Outcomes - Prestige and Perceptions

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, I was just thinking that this morning.

Seems like people should take into account the trickle down of good students. As the number of applicants to top schools has increased while the number of spots has remained constant, kids that in the past would have gotten into Ivies are now going one tier down. The second tier kids are now going third tier and on and on. There are plenty of smart kids at all of the top 100 schools so we need to rethink how we perceive certain schools.
Something that I remember hearing back when I was touring colleges - schools that are in good locations attract good professors. So even if you may think Northeastern isn't so great, Boston can attract good profs.

Agreed. For national universities, maybe something like this: tier 1 = top 10; tier 2 = 11-25ish. That said, placed in the context of 4000 colleges, anyone attending one of these colleges is attending an elite institution. The notion that smart kids are only at Ivies is nonsense.

The top 25 schools being tier 2 is laughable and tone-deaf. But either way, some of you don't seem to remember there are 3 ivy league schools in the 11-25 section. But some of you would still rate schools like Vandy and Gtown lower than Cornell just because Cornell is an ivy, it's hypocritical.

NP here. As a Georgetown alum I rate Vandy and Georgetown below Cornell because that is where every single ranking (including US NEWS) puts those universities when comparing universities on a global basis.

https://www.topuniversities.com/university-ranking...world-university-rankings/2021
(Cornell #19, Vanderbilt #187, Georgetown #230)

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-univers...ank/sort_order/asc/cols/stats.
(Cornell #19, Vanderbilt #111, Georgetown #120))

Even USNEWS has Cornell at #22 globally, while dropping Vanderbilt to #72 and Georgetown to #322
https://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/rankings

We're talking undergrad honey not graduate. Stay on topic. At the undergrad level These schools are the same.

We are talking about prestige and perception which is not -- and cannot -- be based solely on "undergrad". Views of a schools prestige is influenced by the interactions others have with a university in any and all of its facets (undergrad, graduate, professional, faculty, research, alumni, etc.).

You're wrong. See post 16:24 above. If what you're saying was somehow true, UT Austin must be more prestigious than Dartmouth and Brown. UT Austin's highly ranked graduate programs, its large alumni base, and global reach must mean it's more prestigious than Dartmouth whose medical school is ranked 45th. Most people in the know realize prestige of a university comes from it's undergraduate program, which is why Dartmouth is more coveted than almost all of the schools mentioned.

You sound like a clueless 18 year old who was just admitted to Dartmouth.

Nothing clueless about it karen. If graduate schools mattered for prestige then schools like UT Austin and U washington would be prestigious and schools like Dartmouth, Brown, and Notre Dame would not. Notre Dame also doesn't have any reputable graduate programs yet it's still Notre Dame and one of the most sought after schools in the nation. Just say your wrong if you have no argument to the contrary, instead of throwing insults.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, I was just thinking that this morning.

Seems like people should take into account the trickle down of good students. As the number of applicants to top schools has increased while the number of spots has remained constant, kids that in the past would have gotten into Ivies are now going one tier down. The second tier kids are now going third tier and on and on. There are plenty of smart kids at all of the top 100 schools so we need to rethink how we perceive certain schools.
Something that I remember hearing back when I was touring colleges - schools that are in good locations attract good professors. So even if you may think Northeastern isn't so great, Boston can attract good profs.

Agreed. For national universities, maybe something like this: tier 1 = top 10; tier 2 = 11-25ish. That said, placed in the context of 4000 colleges, anyone attending one of these colleges is attending an elite institution. The notion that smart kids are only at Ivies is nonsense.

The top 25 schools being tier 2 is laughable and tone-deaf. But either way, some of you don't seem to remember there are 3 ivy league schools in the 11-25 section. But some of you would still rate schools like Vandy and Gtown lower than Cornell just because Cornell is an ivy, it's hypocritical.

NP here. As a Georgetown alum I rate Vandy and Georgetown below Cornell because that is where every single ranking (including US NEWS) puts those universities when comparing universities on a global basis.

https://www.topuniversities.com/university-ranking...world-university-rankings/2021
(Cornell #19, Vanderbilt #187, Georgetown #230)

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-univers...ank/sort_order/asc/cols/stats.
(Cornell #19, Vanderbilt #111, Georgetown #120))

Even USNEWS has Cornell at #22 globally, while dropping Vanderbilt to #72 and Georgetown to #322
https://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/rankings

We're talking undergrad honey not graduate. Stay on topic. At the undergrad level These schools are the same.

We are talking about prestige and perception which is not -- and cannot -- be based solely on "undergrad". Views of a schools prestige is influenced by the interactions others have with a university in any and all of its facets (undergrad, graduate, professional, faculty, research, alumni, etc.).

You're wrong. See post 16:24 above. If what you're saying was somehow true, UT Austin must be more prestigious than Dartmouth and Brown. UT Austin's highly ranked graduate programs, its large alumni base, and global reach must mean it's more prestigious than Dartmouth whose medical school is ranked 45th. Most people in the know realize prestige of a university comes from it's undergraduate program, which is why Dartmouth is more coveted than almost all of the schools mentioned.

You sound like a clueless 18 year old who was just admitted to Dartmouth.

Nothing clueless about it karen. If graduate schools mattered for prestige then schools like UT Austin and U washington would be prestigious and schools like Dartmouth, Brown, and Notre Dame would not. Notre Dame also doesn't have any reputable graduate programs yet it's still Notre Dame and one of the most sought after schools in the nation. Just say your wrong if you have no argument to the contrary, instead of throwing insults.

-1. You obviously are very young and don't have a graduate or professional degree. Nobody cares about your undergraduate once you go on your second degree. And it is those secondary degrees that are more reflective of the prestige of a university once you are out in a career or traveling internationally and working with folks from the EU or Asia.

I have an undergrad degree from HYPSM and nobody I deal with in my career knows or cares. They do know where I went to law school however (another Ivy).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, I was just thinking that this morning.

