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?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A common factor of elite schools in the T20 other than the Publics is the really low student to faculty ratio ( of 6 to 7), on par with the Top LACs or even better (MIT is 3). The Publics like UCLA, UCB are at 19.

This. Its not the T20 itself it is the size and intellectual quality of courses etc. william and Mary provides essentially the same environment as a T25 private. You cant go just on rank.

As a parent of a Berkeley student, the quality and rigor of CS and math course are just amazing. The classes have prepared him incredibly well for interviews. He has two offers for summer internships - one from a large tech company and one from a quant fund paying 40k for 2.5 months. His friends have internships at Tesla, Amazon and Google but all of them have been working hard preparing for interviews. There are a lot of research opportunities but the kid has to seek those. What matters is not the college but the kid. Sure it's difficult from a big school but the competition is not less fierce at private schools either.

Similar job offers for my UMich kid in CS

So, are you agreeing with the premise that T20s (or let's say T25) matter? I mean Michigan qualifies.

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.

Harvard has 7,200 students. Most Flagship State Us are call it 35,000 in total. So, State Us are 5x as large as Harvard, and if call it 10% are Harvard-stats caliber...well that means they have fewer than Harvard.

Are you trying to claim that 20% or more of State U kids have the average Stats of a Harvard admit?

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

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A common factor of elite schools in the T20 other than the Publics is the really low student to faculty ratio ( of 6 to 7), on par with the Top LACs or even better (MIT is 3). The Publics like UCLA, UCB are at 19.

This. Its not the T20 itself it is the size and intellectual quality of courses etc. william and Mary provides essentially the same environment as a T25 private. You cant go just on rank.

As a parent of a Berkeley student, the quality and rigor of CS and math course are just amazing. The classes have prepared him incredibly well for interviews. He has two offers for summer internships - one from a large tech company and one from a quant fund paying 40k for 2.5 months. His friends have internships at Tesla, Amazon and Google but all of them have been working hard preparing for interviews. There are a lot of research opportunities but the kid has to seek those. What matters is not the college but the kid. Sure it's difficult from a big school but the competition is not less fierce at private schools either.

Similar job offers for my UMich kid in CS

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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A common factor of elite schools in the T20 other than the Publics is the really low student to faculty ratio ( of 6 to 7), on par with the Top LACs or even better (MIT is 3). The Publics like UCLA, UCB are at 19.

This. Its not the T20 itself it is the size and intellectual quality of courses etc. william and Mary provides essentially the same environment as a T25 private. You cant go just on rank.

As a parent of a Berkeley student, the quality and rigor of CS and math course are just amazing. The classes have prepared him incredibly well for interviews. He has two offers for summer internships - one from a large tech company and one from a quant fund paying 40k for 2.5 months. His friends have internships at Tesla, Amazon and Google but all of them have been working hard preparing for interviews. There are a lot of research opportunities but the kid has to seek those. What matters is not the college but the kid. Sure it's difficult from a big school but the competition is not less fierce at private schools either.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A common factor of elite schools in the T20 other than the Publics is the really low student to faculty ratio ( of 6 to 7), on par with the Top LACs or even better (MIT is 3). The Publics like UCLA, UCB are at 19.

This. Its not the T20 itself it is the size and intellectual quality of courses etc. william and Mary provides essentially the same environment as a T25 private. You cant go just on rank.

As a parent of a Berkeley student, the quality and rigor of CS and math course are just amazing. The classes have prepared him incredibly well for interviews. He has two offers for summer internships - one from a large tech company and one from a quant fund paying 40k for 2.5 months. His friends have internships at Tesla, Amazon and Google but all of them have been working hard preparing for interviews. There are a lot of research opportunities but the kid has to seek those. What matters is not the college but the kid. Sure it's difficult from a big school but the competition is not less fierce at private schools either.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

The quality of the kid might be more similar.

But what firms are actually hiring from there? And what percentage of their starting first year analyst class is coming from a T75? I’d argue very few.

At the end of the day that’s what matters. All of the other stuff on this website is nonsense.

Well, that only matters for the sliver of the class interested in private equity or investment banking, so really not that relevant for most.

And most for PE need an MBA, and yes, then it DOES matter where you go. Most PE firms hire from 1 or 2 specific MBA programs (depends largely upon where the top partners got their MBAs). But undergrad, it doesn't matter

You would have us believe that the odds of admission to top MBA programs are the same from all undergraduate institutions?

The kids who end up at top MBA programs are similar strivers/had the resume for a T25 undergrad/did well in undergrad no matter where they went. So while Suzie Q from state U who got a 3.0 in undergrad and didn't have a shot at T25 undergrad doesn't likely have a good shot at Harvard MBA, Suzie Z from State U who got a 3.98 in undergrad honors program, did research, had 2 summer internships, excellent recommendations and was 1500+/3.9+UW/10 AP+ in HS and just didn't win the lottery for T25 (or didn't win the financial lottery as well) and chose to attend State U honors program and excel, well Suzie Z has just as good of chance at ending up at Harvard. It's just that a much higher percentage of kids at Harvard have the drive to excel at that level than at State U. they also come from a background that will push them to elite grad schools and more often can afford the elite grad schools. The avg kid from Kansas State doesn't apply to Harvard MBA because they cannot afford it....they go local or somewhere their employer will help pay for.

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?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

The quality of the kid might be more similar.

But what firms are actually hiring from there? And what percentage of their starting first year analyst class is coming from a T75? I’d argue very few.

At the end of the day that’s what matters. All of the other stuff on this website is nonsense.

Well, that only matters for the sliver of the class interested in private equity or investment banking, so really not that relevant for most.

And most for PE need an MBA, and yes, then it DOES matter where you go. Most PE firms hire from 1 or 2 specific MBA programs (depends largely upon where the top partners got their MBAs). But undergrad, it doesn't matter

You would have us believe that the odds of admission to top MBA programs are the same from all undergraduate institutions?

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

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