The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
So yeah, SATs and interviews are kind of a shitty way of being judged as a student, but they work well. I'm constantly amazed by the quality of everyone's work at Stanford. Even the jocks in the 9 AM classes put most of my high school peers to shame in terms of work ethic and interest in the class. I've only met a handful of people who weren't completely engaged and dedicated to the material they're learning. That's why the big name schools are worth it, in my opinion. No more of that bullshit where I'm the only one in the room pushing myself to completely master the material. I hate that shit. If you're not going to even try, get the fuck out. Students acting like they're above the material was the worst thing about high school. I haven't had a problem with smart asses at Stanford.
I don't think you should be as amazed by the quality of your fellow students as all that - the fees even in a country like mine, where a degree is the price of a small car thanks to government help, put people who can't/don't-wanna off stumblin' through. There really weren't any people in my classes after the first-year intro stuff who didn't really want to be there, and the only time I saw 'dumbness' was in computer-heavy subjects like GIS, because many people just don't click with computing, even in my age group and younger.
Its interesting reading this stuff about the american experience though, for a couple of reasons. First, over here there's not really a huge quality difference between universities, and there's certainly not the prestige-based gap thing going on, although some people seem to wish it were so :P there's certainly variance in quality between individual faculties at different uni's (for instance, Griffith has a reputation as being shit for pretty much everything besides environmental science, at which it kicks most everyone else's asses, and JCU in Townsville, which you'd expect to be a small-town nowheresville uni, is actually scary good in a lot of fields). Second, my uni is relatively new and spread out, has almost no dorms, and therefore has a reputation as being a social vaccuum - and it pretty much is. Apart from the sports stuff, most of us spent too much time working to support ourselves to be in clubs or party much.
So I guess I have a question stemming from this: do you think its better to be dependant on your parents to put you through college (in many if not most cases) and be able to not work, live on campus etc, or to put yourself through on a government loans program like Aus', being somewhat independent from your parent's finances? I see a lot of US H/A threads where people are stuck somewhere where they hate the course or the institution but don't know how to switch or leave without being 'cut off' by their folks, which isn't really a problem here. On the flipside, a lot of us can't afford to leave home until the later stages of our degrees, and we work while studying much more, which is actually affecting the marks our students achieve. Thoughts?
I don't doubt that the students at Brown actually study as much as any other Ivy or big name school. I've just always hated the idea of being in a class for a grade, sweating my ass off and putting in the extra hours to write an A paper, while some of my peers could just sort of whip something up the weekend before it's due because they just need to pass the class. I'm sure they'd be as interested in the material as me (why else would they be in the class) but I can't imagine them being as inspired to slave away without the GPA motivation there. The argument I normally hear is that those students do slave away for "the classes that matter to them" as opposed to the ones they're taking "for fun" or "for interest." That wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing, but it's the kind of attitude I didn't think was right for me. If it's not actually at Brown, then I suppose I was fretting over nothing. But when I was choosing between Brown, Yale, or Stanford, I had to get a little hypercritical or I would've killed myself in indecisiveness .
uhhhh. the bang-something-out-in-a-weekend thing was pretty much my strategy all through uni, in a GPA school. You can never escape us bwahahahahha!
So yeah, SATs and interviews are kind of a shitty way of being judged as a student, but they work well. I'm constantly amazed by the quality of everyone's work at Stanford. Even the jocks in the 9 AM classes put most of my high school peers to shame in terms of work ethic and interest in the class. I've only met a handful of people who weren't completely engaged and dedicated to the material they're learning. That's why the big name schools are worth it, in my opinion. No more of that bullshit where I'm the only one in the room pushing myself to completely master the material. I hate that shit. If you're not going to even try, get the fuck out. Students acting like they're above the material was the worst thing about high school. I haven't had a problem with smart asses at Stanford.
I don't think you should be as amazed by the quality of your fellow students as all that - the fees even in a country like mine, where a degree is the price of a small car thanks to government help, put people who can't/don't-wanna off stumblin' through. There really weren't any people in my classes after the first-year intro stuff who didn't really want to be there, and the only time I saw 'dumbness' was in computer-heavy subjects like GIS, because many people just don't click with computing, even in my age group and younger.