Seems like people should take into account the trickle down of good students. As the number of applicants to top schools has increased while the number of spots has remained constant, kids that in the past would have gotten into Ivies are now going one tier down. The second tier kids are now going third tier and on and on. There are plenty of smart kids at all of the top 100 schools so we need to rethink how we perceive certain schools.
Something that I remember hearing back when I was touring colleges - schools that are in good locations attract good professors. So even if you may think Northeastern isn't so great, Boston can attract good profs.

Agreed. For national universities, maybe something like this: tier 1 = top 10; tier 2 = 11-25ish. That said, placed in the context of 4000 colleges, anyone attending one of these colleges is attending an elite institution. The notion that smart kids are only at Ivies is nonsense.

The top 25 schools being tier 2 is laughable and tone-deaf. But either way, some of you don't seem to remember there are 3 ivy league schools in the 11-25 section. But some of you would still rate schools like Vandy and Gtown lower than Cornell just because Cornell is an ivy, it's hypocritical.

NP here. As a Georgetown alum I rate Vandy and Georgetown below Cornell because that is where every single ranking (including US NEWS) puts those universities when comparing universities on a global basis.

https://www.topuniversities.com/university-ranking...world-university-rankings/2021
(Cornell #19, Vanderbilt #187, Georgetown #230)

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-univers...ank/sort_order/asc/cols/stats.
(Cornell #19, Vanderbilt #111, Georgetown #120))

Even USNEWS has Cornell at #22 globally, while dropping Vanderbilt to #72 and Georgetown to #322
https://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/rankings

We're talking undergrad honey not graduate. Stay on topic. At the undergrad level These schools are the same.

We are talking about prestige and perception which is not -- and cannot -- be based solely on "undergrad". Views of a schools prestige is influenced by the interactions others have with a university in any and all of its facets (undergrad, graduate, professional, faculty, research, alumni, etc.).

You're wrong. See post 16:24 above. If what you're saying was somehow true, UT Austin must be more prestigious than Dartmouth and Brown. UT Austin's highly ranked graduate programs, its large alumni base, and global reach must mean it's more prestigious than Dartmouth whose medical school is ranked 45th. Most people in the know realize prestige of a university comes from it's undergraduate program, which is why Dartmouth is more coveted than almost all of the schools mentioned.

You sound like a clueless 18 year old who was just admitted to Dartmouth.

Nothing clueless about it karen. If graduate schools mattered for prestige then schools like UT Austin and U washington would be prestigious and schools like Dartmouth, Brown, and Notre Dame would not. Notre Dame also doesn't have any reputable graduate programs yet it's still Notre Dame and one of the most sought after schools in the nation. Just say your wrong if you have no argument to the contrary, instead of throwing insults.

We noticed you denied being clueless -- but not being 18 or headed to Dartmouth!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, I was just thinking that this morning.

Seems like people should take into account the trickle down of good students. As the number of applicants to top schools has increased while the number of spots has remained constant, kids that in the past would have gotten into Ivies are now going one tier down. The second tier kids are now going third tier and on and on. There are plenty of smart kids at all of the top 100 schools so we need to rethink how we perceive certain schools.
Something that I remember hearing back when I was touring colleges - schools that are in good locations attract good professors. So even if you may think Northeastern isn't so great, Boston can attract good profs.

Agreed. For national universities, maybe something like this: tier 1 = top 10; tier 2 = 11-25ish. That said, placed in the context of 4000 colleges, anyone attending one of these colleges is attending an elite institution. The notion that smart kids are only at Ivies is nonsense.

The top 25 schools being tier 2 is laughable and tone-deaf. But either way, some of you don't seem to remember there are 3 ivy league schools in the 11-25 section. But some of you would still rate schools like Vandy and Gtown lower than Cornell just because Cornell is an ivy, it's hypocritical.

NP here. As a Georgetown alum I rate Vandy and Georgetown below Cornell because that is where every single ranking (including US NEWS) puts those universities when comparing universities on a global basis.

https://www.topuniversities.com/university-ranking...world-university-rankings/2021
(Cornell #19, Vanderbilt #187, Georgetown #230)

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-univers...ank/sort_order/asc/cols/stats.
(Cornell #19, Vanderbilt #111, Georgetown #120))

Even USNEWS has Cornell at #22 globally, while dropping Vanderbilt to #72 and Georgetown to #322
https://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/rankings

We're talking undergrad honey not graduate. Stay on topic. At the undergrad level These schools are the same.

We are talking about prestige and perception which is not -- and cannot -- be based solely on "undergrad". Views of a schools prestige is influenced by the interactions others have with a university in any and all of its facets (undergrad, graduate, professional, faculty, research, alumni, etc.).

You're wrong. See post 16:24 above. If what you're saying was somehow true, UT Austin must be more prestigious than Dartmouth and Brown. UT Austin's highly ranked graduate programs, its large alumni base, and global reach must mean it's more prestigious than Dartmouth whose medical school is ranked 45th. Most people in the know realize prestige of a university comes from it's undergraduate program, which is why Dartmouth is more coveted than almost all of the schools mentioned.

You sound like a clueless 18 year old who was just admitted to Dartmouth.

Nothing clueless about it karen. If graduate schools mattered for prestige then schools like UT Austin and U washington would be prestigious and schools like Dartmouth, Brown, and Notre Dame would not. Notre Dame also doesn't have any reputable graduate programs yet it's still Notre Dame and one of the most sought after schools in the nation. Just say your wrong if you have no argument to the contrary, instead of throwing insults.

-1. You obviously are very young and don't have a graduate or professional degree. Nobody cares about your undergraduate once you go on your second degree. And it is those secondary degrees that are more reflective of the prestige of a university once you are out in a career or traveling internationally and working with folks from the EU or Asia.

I have an undergrad degree from HYPSM and nobody I deal with in my career knows or cares. They do know where I went to law school however (another Ivy).

