Anonymous wrote:People think that the probability that your room mate will in the future be president of the united states is much larger at Harvard and Yale. However, it really is only the graduate schools of these institutions that produce presidents, not the undergraduate ones.

I mean, your roommate could also be Ted Cruz, so.....

These issues are very much on our minds in my family. My grandson is admitted to Dartmouth, Amherst, and the U with oodles of merit aid from the U. No money from Dartmouth or Amherst. He will visit them all and then decide. My gut tells he will get the best education at Amherst in his non STEM
major, but that maybe because i went to a LAC and got a lot out of it. On the other hand, Dartmouth is bigger and an Ivy, and at the U he would be the top of his class with lots of extras because he would be in several special programs. He is having a hard time with the decision. Wants to do law, and I am wondering if Dartmouth would open more doors.

People think that the probability that your room mate will in the future be president of the united states is much larger at Harvard and Yale. However, it really is only the graduate schools of these institutions that produce presidents, not the undergraduate ones.

Anonymous wrote:Everyone really needs to read "Where You Go Is Not Who You'll Be" by Frank Bruni

Also "Excellent Sheep" by Deresiewicz

Everyone really needs to read "Where You Go Is Not Who You'll Be" by Frank Bruni

1. A lifetime of not having to prove how smart you are...especially important for women.

2. Some organizations only higher Ivies (especially in high-level finance and top law firms)

3. You never have to apologize for where you went.
(For example...why would you go to Bates and pay private tuition when a great state university would be cheaper/better).

4. If you have to ask...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One word - access.

Strength of OCI/OCR & networks as well as quality of peers is what separates the good from the great.

I agree with the first, but not the second. There are Ivy qualified students at every 4 year school in the US.

NP. Yes, probably, but not a critical mass of them. So who cares if there are five or six kids at, say, Bucknell who could have gone to an Ivy?

A lot of these school have more than 5-6 kids Ivy-caliber students. Also, the research shows you'll probably have a better educational experience and more post-college success if you are in the top tier of students at a not-super-top college than being in the middle-to-bottom at a super-top college. If you can be in the top tier at Harvard, yay for you and yes, I'm sure you'll do great in life but you'll also do great anywhere.

It's the students at the top of the pile -- anywhere -- that benefit most from all that faculty attention, resources, etc. The kid who didn't get into Yale (but had the stats for it) instead goes to the Honors College at Bucknell is likely to have more opportunities there than he would at Harvard where he wouldn't stand out.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One word - access.

Strength of OCI/OCR & networks as well as quality of peers is what separates the good from the great.

I agree with the first, but not the second. There are Ivy qualified students at every 4 year school in the US.

NP. Yes, probably, but not a critical mass of them. So who cares if there are five or six kids at, say, Bucknell who could have gone to an Ivy?

Anonymous wrote:One word - access.

Strength of OCI/OCR & networks as well as quality of peers is what separates the good from the great.

I agree with the first, but not the second. There are Ivy qualified students at every 4 year school in the US.

The marriage market.

Cachet.

There's definately cache. Like a pp, I still get comments about my Cornell degree, 25 years after I graduated. I doubt I'd the same reaction if I had gone to SUNY Binghamton, though truthfully the kids from my high school who went there were as smart as I was.

Thank you to PPs!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn't care about connections, but had a great intellectual experience at Harvard. Professors, resources (libraries, museums, bookstores), and environment were all really important to me, in terms of quantity, quality, variety, and intensity. But, honestly, that's not what most undergrads want from college.

No way in hell could I have found what I was looking for at Williams. OTOH, I doubt I'd have found it at every other Ivy -- and I know I could have found it at other excellent research universities, including a few public flagships.

Which ones?

Certainly Berkeley, Madison, and Ann Arbor. Others depend on field -- for STEM, I'd also look at UCSD and University of Washington -- Seattle. Don't know UCLA and UT Austin well enough to have an opinion re where strengths and weaknesses are.

Thank you. And to clarify, these schools had the intellectual environment or the research opportunities? Or both?

Also, what were your experiences with research at Harvard as an undergrad?

Berkeley (and Stanford & MIT) have a richer intellectual environment and more research opportunities than most ivyies, if not all. It really depends on what you're trying to get.

I'm a non-STEM person (my kid's the would-be science major). So my research is all in libraries -- not labs.

And what I'm saying is comparable (from the perspective of an intellectually ambitious undergrad) is resources -- faculty, facilities, range of course offerings. Basically, if you want to see what cutting-edge scholarship in a variety of fields looks like and whether this is the life for you, then you can do that at any of the school's I've listed. Again, that's not what most undergrads are interested in doing -- even at HYP (though what most undergrads are interested in doing at Harvard vs. Madison will probably vary, so that's an environmental difference).