I don't think you should underestimate the gall of some American college students. Getting a degree is the norm, and a lot of people seem to think college is an entitlement, a parent-paid four-year party that's going on while you wait for your degree to materialize. All of my high school friends who went to local New Jersey colleges (like TCNJ, NJIT, or Rutgers) spend almost all of their time dicking around and partying. Based off of their self-reports, not one of them comes anywhere close to the amount of work the average Stanford student puts out. That's the reason I've been so amazed at the quality of my peers' work; I've heard so many horror stories of friends going through college buying every paper online, sleeping through finals, partying every night of the week. Just generally sleepwalking through the academic part of college.
So I guess I have a question stemming from this: do you think its better to be dependant on your parents to put you through college (in many if not most cases) and be able to not work, live on campus etc, or to put yourself through on a government loans program like Aus', being somewhat independent from your parent's finances? I see a lot of US H/A threads where people are stuck somewhere where they hate the course or the institution but don't know how to switch or leave without being 'cut off' by their folks, which isn't really a problem here. On the flipside, a lot of us can't afford to leave home until the later stages of our degrees, and we work while studying much more, which is actually affecting the marks our students achieve. Thoughts?
Well I'm lucky enough that my parents can put me through one of the more expensive colleges without blinking an eye. And yeah, I think it's always going to be academically advantageous when a student can devote him/herself entirely to studying, and that's easier if your parents are putting you through. Is that possible, or is it worth the headaches it causes? Beats me.
Finishing school with huge student loans to pay off is obviously ... suboptimal, so I feel like there's something to be said for relying on a well-managed college fund, if the option is there.
On the other hand, it's not always necessary to choose between working through college and milking the parental units - there was a navy recruiter at my school last week offering a program to engineering students where they'd pay for your college and give you an on-the-spot paycheck for committing to four years of service as a research engineer, after which they'd put you through grad school (if you opt to go) and give you a hefty raise after that. The army and air force have similar kinds of programs, which is how my parents got through school.
Dartmouth: gargle moonshine, chop wood for heating.
My brother goes to Dartmouth, and judging from everything he's told me, this is an apt description of one of his mornings.
Yale and Princeton are kind of weak, since they just strike me as ripping on the school as opposed to capturing the feel of anything, but other than that I find the whole thing so funny simply because it's oddly good at perfectly capturing at least an aspect of the school in a handful of pithy words.
I think Yale has the most beautiful campus of any school I've seen.
What is with all the lawyers/law students on this site anymore? I disagree slightly though because law is far more prestige obsessed than most normal occupations. A smart person who uses college to skill-build rather than just get a piece of paper will go just as far from any state school except in like, banking/law and maybe a few other limited situations.
ive been here since like 2004 or something like that. as for the name game, well, im just speaking from experience. all the big law firms will love you if you graduate from a top named law school.
Yeah, I don't doubt it: every law firm I've dealt with was insane about local connections (outside NYC) and school-rank. If your firm is getting apps from Brooklyn, though, I'm guessing you are at an NYC firm, which explains why you are posting here so late at night . Trying to make your billables for year-end?
Do poor kids who attend Ivy League schools have similar experiences as the rich kids. For example, are they invited to fraternities as regularly?
Hahaha, what a can of pickles you have opened.
I never noticed any problems between the haves and have nots on campus. I was dirt poor, and I never felt snubbed or limited in anything I did or got any grief from any of the filthy rich people I knew.
You won't get tapped for any secret societies, and you miss out on a lot of the legacy stuff (which always seemed cool as hell), but I never heard of someone being discouraged from pledging a frat if they weren't from the right social circle or a legacy. And as far as academics go, they really couldn't give less of a crap who your daddy is.
I guess you've never heard of fraternity-dues. They're generally upwards of three grand per semester here and this is a damn state school. I have difficulty imagining that anything is cheaper at Ivy League schools, especially the exclusive-clubs.
ViolentChemistry on
0
MrMisterJesus dying on the cross in pain? Morally better than us. One has to go "all in".Registered Userregular
So I guess I have a question stemming from this: do you think its better to be dependant on your parents to put you through college (in many if not most cases) and be able to not work, live on campus etc, or to put yourself through on a government loans program like Aus', being somewhat independent from your parent's finances? I see a lot of US H/A threads where people are stuck somewhere where they hate the course or the institution but don't know how to switch or leave without being 'cut off' by their folks, which isn't really a problem here. On the flipside, a lot of us can't afford to leave home until the later stages of our degrees, and we work while studying much more, which is actually affecting the marks our students achieve. Thoughts?