I doubt you graduated from an Ivy because you’re wrong. Harvard doesn’t recognize graduate degrees for legacy admissions. In general, there’s much more prestige in an Ivy undergraduate admit because there are fewer seats (relative to all the graduate programs combined) and you only have one chance. Lots of people get graduate degrees from Ivies. In fact, some get multiple degrees. Also, I know lots of people who got their undergrad at an Ivy and their law degree at a comparatively low ranking law school, yet they have prestigious jobs. A Harvard law degree is great, but a Harvard undergraduate degree is more prestigious.

[Anonymous]

I doubt you graduated from an Ivy because you’re wrong. Harvard doesn’t recognize graduate degrees for legacy admissions. In general, there’s much more prestige in an Ivy undergraduate admit because there are fewer seats (relative to all the graduate programs combined) and you only have one chance. Lots of people get graduate degrees from Ivies. In fact, some get multiple degrees. Also, I know lots of people who got their undergrad at an Ivy and their law degree at a comparatively low ranking law school, yet they have prestigious jobs. A Harvard law degree is great, but a Harvard undergraduate degree is more prestigious.

This is 100 percent true. The prestige comes from the undergrad degree (with some exceptions: Yale Law, Hopkins MD, HBS, etc.). Almost anyone can get a Harvard grad degree if they can pay for a master's.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, I was just thinking that this morning.

Seems like people should take into account the trickle down of good students. As the number of applicants to top schools has increased while the number of spots has remained constant, kids that in the past would have gotten into Ivies are now going one tier down. The second tier kids are now going third tier and on and on. There are plenty of smart kids at all of the top 100 schools so we need to rethink how we perceive certain schools.
Something that I remember hearing back when I was touring colleges - schools that are in good locations attract good professors. So even if you may think Northeastern isn't so great, Boston can attract good profs.

Agreed. For national universities, maybe something like this: tier 1 = top 10; tier 2 = 11-25ish. That said, placed in the context of 4000 colleges, anyone attending one of these colleges is attending an elite institution. The notion that smart kids are only at Ivies is nonsense.

The top 25 schools being tier 2 is laughable and tone-deaf. But either way, some of you don't seem to remember there are 3 ivy league schools in the 11-25 section. But some of you would still rate schools like Vandy and Gtown lower than Cornell just because Cornell is an ivy, it's hypocritical.

NP here. As a Georgetown alum I rate Vandy and Georgetown below Cornell because that is where every single ranking (including US NEWS) puts those universities when comparing universities on a global basis.

https://www.topuniversities.com/university-ranking...world-university-rankings/2021
(Cornell #19, Vanderbilt #187, Georgetown #230)

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-univers...ank/sort_order/asc/cols/stats.
(Cornell #19, Vanderbilt #111, Georgetown #120))

Even USNEWS has Cornell at #22 globally, while dropping Vanderbilt to #72 and Georgetown to #322
https://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/rankings

We're talking undergrad honey not graduate. Stay on topic. At the undergrad level These schools are the same.

We are talking about prestige and perception which is not -- and cannot -- be based solely on "undergrad". Views of a schools prestige is influenced by the interactions others have with a university in any and all of its facets (undergrad, graduate, professional, faculty, research, alumni, etc.).

You're wrong. See post 16:24 above. If what you're saying was somehow true, UT Austin must be more prestigious than Dartmouth and Brown. UT Austin's highly ranked graduate programs, its large alumni base, and global reach must mean it's more prestigious than Dartmouth whose medical school is ranked 45th. Most people in the know realize prestige of a university comes from it's undergraduate program, which is why Dartmouth is more coveted than almost all of the schools mentioned.

You sound like a clueless 18 year old who was just admitted to Dartmouth.

Nothing clueless about it karen. If graduate schools mattered for prestige then schools like UT Austin and U washington would be prestigious and schools like Dartmouth, Brown, and Notre Dame would not. Notre Dame also doesn't have any reputable graduate programs yet it's still Notre Dame and one of the most sought after schools in the nation. Just say your wrong if you have no argument to the contrary, instead of throwing insults.

-1. You obviously are very young and don't have a graduate or professional degree. Nobody cares about your undergraduate once you go on your second degree. And it is those secondary degrees that are more reflective of the prestige of a university once you are out in a career or traveling internationally and working with folks from the EU or Asia.

I have an undergrad degree from HYPSM and nobody I deal with in my career knows or cares. They do know where I went to law school however (another Ivy).

I doubt you graduated from an Ivy because you’re wrong. Harvard doesn’t recognize graduate degrees for legacy admissions. In general, there’s much more prestige in an Ivy undergraduate admit because there are fewer seats (relative to all the graduate programs combined) and you only have one chance. Lots of people get graduate degrees from Ivies. In fact, some get multiple degrees. Also, I know lots of people who got their undergrad at an Ivy and their law degree at a comparatively low ranking law school, yet they have prestigious jobs. A Harvard law degree is great, but a Harvard undergraduate degree is more prestigious.

Anyone who thinks a Harvard undergrad degree is more prestigious than a Harvard Law degree must be an undergrad!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, I was just thinking that this morning.

Seems like people should take into account the trickle down of good students. As the number of applicants to top schools has increased while the number of spots has remained constant, kids that in the past would have gotten into Ivies are now going one tier down. The second tier kids are now going third tier and on and on. There are plenty of smart kids at all of the top 100 schools so we need to rethink how we perceive certain schools.
Something that I remember hearing back when I was touring colleges - schools that are in good locations attract good professors. So even if you may think Northeastern isn't so great, Boston can attract good profs.

Agreed. For national universities, maybe something like this: tier 1 = top 10; tier 2 = 11-25ish. That said, placed in the context of 4000 colleges, anyone attending one of these colleges is attending an elite institution. The notion that smart kids are only at Ivies is nonsense.

The top 25 schools being tier 2 is laughable and tone-deaf. But either way, some of you don't seem to remember there are 3 ivy league schools in the 11-25 section. But some of you would still rate schools like Vandy and Gtown lower than Cornell just because Cornell is an ivy, it's hypocritical.

