus

One-semester combined calc 1 and 2 final at MIT: https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/18-01sc-single-variable-calculus-fall-2010/pages/final-exam/

Calc 2 final at Princeton: https://web.math.princeton.edu/~nelson/104/F02ans.pdf

DP. We reviewed syllabi when our first was applying to colleges, at the urging of our college professor family member who has taught at T10s and T55-60. The course offerings are more rigorous, indeed as pointed out by other posters above and on other threads , at almost all T20s. Not sure why this is surprising to anyone. The student body makeup skews much further to the top-1% students; these students are the future of intellectual thought in whatever fields they choose. Of course the top schools need these courses, and their “regular “ intro courses are also more rigorous. The vast majority of professors are about the same—it is the student level that determines how hard the professors can push the pace and depth of coursework

You'd be surprised by how underwhelming the math talent is at most T20s. It's just that Princeton swallows all the students interested in math academia and MIT the competitive math students. Harvard has math geniuses, but they're 2% of the math students. The rest are very very average.

surprise!!! Many students aren't going into math or stem. My son scored 5s on all science and math AP exams and does equally as well in STEM--but zero desire to major in it. T10s definitely provide an advantage in his program.

Agree the stem obsession is strange on Dcum. Many brilliant top1% kids pick other fields. And end up in great careers and/or top professional schools.
T10s provide a large advantage to all majors.

My take as a 50+ year old woman with undergrad and grad degrees in STEM- working in the field for over 50 years is it’s a bunch of liberal arts/lawyers/lobbyists/comm majors just so astounded that their kids can do well in STEM, especially girl parents. It’s like they never could do high math and science and think their kids are geniuses.

Our public school system —starting in elementary is very STEM focused. It did get most kids interested in (which is good)- but they did sacrifice a lot of reasoning, verbal, social sciences, arts, etc.

IMO, a truly educated person is well-read and strong in all areas—not just a computer or stem nerd.

My kids are strong in STEM like me, and very strong in all subjects. They have zero desire for computer science or engineering and it seems every single kid in their class is headed for those areas.

There are many very lucrative as well as high paying outside of STEM. It’s getting hard to get jobs now with a CS degree given the glut of CS graduates.

[Anonymous]

*working 30 years (not 50 )