The optimal solution is having awesome parents who will pay for your education no-strings-attached, though, of course, this is not always available.
Financial aid is available to US students, though it's not like the UK or anything like that. The federal aid is mostly a lot of loans, and given that school can be $50,000 a year, you can be staring down a pretty huge debt at the end of it. Really, it will depend on how generous your individual school is.
Do poor kids who attend Ivy League schools have similar experiences as the rich kids. For example, are they invited to fraternities as regularly?
Hahaha, what a can of pickles you have opened.
I never noticed any problems between the haves and have nots on campus. I was dirt poor, and I never felt snubbed or limited in anything I did or got any grief from any of the filthy rich people I knew.
You won't get tapped for any secret societies, and you miss out on a lot of the legacy stuff (which always seemed cool as hell), but I never heard of someone being discouraged from pledging a frat if they weren't from the right social circle or a legacy. And as far as academics go, they really couldn't give less of a crap who your daddy is.
I guess you've never heard of fraternity-dues. They're generally upwards of three grand per semester here and this is a damn state school. I have difficulty imagining that anything is cheaper at Ivy League schools, especially the exclusive-clubs.
I can't speak for universality, but I knew a fair number of brothers in a lot of different houses, and I can't think of any frat I could have made the dues at, and I was basically as strapped for cash as it's possible to be. Not least because dues can get you room in board in the house, and if you really are hard up there's almost always an alum around who'd be more than happy to help a young brother.
To be fair though, I can't think of a single frat off the top of my head that was north of 15 hundred a year.
I'm a sophomore at Stanford, and I was accepted into most of the Ivys (Brown, Dartmouth, Yale, Harvard, and Penn), so I spent a lot of time researching them and I've spent a couple weekends at each of them.
For one, there's a lot more variance than you'd think. The Ivy League schools (and the other handful of top-tier name schools like MIT and Stanford) aren't a monolithic entity. In my experience, the campuses at Dartmouth, MIT and Penn are dreary wastelands, while Princeton, Yale, and Stanford are beautiful. The facilities in general aren't special or anything, although each has something kind of cool and unique to offer. And while each of the big name universities attracts a handful of famous professors, it's not like the places are overflowing with brilliant field-defining thinkers. You've still got to pick and choose which place has what you want.
Some Ivys have a reputation for drinking or drugs, and their students try to act like they're really cool and don't study all the time. That's a lie; everyone at top name schools studies harder than students at more typical universities. I'd guess that's because of the application process that requires students to have superhuman work ethics. Yes, a small (but vocal) group of slacking high school students manage to get into the Ivys, and they like to brag about how they never do any work. They're the exception, and unless they go to Brown (fuck Brown) their GPAs should reflect their slacking. Drinking and drug use varies widely. As it is at most colleges, the rate of students drinking (or using drugs) is lower than you'd imagine, but yeah, there's more studying and less partying at most of the top-tier schools. Some study had 30% of Stanford students abstaining from alcohol, and the vast majority only drinks in moderation.
So yeah, SATs and interviews are kind of a shitty way of being judged as a student, but they work well. I'm constantly amazed by the quality of everyone's work at Stanford. Even the jocks in the 9 AM classes put most of my high school peers to shame in terms of work ethic and interest in the class. I've only met a handful of people who weren't completely engaged and dedicated to the material they're learning. That's why the big name schools are worth it, in my opinion. No more of that bullshit where I'm the only one in the room pushing myself to completely master the material. I hate that shit. If you're not going to even try, get the fuck out. Students acting like they're above the material was the worst thing about high school. I haven't had a problem with smart asses at Stanford.
Princeton, Harvard, and Yale all have reputations for snottiness and being for "rich kids only," but that's really a load of shit. Nobody cares about how much your parents make. That's a stereotype that was valid 30 years ago, but there's next to no rich/poor prejudice at any top-tier school today. Any exceptions are blips in the radar. There's is really no rich kid culture on these campuses.