NP here. As a Georgetown alum I rate Vandy and Georgetown below Cornell because that is where every single ranking (including US NEWS) puts those universities when comparing universities on a global basis.

https://www.topuniversities.com/university-ranking...world-university-rankings/2021
(Cornell #19, Vanderbilt #187, Georgetown #230)

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-univers...ank/sort_order/asc/cols/stats.
(Cornell #19, Vanderbilt #111, Georgetown #120))

Even USNEWS has Cornell at #22 globally, while dropping Vanderbilt to #72 and Georgetown to #322
https://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/rankings

We're talking undergrad honey not graduate. Stay on topic. At the undergrad level These schools are the same.

We are talking about prestige and perception which is not -- and cannot -- be based solely on "undergrad". Views of a schools prestige is influenced by the interactions others have with a university in any and all of its facets (undergrad, graduate, professional, faculty, research, alumni, etc.).

You're wrong. See post 16:24 above. If what you're saying was somehow true, UT Austin must be more prestigious than Dartmouth and Brown. UT Austin's highly ranked graduate programs, its large alumni base, and global reach must mean it's more prestigious than Dartmouth whose medical school is ranked 45th. Most people in the know realize prestige of a university comes from it's undergraduate program, which is why Dartmouth is more coveted than almost all of the schools mentioned.

You sound like a clueless 18 year old who was just admitted to Dartmouth.

Nothing clueless about it karen. If graduate schools mattered for prestige then schools like UT Austin and U washington would be prestigious and schools like Dartmouth, Brown, and Notre Dame would not. Notre Dame also doesn't have any reputable graduate programs yet it's still Notre Dame and one of the most sought after schools in the nation. Just say your wrong if you have no argument to the contrary, instead of throwing insults.

-1. You obviously are very young and don't have a graduate or professional degree. Nobody cares about your undergraduate once you go on your second degree. And it is those secondary degrees that are more reflective of the prestige of a university once you are out in a career or traveling internationally and working with folks from the EU or Asia.

I have an undergrad degree from HYPSM and nobody I deal with in my career knows or cares. They do know where I went to law school however (another Ivy).

I doubt you graduated from an Ivy because you’re wrong. Harvard doesn’t recognize graduate degrees for legacy admissions. In general, there’s much more prestige in an Ivy undergraduate admit because there are fewer seats (relative to all the graduate programs combined) and you only have one chance. Lots of people get graduate degrees from Ivies. In fact, some get multiple degrees. Also, I know lots of people who got their undergrad at an Ivy and their law degree at a comparatively low ranking law school, yet they have prestigious jobs. A Harvard law degree is great, but a Harvard undergraduate degree is more prestigious.

I actually have three Ivy degrees. Best of luck starting at Dartmouth this fall !

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, I was just thinking that this morning.

Seems like people should take into account the trickle down of good students. As the number of applicants to top schools has increased while the number of spots has remained constant, kids that in the past would have gotten into Ivies are now going one tier down. The second tier kids are now going third tier and on and on. There are plenty of smart kids at all of the top 100 schools so we need to rethink how we perceive certain schools.
Something that I remember hearing back when I was touring colleges - schools that are in good locations attract good professors. So even if you may think Northeastern isn't so great, Boston can attract good profs.

Agreed. For national universities, maybe something like this: tier 1 = top 10; tier 2 = 11-25ish. That said, placed in the context of 4000 colleges, anyone attending one of these colleges is attending an elite institution. The notion that smart kids are only at Ivies is nonsense.

The top 25 schools being tier 2 is laughable and tone-deaf. But either way, some of you don't seem to remember there are 3 ivy league schools in the 11-25 section. But some of you would still rate schools like Vandy and Gtown lower than Cornell just because Cornell is an ivy, it's hypocritical.

NP here. As a Georgetown alum I rate Vandy and Georgetown below Cornell because that is where every single ranking (including US NEWS) puts those universities when comparing universities on a global basis.

https://www.topuniversities.com/university-ranking...world-university-rankings/2021
(Cornell #19, Vanderbilt #187, Georgetown #230)

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-univers...ank/sort_order/asc/cols/stats.
(Cornell #19, Vanderbilt #111, Georgetown #120))

Even USNEWS has Cornell at #22 globally, while dropping Vanderbilt to #72 and Georgetown to #322
https://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/rankings

We're talking undergrad honey not graduate. Stay on topic. At the undergrad level These schools are the same.

We are talking about prestige and perception which is not -- and cannot -- be based solely on "undergrad". Views of a schools prestige is influenced by the interactions others have with a university in any and all of its facets (undergrad, graduate, professional, faculty, research, alumni, etc.).

You're wrong. See post 16:24 above. If what you're saying was somehow true, UT Austin must be more prestigious than Dartmouth and Brown. UT Austin's highly ranked graduate programs, its large alumni base, and global reach must mean it's more prestigious than Dartmouth whose medical school is ranked 45th. Most people in the know realize prestige of a university comes from it's undergraduate program, which is why Dartmouth is more coveted than almost all of the schools mentioned.

You sound like a clueless 18 year old who was just admitted to Dartmouth.

Nothing clueless about it karen. If graduate schools mattered for prestige then schools like UT Austin and U washington would be prestigious and schools like Dartmouth, Brown, and Notre Dame would not. Notre Dame also doesn't have any reputable graduate programs yet it's still Notre Dame and one of the most sought after schools in the nation. Just say your wrong if you have no argument to the contrary, instead of throwing insults.

-1. You obviously are very young and don't have a graduate or professional degree. Nobody cares about your undergraduate once you go on your second degree. And it is those secondary degrees that are more reflective of the prestige of a university once you are out in a career or traveling internationally and working with folks from the EU or Asia.

I have an undergrad degree from HYPSM and nobody I deal with in my career knows or cares. They do know where I went to law school however (another Ivy).

