I'm not convinced by most of the posts on this thread. How can you possibly know what your life would have been like had you not gone to an Ivy? I went to HYP and I think I got a fine education. But connections? They help initially, but not after that. I have a lot of friends who graduated from Ivies. None is particularly successful. The Harvard grads did move quickly right after graduation, but by mid-career, we're pretty indistinguishable from those unlucky souls who went to "lesser" schools. No failures, but no CEOs or US Presidents in my circle.
DCUM posters are a competitive lot. Not representative of the average Ivy grad.

Yes, but its the same thing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Connections.

Will someone please explain these "connections". Are there really employers where everyone went to the same school and they only hire people from that school?

I know a Federal judge who only hires law clerks who went to law school at Harvard or Yale. She uses it to weed out candidates. She went to Yale and Harvard Law. These are the "connections" pps are talking about.

But once you have the law degree, it really is completely irrelevant as to where you went to school for undergraduate.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Connections.

Will someone please explain these "connections". Are there really employers where everyone went to the same school and they only hire people from that school?

I know a Federal judge who only hires law clerks who went to law school at Harvard or Yale. She uses it to weed out candidates. She went to Yale and Harvard Law. These are the "connections" pps are talking about.

But that's law school. I was under the impression that this conversation was about undergraduate degrees.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Connections.

Will someone please explain these "connections". Are there really employers where everyone went to the same school and they only hire people from that school?

I know a Federal judge who only hires law clerks who went to law school at Harvard or Yale. She uses it to weed out candidates. She went to Yale and Harvard Law. These are the "connections" pps are talking about.

Anonymous wrote:Immediate, comprehensive, universal access. Different to such a degree that those who did not graduate from an Ivy or something very, very close really do not understand.

I went to Harvard. I don't understand. I guess I slept through the lecture on the secret handshake.

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.

This is pretty typical Harvard myopia here, in both the assessment of what other schools (including SLACs) offer, as well as the presumption about what other undergrads are looking for/value in a school.

When I read PP's comment, what I hear in my head is the voice of Thurston Howell III.

Nope, I'm an academic that has studied and/or taught at seven different colleges/universities and who has close friends and former students that teach/taught/have studied at many others.

I'm an academic who
Former students who

I'm sorry to be petty; just so sick of the general inability to distinguish between that/who.

Anonymous wrote:

The research on post-college success suggests he'd do best at the U in the special programs for the top-of-the-class students. Save the $$ for law school.

+1. I went to my large state school, graduated top of my class, and had so many options for law school - and my parents still had some $$ to help me pay for it. I ended up at a prestigious law school with many Ivy undergrads, and once we were there it really didn't matter where we had done our undergrad work.

So I would caution against going to a large state school because there is less grade inflation. Go to the school where getting grades is the easiest and rock your lsats.

High grade inflation + stron lsats = law school app success.

Large state schools are less flexible abou t grades, deadlines, etc.

The research on post-college success suggests he'd do best at the U in the special programs for the top-of-the-class students. Save the $$ for law school.

+1. I went to my large state school, graduated top of my class, and had so many options for law school - and my parents still had some $$ to help me pay for it. I ended up at a prestigious law school with many Ivy undergrads, and once we were there it really didn't matter where we had done our undergrad work.

If college admissions and the job market is so competitive, doesn't that mean the "omg our kids have poor educations" - - crisis completely overblown?

Anonymous wrote:Immediate, comprehensive, universal access. Different to such a degree that those who did not graduate from an Ivy or something very, very close really do not understand.

That was obvious to me when I toured Penn and Princeton last summer. Just. A. Whole. Different. Level.

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.

This is pretty typical Harvard myopia here, in both the assessment of what other schools (including SLACs) offer, as well as the presumption about what other undergrads are looking for/value in a school.

When I read PP's comment, what I hear in my head is the voice of Thurston Howell III.

Nope, I'm an academic that has studied and/or taught at seven different colleges/universities and who has close friends and former students that teach/taught/have studied at many others.

Immediate, comprehensive, universal access. Different to such a degree that those who did not graduate from an Ivy or something very, very close really do not understand.

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.

This is pretty typical Harvard myopia here, in both the assessment of what other schools (including SLACs) offer, as well as the presumption about what other undergrads are looking for/value in a school.

When I read PP's comment, what I hear in my head is the voice of Thurston Howell III.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

There are, but I was talking about the student body as a whole. At other places the median student is a lot weaker and the low end aren't even the same species.

That makes a huge difference

The lows of the lows would probably be the same at any school

The highs of the highs are likely to be the same at many schools. I seriously doubt that it is the same for the lows.