Anonymous wrote:
CMU CS >>>>>>>> Harvard English

NYU Stern >>>>>>> Yale Art history

and so on

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You're assuming that there are way fewer Suzie Zs at State U, and that's simply not the case. I'm talking absolute numbers. State U often has 5 to 10 times the students as Harvard.

The difference between Suzie Z and a Harvard undergrad is that the latter doesn't need a Harvard MBA to succeed. Suzie Z has something to prove so will invest 2 yrs and $200,000 for a Harvard MBA.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Successful people who went to T20 schools say they would have never gotten where they are without it. So yes, totally worth it.

Successful people who didn’t go to T20 say they didn’t need it. So no, not worth it.

eh.. lots of people who went to T50 below work alongside T10 grads, myself included.

Anonymous wrote:You're assuming that there are way fewer Suzie Zs at State U, and that's simply not the case. I'm talking absolute numbers. State U often has 5 to 10 times the students as Harvard.

Anonymous wrote:Top 20 no.
Top 10 yes.
Harvard
Yale
Princeton
Stanford
MIT
UPenn
Columbia
Caltech
Duke
John Hopkins

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First going off to college next year, they attended a very rigorous top-ranked high school. We prioritized fit over all else, but i will say the T20 they almost went with felt very different than the T10's interestingly. They just had more of an academic air, a different intensity that could be felt. Pro or con depending on person.

💯
T10s are intense and generally not “social & fun”….

Think northwestern vs Vanderbilt

Anonymous wrote:First going off to college next year, they attended a very rigorous top-ranked high school. We prioritized fit over all else, but i will say the T20 they almost went with felt very different than the T10's interestingly. They just had more of an academic air, a different intensity that could be felt. Pro or con depending on person.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Quality of the peer group is vastly different vs. non T20 IMO.

The quality at Georgetown or Emory is higher than UCLA

Anonymous wrote:First going off to college next year, they attended a very rigorous top-ranked high school. We prioritized fit over all else, but i will say the T20 they almost went with felt very different than the T10's interestingly. They just had more of an academic air, a different intensity that could be felt. Pro or con depending on person.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Quality of the peer group is vastly different vs. non T20 IMO.

With holistic admissions and current preferences for athletes, first gen and pell grant eligible, this is not true, Lots if kids at T50 or even T75 who have stats for T20 but didn’t get in due to the aforementioned preferences, were hurt by average ecs, or college’s desire for geographical diversity.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Top 20 no.
Top 10 yes.
Harvard
Yale
Princeton
Stanford
MIT
UPenn
Columbia
Caltech
Duke
John Hopkins

How about Brown Northwestern UChicago?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sure it's difficult from a big school but the competition is not less fierce at private schools either.

But the title of this thread is "Do T20s actually matter?" and you just cited Berkeley which just happens to be one.

The better question in my mind is, what differences are there between outcomes from T20 and non-T20 big public schools, or between outcomes from T20 and non-T20 private schools?

Look at the WSJ survey of best paying jobs from which colleges in 9 areas. For many of the careers, the #1 ranked public would also show up in the Top 20 private...but often the #2 public is below what the #20 private supposedly pays in that profession. For areas like finance and consulting, the #1 public university is below what the #20 private pays.

https://www.wsj.com/news/collection/college-pay-80428504