I doubt you graduated from an Ivy because you’re wrong. Harvard doesn’t recognize graduate degrees for legacy admissions. In general, there’s much more prestige in an Ivy undergraduate admit because there are fewer seats (relative to all the graduate programs combined) and you only have one chance. Lots of people get graduate degrees from Ivies. In fact, some get multiple degrees. Also, I know lots of people who got their undergrad at an Ivy and their law degree at a comparatively low ranking law school, yet they have prestigious jobs. A Harvard law degree is great, but a Harvard undergraduate degree is more prestigious.

Did you just say a Harvard undergraduate degree is more prestigious than a Harvard law degree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, I was just thinking that this morning.

Seems like people should take into account the trickle down of good students. As the number of applicants to top schools has increased while the number of spots has remained constant, kids that in the past would have gotten into Ivies are now going one tier down. The second tier kids are now going third tier and on and on. There are plenty of smart kids at all of the top 100 schools so we need to rethink how we perceive certain schools.
Something that I remember hearing back when I was touring colleges - schools that are in good locations attract good professors. So even if you may think Northeastern isn't so great, Boston can attract good profs.

Agreed. For national universities, maybe something like this: tier 1 = top 10; tier 2 = 11-25ish. That said, placed in the context of 4000 colleges, anyone attending one of these colleges is attending an elite institution. The notion that smart kids are only at Ivies is nonsense.

The top 25 schools being tier 2 is laughable and tone-deaf. But either way, some of you don't seem to remember there are 3 ivy league schools in the 11-25 section. But some of you would still rate schools like Vandy and Gtown lower than Cornell just because Cornell is an ivy, it's hypocritical.

NP here. As a Georgetown alum I rate Vandy and Georgetown below Cornell because that is where every single ranking (including US NEWS) puts those universities when comparing universities on a global basis.

https://www.topuniversities.com/university-ranking...world-university-rankings/2021
(Cornell #19, Vanderbilt #187, Georgetown #230)

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-univers...ank/sort_order/asc/cols/stats.
(Cornell #19, Vanderbilt #111, Georgetown #120))

Even USNEWS has Cornell at #22 globally, while dropping Vanderbilt to #72 and Georgetown to #322
https://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/rankings

We're talking undergrad honey not graduate. Stay on topic. At the undergrad level These schools are the same.

We are talking about prestige and perception which is not -- and cannot -- be based solely on "undergrad". Views of a schools prestige is influenced by the interactions others have with a university in any and all of its facets (undergrad, graduate, professional, faculty, research, alumni, etc.).

You're wrong. See post 16:24 above. If what you're saying was somehow true, UT Austin must be more prestigious than Dartmouth and Brown. UT Austin's highly ranked graduate programs, its large alumni base, and global reach must mean it's more prestigious than Dartmouth whose medical school is ranked 45th. Most people in the know realize prestige of a university comes from it's undergraduate program, which is why Dartmouth is more coveted than almost all of the schools mentioned.

You sound like a clueless 18 year old who was just admitted to Dartmouth.

Nothing clueless about it karen. If graduate schools mattered for prestige then schools like UT Austin and U washington would be prestigious and schools like Dartmouth, Brown, and Notre Dame would not. Notre Dame also doesn't have any reputable graduate programs yet it's still Notre Dame and one of the most sought after schools in the nation. Just say your wrong if you have no argument to the contrary, instead of throwing insults.

-1. You obviously are very young and don't have a graduate or professional degree. Nobody cares about your undergraduate once you go on your second degree. And it is those secondary degrees that are more reflective of the prestige of a university once you are out in a career or traveling internationally and working with folks from the EU or Asia.

I have an undergrad degree from HYPSM and nobody I deal with in my career knows or cares. They do know where I went to law school however (another Ivy).

I doubt you graduated from an Ivy because you’re wrong. Harvard doesn’t recognize graduate degrees for legacy admissions. In general, there’s much more prestige in an Ivy undergraduate admit because there are fewer seats (relative to all the graduate programs combined) and you only have one chance. Lots of people get graduate degrees from Ivies. In fact, some get multiple degrees. Also, I know lots of people who got their undergrad at an Ivy and their law degree at a comparatively low ranking law school, yet they have prestigious jobs. A Harvard law degree is great, but a Harvard undergraduate degree is more prestigious.

You seem to be confusing money-printing degrees that Columbia and Harvard i.e. Masters of Public Health, etc. tend to hand out to PhDs that the top graduate schools in a given program give.

Also, to say that a Harvard undergraduate degree is more prestigious than a Harvard law, medical school, business school is utterly false.

Suppose an individual went to Harvard for undergraduate, and then followed up with an MBA from the University of Washington.
Compare that with another individual who went to the University of Washington for undergraduate and followed up with an MBA from Harvard.

Who's going to be viewed as a more impressive candidate is any situation? It's rather obvious who's the one with wealthier parents.

The one who went in-state flagship for undergrad and followed up with a degree from HBS is the profile of a very large number of Fortune 500 CEO's though.

Are you seriously suggesting that a Harvard undergraduate degree with a relatively mediocre law school is going to be more impressive to law firms than a Harvard law degree after a relatively mediocre undergrad?

You realize that law firms advertise to clients how many HLS graduates they are employing, right? You realize that a large number of HLS graduates are not from Harvard undergrad?

Your anecdote with a sample size of 1 is rather irrelevant, likely that individual used his network from undergrad to get the job - networks that he could have developed at law school had he attended HLS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, I was just thinking that this morning.

Seems like people should take into account the trickle down of good students. As the number of applicants to top schools has increased while the number of spots has remained constant, kids that in the past would have gotten into Ivies are now going one tier down. The second tier kids are now going third tier and on and on. There are plenty of smart kids at all of the top 100 schools so we need to rethink how we perceive certain schools.
Something that I remember hearing back when I was touring colleges - schools that are in good locations attract good professors. So even if you may think Northeastern isn't so great, Boston can attract good profs.

Agreed. For national universities, maybe something like this: tier 1 = top 10; tier 2 = 11-25ish. That said, placed in the context of 4000 colleges, anyone attending one of these colleges is attending an elite institution. The notion that smart kids are only at Ivies is nonsense.

