Anyone attend an "elite" college/university?

Post Reply New Topic

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.

The human capital model and signalling go hand in hand, I think. What I was trying to say was that school is important, but the school you go to acts as a signal. The "better" and more elite your school, one of the perceived signals is that you're getting a "better" education.

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))

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

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.

maybe I don't understand this because I'm not very interested in cars. I also don't think material wealth represent a person's abilities. For all I know, the lawyer with the better car got it as a present from his rich family that payed his way through school and he really wouldn't be able to efficiently represent someone.

maybe I don't understand this because I'm not very interested in cars. I also don't think material wealth represent a person's abilities. For all I know, the lawyer with the better car got it as a present from his rich family that payed his way through school and he really wouldn't be able to efficiently represent someone.

you said ma'am you are sure a texan.

I agree. I just thought it was being said that education did nothing for human capital. I misunderstood though.

I'm tired of commenting on the prestige factor, I'm not sure if I ever made myself entirely clear but whatever.

As for the two questions posed to me - 1. I'm 21, going to be a senior this year, and 2. I suppos I started the process the summer before my senior year, visiting colleges. I thought I did well in my interviews, but looking back, I have no clue. I really found it impossible for me to get across just why I'm so special in my applications. Maybe if I'd been aware of my AS, I could've done a better job. I knew that I would be one of the smartest, most gifted and driven people no matter where I went, and sure enough, that's the case, but for some reason it didn't come across on my app. I used the common app, but by choice. Looking back, that was probably really stupid, but they swore it didn't matter and I believed them, like an idiot. The whole process is such a crock... I knew a guy with straight A's and a 1600 who didn't get in anywhere except Duke, and I swear he's smarter than 98% of the people at Columbia. Getting the best qualified, most gifted people is sadly not their goal. I applied early action to Harvard and was deferred and then rejected in April. I was waitlisted at Princeton and Yale, and I tried to get into Princeton off the waitlist, but it wasn't to be. Sometimes I actually wish I had gone to Amherst - I think liberal arts colleges can be fantastic. You get so much more attention - smaller classes, etc. I've had so many awful lecture classes at Columbia (but some great ones too). In the end I'm really glad I went to Columbia, in fact I probably wouldn't go anywhere else now even if I could. The most unpleasant and challenging aspect of Columbia has also been rewarding beyond anything I could've imagined, and that is that my whole bubble, my perception of what people are like and who's out there and what real life is like, after growing up in a very sheltered, conservative environment, has been completely shattered. It was tough and very scary at times, but I am seriously 10x the person I was before I went up there, having learned to deal with all different kinds of people and situations and cultures and all of that jazz. I think if I had gone to Princeton, I would've have developed even a fraction as much as I have now, because it would've been white picket fence Polo-shirt-land all over again.

I'm tired of commenting on the prestige factor, I'm not sure if I ever made myself entirely clear but whatever.

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.

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)

I'm under the impression that famous professors at prestigious universities usually don't even teach undergraduates so this program doubly cool.

To whom is this addressed?

That is definitely not true with regard to the top liberal arts colleges. Liberal arts colleges do not have any graduate students so all the focus is on the undergraduates. Professors, even the most distinguished of them, only teach undergraduates at liberal arts colleges. Furthermore the typical class size is around 20-30 so all of your professors get to know you by name and face.