Anyone attend an "elite" college/university?

Post Reply New Topic

It's always great to get out there and experience something new, isn't it? Something totally outside our previous experiences. We think we know it all, and then we get something like college education in an unfamiliar environment, meeting people who don't think like we do, and as long as we keep our minds sufficiently open, we're bound to change and grow as a result. This could happen at Columbia, or anywhere else for that matter.

The nice thing too is that this learning experience can continue out in the workplace, whether it's in a lab on campus or for a company in the everyday world. The key is to keep an open mind, to see different things, and not to shy away from calculated risks. It's great that you're only 21 and you feel that your worldview has already been irrevocably changed compared to years ago. Imagine how it'll be when you're my age ( 28 ) ! What is that saying... "the more you know, the less you actually think you know" or something like that. I know it's cliche but it's very true.

havent had time to read through all this...

but it means less and less these days to attend an "elite" school... especially for research in science... it's all about the program and individual labs... and your work (publications)

the rest is just hot air they give you to blow up your own butt

k... now that i've read this...

i still stand by what i say... that if you're going into science (i seem to remember you saying that you wanna research autism)...

it doesn't matter what uni you attend... it's the research being done there. (i somehow doubt these elite schools are elite due to their autism research)

what types of autism research do all these elite schools do? have you looked at the autism research going on in other unis? regardless of their "Stature"???

how many grad students do all these labs have? how many grants do the profs all get? (grants prolly not that big a prob at ivies... though it is an indicator of innovative research, that your prof gets lots of good ones) things like that... you should really be contacting current students and checking that out...

i just really recommend looking into the specific research (each lab is unique), or else you're gonna be stuck somewhere for 5ish years where you dont wanna be...

damn the prestige... i left a program that was paying me +30k a year (most stipends are 10kish depending on local) fresh out of undergrad BECAUSE THE RESEARCH was not what i was lead to believe it was.... (so again, talk to current students in the labs to get a real non-interview feel for your potential advisor)

now i'm back on track... not to an ivy league school... but one of those alex mentioned, actually ^_^

will be slicing rat brains for autism research by the end of this summer

sum: ivy league schools look great to/for people who don't really know specifics... be it potential grads or potential employers... cause hey... it's an uber school; what else is there to need to know? though again, employers are gonna be looking at your pubs... so start lookin at what pubs your potential advisor has... and journals do matter... way moreso than what uni you attend)

i think you really need to check out the different innovative types of research that's going on before you commit to a school... but if you don't really know what interests you... sure go for the general marketability of an ivy league school. (there's always the land of postdoc-dom to gain competitive pubs)

Look, Ivy League schools offer advantages to students that kids who attend different schools have to to fight for, and the biggest advantage of an Ivy is the connections. Also, people are vain and like signals, and we've convinced ourselves that elite schools offer a better education than other schools. Academics are people, too, and want to teach at elite institutions because of the prestige associated with the school, not to mention they probably get paid more. People send their kids to those schools because they send signals, not necessarily about intelligence, but about wealth and connections. So it's a self-perpetuating cycle.

Personally, it is my opinion that you can get a good education anywhere if you are willing to put forth the effort, and you might even get a better education at a "lesser" school where your talents stand out and can be nurtured. Besides, it all depends on what we call "education," anyway.

Also, I've been reading up on education in general, especially higher education, and how it isn't really the learning accomplished at school that is the point of attending, but rather the fact that you're sending a SIGNAL to a potential employer. Therefore, the more elite your credentials, the stronger the signal.

But a degree does not indicate that a student knows HOW to think, merely that the student knew how to remember what their professors TOLD them to think. Some of the greatest minds in the world have never graduated with honors from any school, let alone an elite university.

So you got into a top school. Congratulations. You harnessed your ability. Well done. You will have some great connections that will help you succeed. That's what you get for getting into an elite school--connections. And you do get access to some great teachers. But the Internet is, I think, slowly eroding the monopoly on great education that these "elite" schools have held.

If higher education is nothing more than a signal, then it seems like there is a lot of money wasted on sending people to university. Wouldn't it be better to find a cheaper signal if that's the case? I believe there is some truth to the signaling model, but I think there is more truth to the human capital model.

Just my thoughts.

four years of college costs less than a 500,000 dollar car... seems like it's one of the cheaper signals in the big scheme of things

Is owning a 500,000 dollar car a signal? I don't understand how owning a car lets an employer know how good of a worker you are...

not to mention that for many areas of study, like science,.... grad students don't pay for their graduate education.

im in grad school couple years and haven't paid a dime yet.... and my tuition is free

Of course it is. People don't buy expensive cars because you're allowed to drive faster than everyone else on the highway...

oh... and i thought it was to compensate for other things

It is likely true that there is a human capital element to college, however, the reason I tend to believe somewhat in the signal model relates somewhat to the tendency for some groups to get high salaries and not work with much of what they were taught. I think that the signaling model hold truth with the benefits of certain liberal arts educations and with engineering degrees providing employment benefits outside of that field and with the value of degrees at prestigious universities that have horrible teaching(Harvard is considered one of the most prestigious universities but reports have often stated that the quality of teaching is horrid there). The issue is that your logic on the nature of signaling doesn't take into account the various intervening elements dealing with the signals. Corporations shouldn't mind the expense of the signal because students are the ones to pay for it and the students in this case are not likely to balk because everyone else in their group is doing the very same and has been told by teachers etc to do so. So, really, it could be an odd combo of a nash equilibrium, governmental intervention interfering with information diffusion(messages sent by public education and government subsidies) and groups that do not pay the costs benefiting form the results.... and possibly a little bit of a cultural issue as well.

The fact that employers will pay for certain advanced degrees does show some truth to the human capital model though.

Last edited by Awesomelyglorious on 05 May 2007, 6:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Ah yes, got to remember the non-monetary aspects of the economic equation.
Well, that is sort of the reason. It is to signal prestige to potential mates by showing off wealth. The use of these signals can often be employed by those who have certain deficiencies.

Hmm...I still don't see how what you own affects your abilities as a worker, but ok. School is a cheaper signal than a 500,000 dollar car.

While graduate education is free, you are giving up the wages you could be earning if you are not in school, so that is a part of a cost of the signal.

I just think that in earning a university degree you actually increase your human capital...at least I think that is the case for NTs

It is to pick up chicks ma'am. That car is not a signal to employers at all.
True.

Most of the stuff I have gone to class for is quite useless. There is probably some truth to the human capital model considering the feedback mechanisms between employer demands and university teachings, however, there are some discrepancies in the model that do warrant some attention.

it was a joke lol

just to give you an example...

if you committed some haneous crime... and you see that two lawyers come to your aide probono... would you want the lawyer with the BMW or the pinto defending you? (assuming you knew nothing else about them)

and as for accounting for wages earned if one did not go to gradschool.... i doubt the standard of living between myself being in gradschool living on current wages is that different than someone with an undergrad degree... assuming they're maximizing their potential (generally)