The top 25 schools being tier 2 is laughable and tone-deaf. But either way, some of you don't seem to remember there are 3 ivy league schools in the 11-25 section. But some of you would still rate schools like Vandy and Gtown lower than Cornell just because Cornell is an ivy, it's hypocritical.

NP here. As a Georgetown alum I rate Vandy and Georgetown below Cornell because that is where every single ranking (including US NEWS) puts those universities when comparing universities on a global basis.

https://www.topuniversities.com/university-ranking...world-university-rankings/2021
(Cornell #19, Vanderbilt #187, Georgetown #230)

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-univers...ank/sort_order/asc/cols/stats.
(Cornell #19, Vanderbilt #111, Georgetown #120))

Even USNEWS has Cornell at #22 globally, while dropping Vanderbilt to #72 and Georgetown to #322
https://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/rankings

We're talking undergrad honey not graduate. Stay on topic. At the undergrad level These schools are the same.

We are talking about prestige and perception which is not -- and cannot -- be based solely on "undergrad". Views of a schools prestige is influenced by the interactions others have with a university in any and all of its facets (undergrad, graduate, professional, faculty, research, alumni, etc.).

You're wrong. See post 16:24 above. If what you're saying was somehow true, UT Austin must be more prestigious than Dartmouth and Brown. UT Austin's highly ranked graduate programs, its large alumni base, and global reach must mean it's more prestigious than Dartmouth whose medical school is ranked 45th. Most people in the know realize prestige of a university comes from it's undergraduate program, which is why Dartmouth is more coveted than almost all of the schools mentioned.

You sound like a clueless 18 year old who was just admitted to Dartmouth.

Nothing clueless about it karen. If graduate schools mattered for prestige then schools like UT Austin and U washington would be prestigious and schools like Dartmouth, Brown, and Notre Dame would not. Notre Dame also doesn't have any reputable graduate programs yet it's still Notre Dame and one of the most sought after schools in the nation. Just say your wrong if you have no argument to the contrary, instead of throwing insults.

-1. You obviously are very young and don't have a graduate or professional degree. Nobody cares about your undergraduate once you go on your second degree. And it is those secondary degrees that are more reflective of the prestige of a university once you are out in a career or traveling internationally and working with folks from the EU or Asia.

I have an undergrad degree from HYPSM and nobody I deal with in my career knows or cares. They do know where I went to law school however (another Ivy).

I doubt you graduated from an Ivy because you’re wrong. Harvard doesn’t recognize graduate degrees for legacy admissions. In general, there’s much more prestige in an Ivy undergraduate admit because there are fewer seats (relative to all the graduate programs combined) and you only have one chance. Lots of people get graduate degrees from Ivies. In fact, some get multiple degrees. Also, I know lots of people who got their undergrad at an Ivy and their law degree at a comparatively low ranking law school, yet they have prestigious jobs. A Harvard law degree is great, but a Harvard undergraduate degree is more prestigious.

Just because you haven't been criticized enough yet for how stupid this comment is, let me be another person to say that, among lawyers, a JD from Harvard law is far, far, far more prestigious than the Harvard BA/BS. Once you get to law school, it pretty much wipes your slate clean from undergrad. In some ways, going from directional state U to Harvard law is more impressive than going from Harvard undergrad to Harvard law. That person must have really made something of themselves in undergrad to make it to Harvard.

[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:OP, I was just thinking that this morning.

Seems like people should take into account the trickle down of good students. As the number of applicants to top schools has increased while the number of spots has remained constant, kids that in the past would have gotten into Ivies are now going one tier down. The second tier kids are now going third tier and on and on. There are plenty of smart kids at all of the top 100 schools so we need to rethink how we perceive certain schools.
Something that I remember hearing back when I was touring colleges - schools that are in good locations attract good professors. So even if you may think Northeastern isn't so great, Boston can attract good profs.

Agreed. For national universities, maybe something like this: tier 1 = top 10; tier 2 = 11-25ish. That said, placed in the context of 4000 colleges, anyone attending one of these colleges is attending an elite institution. The notion that smart kids are only at Ivies is nonsense.

The top 25 schools being tier 2 is laughable and tone-deaf. But either way, some of you don't seem to remember there are 3 ivy league schools in the 11-25 section. But some of you would still rate schools like Vandy and Gtown lower than Cornell just because Cornell is an ivy, it's hypocritical.

NP here. As a Georgetown alum I rate Vandy and Georgetown below Cornell because that is where every single ranking (including US NEWS) puts those universities when comparing universities on a global basis.

https://www.topuniversities.com/university-ranking...world-university-rankings/2021
(Cornell #19, Vanderbilt #187, Georgetown #230)

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-univers...ank/sort_order/asc/cols/stats.
(Cornell #19, Vanderbilt #111, Georgetown #120))

Even USNEWS has Cornell at #22 globally, while dropping Vanderbilt to #72 and Georgetown to #322
https://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/rankings

We're talking undergrad honey not graduate. Stay on topic. At the undergrad level These schools are the same.

We are talking about prestige and perception which is not -- and cannot -- be based solely on "undergrad". Views of a schools prestige is influenced by the interactions others have with a university in any and all of its facets (undergrad, graduate, professional, faculty, research, alumni, etc.).

You're wrong. See post 16:24 above. If what you're saying was somehow true, UT Austin must be more prestigious than Dartmouth and Brown. UT Austin's highly ranked graduate programs, its large alumni base, and global reach must mean it's more prestigious than Dartmouth whose medical school is ranked 45th. Most people in the know realize prestige of a university comes from it's undergraduate program, which is why Dartmouth is more coveted than almost all of the schools mentioned.

You sound like a clueless 18 year old who was just admitted to Dartmouth.

Nothing clueless about it karen. If graduate schools mattered for prestige then schools like UT Austin and U washington would be prestigious and schools like Dartmouth, Brown, and Notre Dame would not. Notre Dame also doesn't have any reputable graduate programs yet it's still Notre Dame and one of the most sought after schools in the nation. Just say your wrong if you have no argument to the contrary, instead of throwing insults.

