Anonymous wrote:May be better to be at the top at a school a level or two down from the list. Watch Malcolm Gladwell “Don’t go to Harvard” for reference.
Not nearly as simple as that. As Malcolm Gladwell clearly says in the video and many other times he has faced similar inquiry, Harvard/ivies are fine for those who have the goods to be top-quarter. There is nothing implicitly wrong with elite unis, it is merely the fact that if you are going to be below average at these places, your trajectory could change compared to being top-group in an easier peer group.
The key is being honest in one's assessment of your student to be able to decipher which schools are realistic for them to excel above the middle of the pack, particularly in STEM where the courses are graded on curves. Non-stem courses are more subjectively graded, often 80% A- and above, and almost no Cs, not too much to worry about. Then again, elite/ivy give average STEM students B+ for intro, A- for upper levels, while typical publics have much lower curve sets, making "average" elite STEM majors likely better off than top-quarter students at schools with easier peer competition.