-1. You obviously are very young and don't have a graduate or professional degree. Nobody cares about your undergraduate once you go on your second degree. And it is those secondary degrees that are more reflective of the prestige of a university once you are out in a career or traveling internationally and working with folks from the EU or Asia.

I have an undergrad degree from HYPSM and nobody I deal with in my career knows or cares. They do know where I went to law school however (another Ivy).

I doubt you graduated from an Ivy because you’re wrong. Harvard doesn’t recognize graduate degrees for legacy admissions. In general, there’s much more prestige in an Ivy undergraduate admit because there are fewer seats (relative to all the graduate programs combined) and you only have one chance. Lots of people get graduate degrees from Ivies. In fact, some get multiple degrees. Also, I know lots of people who got their undergrad at an Ivy and their law degree at a comparatively low ranking law school, yet they have prestigious jobs. A Harvard law degree is great, but a Harvard undergraduate degree is more prestigious.

You seem to be confusing money-printing degrees that Columbia and Harvard i.e. Masters of Public Health, etc. tend to hand out to PhDs that the top graduate schools in a given program give.

Also, to say that a Harvard undergraduate degree is more prestigious than a Harvard law, medical school, business school is utterly false.

Suppose an individual went to Harvard for undergraduate, and then followed up with an MBA from the University of Washington.
Compare that with another individual who went to the University of Washington for undergraduate and followed up with an MBA from Harvard.

Who's going to be viewed as a more impressive candidate is any situation? It's rather obvious who's the one with wealthier parents.

The one who went in-state flagship for undergrad and followed up with a degree from HBS is the profile of a very large number of Fortune 500 CEO's though.

Are you seriously suggesting that a Harvard undergraduate degree with a relatively mediocre law school is going to be more impressive to law firms than a Harvard law degree after a relatively mediocre undergrad?

You realize that law firms advertise to clients how many HLS graduates they are employing, right? You realize that a large number of HLS graduates are not from Harvard undergrad?

Your anecdote with a sample size of 1 is rather irrelevant, likely that individual used his network from undergrad to get the job - networks that he could have developed at law school had he attended HLS.

NP.

By definition, your college is the undergrad institution you graduated from. You can compare your law school with some else's law school. But to compare your law school with someone else's undergraduate college doesn't make a lot of sense. You have to set up straw man to make the comparison even remotely logical. Almost 100% Harvard applicants to medical school get admitted. The biggest feeder to Harvard and Yale Law is Harvard college. Statistically it's rare to make Harvard Law from a Podunk university. Comparing a genius from Podunk state and a slacker from Harvard is meaningless.

[Anonymous]

Y’all are nuts and weirdly obsessed. And not too kind/civil either.

[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:OP, I was just thinking that this morning.

Seems like people should take into account the trickle down of good students. As the number of applicants to top schools has increased while the number of spots has remained constant, kids that in the past would have gotten into Ivies are now going one tier down. The second tier kids are now going third tier and on and on. There are plenty of smart kids at all of the top 100 schools so we need to rethink how we perceive certain schools.
Something that I remember hearing back when I was touring colleges - schools that are in good locations attract good professors. So even if you may think Northeastern isn't so great, Boston can attract good profs.

Agreed. For national universities, maybe something like this: tier 1 = top 10; tier 2 = 11-25ish. That said, placed in the context of 4000 colleges, anyone attending one of these colleges is attending an elite institution. The notion that smart kids are only at Ivies is nonsense.

The top 25 schools being tier 2 is laughable and tone-deaf. But either way, some of you don't seem to remember there are 3 ivy league schools in the 11-25 section. But some of you would still rate schools like Vandy and Gtown lower than Cornell just because Cornell is an ivy, it's hypocritical.

NP here. As a Georgetown alum I rate Vandy and Georgetown below Cornell because that is where every single ranking (including US NEWS) puts those universities when comparing universities on a global basis.

https://www.topuniversities.com/university-ranking...world-university-rankings/2021
(Cornell #19, Vanderbilt #187, Georgetown #230)

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-univers...ank/sort_order/asc/cols/stats.
(Cornell #19, Vanderbilt #111, Georgetown #120))

Even USNEWS has Cornell at #22 globally, while dropping Vanderbilt to #72 and Georgetown to #322
https://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/rankings

We're talking undergrad honey not graduate. Stay on topic. At the undergrad level These schools are the same.

We are talking about prestige and perception which is not -- and cannot -- be based solely on "undergrad". Views of a schools prestige is influenced by the interactions others have with a university in any and all of its facets (undergrad, graduate, professional, faculty, research, alumni, etc.).

You're wrong. See post 16:24 above. If what you're saying was somehow true, UT Austin must be more prestigious than Dartmouth and Brown. UT Austin's highly ranked graduate programs, its large alumni base, and global reach must mean it's more prestigious than Dartmouth whose medical school is ranked 45th. Most people in the know realize prestige of a university comes from it's undergraduate program, which is why Dartmouth is more coveted than almost all of the schools mentioned.

You sound like a clueless 18 year old who was just admitted to Dartmouth.

Nothing clueless about it karen. If graduate schools mattered for prestige then schools like UT Austin and U washington would be prestigious and schools like Dartmouth, Brown, and Notre Dame would not. Notre Dame also doesn't have any reputable graduate programs yet it's still Notre Dame and one of the most sought after schools in the nation. Just say your wrong if you have no argument to the contrary, instead of throwing insults.

-1. You obviously are very young and don't have a graduate or professional degree. Nobody cares about your undergraduate once you go on your second degree. And it is those secondary degrees that are more reflective of the prestige of a university once you are out in a career or traveling internationally and working with folks from the EU or Asia.

I have an undergrad degree from HYPSM and nobody I deal with in my career knows or cares. They do know where I went to law school however (another Ivy).

I doubt you graduated from an Ivy because you’re wrong. Harvard doesn’t recognize graduate degrees for legacy admissions. In general, there’s much more prestige in an Ivy undergraduate admit because there are fewer seats (relative to all the graduate programs combined) and you only have one chance. Lots of people get graduate degrees from Ivies. In fact, some get multiple degrees. Also, I know lots of people who got their undergrad at an Ivy and their law degree at a comparatively low ranking law school, yet they have prestigious jobs. A Harvard law degree is great, but a Harvard undergraduate degree is more prestigious.

You seem to be confusing money-printing degrees that Columbia and Harvard i.e. Masters of Public Health, etc. tend to hand out to PhDs that the top graduate schools in a given program give.

Also, to say that a Harvard undergraduate degree is more prestigious than a Harvard law, medical school, business school is utterly false.

Suppose an individual went to Harvard for undergraduate, and then followed up with an MBA from the University of Washington.
Compare that with another individual who went to the University of Washington for undergraduate and followed up with an MBA from Harvard.

Who's going to be viewed as a more impressive candidate is any situation? It's rather obvious who's the one with wealthier parents.

The one who went in-state flagship for undergrad and followed up with a degree from HBS is the profile of a very large number of Fortune 500 CEO's though.

Are you seriously suggesting that a Harvard undergraduate degree with a relatively mediocre law school is going to be more impressive to law firms than a Harvard law degree after a relatively mediocre undergrad?

You realize that law firms advertise to clients how many HLS graduates they are employing, right? You realize that a large number of HLS graduates are not from Harvard undergrad?

Your anecdote with a sample size of 1 is rather irrelevant, likely that individual used his network from undergrad to get the job - networks that he could have developed at law school had he attended HLS.

NP.

By definition, your college is the undergrad institution you graduated from. You can compare your law school with some else's law school. But to compare your law school with someone else's undergraduate college doesn't make a lot of sense. You have to set up straw man to make the comparison even remotely logical. Almost 100% Harvard applicants to medical school get admitted. The biggest feeder to Harvard and Yale Law is Harvard college. Statistically it's rare to make Harvard Law from a Podunk university. Comparing a genius from Podunk state and a slacker from Harvard is meaningless.

The biggest feeder to Yale Law is Yale.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, I was just thinking that this morning.

Seems like people should take into account the trickle down of good students. As the number of applicants to top schools has increased while the number of spots has remained constant, kids that in the past would have gotten into Ivies are now going one tier down. The second tier kids are now going third tier and on and on. There are plenty of smart kids at all of the top 100 schools so we need to rethink how we perceive certain schools.
Something that I remember hearing back when I was touring colleges - schools that are in good locations attract good professors. So even if you may think Northeastern isn't so great, Boston can attract good profs.

Agreed. For national universities, maybe something like this: tier 1 = top 10; tier 2 = 11-25ish. That said, placed in the context of 4000 colleges, anyone attending one of these colleges is attending an elite institution. The notion that smart kids are only at Ivies is nonsense.

The top 25 schools being tier 2 is laughable and tone-deaf. But either way, some of you don't seem to remember there are 3 ivy league schools in the 11-25 section. But some of you would still rate schools like Vandy and Gtown lower than Cornell just because Cornell is an ivy, it's hypocritical.

NP here. As a Georgetown alum I rate Vandy and Georgetown below Cornell because that is where every single ranking (including US NEWS) puts those universities when comparing universities on a global basis.

https://www.topuniversities.com/university-ranking...world-university-rankings/2021
(Cornell #19, Vanderbilt #187, Georgetown #230)

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-univers...ank/sort_order/asc/cols/stats.
(Cornell #19, Vanderbilt #111, Georgetown #120))

Even USNEWS has Cornell at #22 globally, while dropping Vanderbilt to #72 and Georgetown to #322
https://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/rankings

We're talking undergrad honey not graduate. Stay on topic. At the undergrad level These schools are the same.

We are talking about prestige and perception which is not -- and cannot -- be based solely on "undergrad". Views of a schools prestige is influenced by the interactions others have with a university in any and all of its facets (undergrad, graduate, professional, faculty, research, alumni, etc.).

You're wrong. See post 16:24 above. If what you're saying was somehow true, UT Austin must be more prestigious than Dartmouth and Brown. UT Austin's highly ranked graduate programs, its large alumni base, and global reach must mean it's more prestigious than Dartmouth whose medical school is ranked 45th. Most people in the know realize prestige of a university comes from it's undergraduate program, which is why Dartmouth is more coveted than almost all of the schools mentioned.

You sound like a clueless 18 year old who was just admitted to Dartmouth.

Nothing clueless about it karen. If graduate schools mattered for prestige then schools like UT Austin and U washington would be prestigious and schools like Dartmouth, Brown, and Notre Dame would not. Notre Dame also doesn't have any reputable graduate programs yet it's still Notre Dame and one of the most sought after schools in the nation. Just say your wrong if you have no argument to the contrary, instead of throwing insults.

-1. You obviously are very young and don't have a graduate or professional degree. Nobody cares about your undergraduate once you go on your second degree. And it is those secondary degrees that are more reflective of the prestige of a university once you are out in a career or traveling internationally and working with folks from the EU or Asia.

I have an undergrad degree from HYPSM and nobody I deal with in my career knows or cares. They do know where I went to law school however (another Ivy).

I doubt you graduated from an Ivy because you’re wrong. Harvard doesn’t recognize graduate degrees for legacy admissions. In general, there’s much more prestige in an Ivy undergraduate admit because there are fewer seats (relative to all the graduate programs combined) and you only have one chance. Lots of people get graduate degrees from Ivies. In fact, some get multiple degrees. Also, I know lots of people who got their undergrad at an Ivy and their law degree at a comparatively low ranking law school, yet they have prestigious jobs. A Harvard law degree is great, but a Harvard undergraduate degree is more prestigious.

Thank you! In friendly conversation, when people ask where you went to college, they mean undergrad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Y’all are nuts and weirdly obsessed. And not too kind/civil either.

You seem kind and not at all obsessed.