I spend a shitload of hours at the library every week, and most everyone I know does too. I certainly hope all my hard work pays off with either a sweet high-paying job down the road, or at least acceptance into a rocking grad school in the short term. I'm too young to have any experience with the monetary pay-offs (or debt problems) that the big name schools give.
Name recognition does exist. First of all, Stanford and MIT (and a handful others) are more widely known than a lot of the Ivys (sorry, Cornell and Penn). Second, in my experience, a lot of people hate you for going to a big name school. I got a lot of flak for it at my last internship, even though I never brought it up in conversation. Just a lot of snide remarks and a general distrust. Whatever. I hope it plays to my advantage when I apply for my first job. Yeah, I know experience and personality matter just as much as the University name or the GPA when interviewing for a job, but I can't imagine a 4.0 from Stanford hurting.
Of course, this is what I've been able to piece together in my own research when deciding what college to go to. Feel free to correct whatever you think I got wrong with your own anecdotes.
This man knows what he is talking about. *Thumbs up approval*
I go to stanford (well i guess it's not really an Ivy) and it's freaking hard. Of course, that's just my experience. It really depends on what kind of experience you want to have. I could take only 3 classes each quarter and it'd be easier, but I choose to take accelerated classes and a full course load.
I go to stanford (well i guess it's not really an Ivy) and it's freaking hard. Of course, that's just my experience. It really depends on what kind of experience you want to have. I could take only 3 classes each quarter and it'd be easier, but I choose to take accelerated classes and a full course load.
The thing I loved most about MIT was when I met a girl I instantly knew she was brilliant, and we both loved science and engineering. Good chance she was a geek as well. Everyone wants to be there, and they had to work for it, that definitely makes for a nice atmosphere. Again you can get the same education at other schools, but I think there's a higher percentage of people who actually want to be there to learn not just party.(Tough man did I go to some Epic parties)
Mishra on
"Give a man a fire, he's warm for the night. Set a man on fire he's warm for the rest of his life."
-Terry Pratchett
0
Podlyyou unzipped me! it's all coming back! i don't like it!Registered Userregular
edited December 2007
lot's of beautiful schools are in terrible areas. My school is constantly ranked one of the most beautiful schools in America, yet right outside the gates is the ghetto.
It has been my experience that the Ivies are not 10x better than the other top 90 schools, but that the top 100 schools are relatively similar, and miles better than the other schools.
Seriously, if you get into a top 100 school, how good it is really depends on how much you put into it.
The problem I had with Brown's grading scheme was that I was afraid I would wind up in some class I really loved, and be surrounded by 200 students who are just coasting by because they're taking it pass/fail and wouldn't have been in the class otherwise. Yeah, maybe those kids are trying more classes and broadening their horizons, but I'd prefer a college where you have to try your best even when you're experimenting. It'd be detrimental to me to be around a bunch of uninspired students when it could have just been me and 15 wholly engaged kids in a smaller seminar class.
Maybe that's not a fair analysis, but it's what scared me away from Brown.
It's really not a fair analysis at all. While the lack of a structured curriculum can let an unfocused student muddle through four or five years directionless, it also lets students experiment with many disciplines to see what truly drives them, backloading the committment to a concentration as late as possible (and even then a student can still change as long as they can show they can complete their plan of study). For students that do know what they want, it allows them to take pretty much exactly what they want without having to take ANY required bad/boring/uninteresting classes (outside concentration pre-reqs anyway) or risking GPA on a difficult class that interests them but is outside their field of study/knowledge base/comfort zone. English major who wants to try an advanced game theory class? S/NC and go for it! Computer Science geek who wants to take a modern Japanese History class? Come on down! (that was me, though I took it for a grade).
If you're in a class with 200 people then one of two things is true - either it's a pre-req class in a popular department and the students there are taking it because they need to (CS15/EC11), or it's a popular class because it's a damn good class (BN01/PS22). If it's a pre-req class then yeah, some will just want to get it over with, but they do need to be there... and if it's a good, interesting class then the students are there because they want to be. If you are unmotivated because a couple of them are taking it pass/fail and giving their papers one or two fewer coats of polish than you are, then yeah Brown isn't the place for you.
The pass/fail thing is also completely overblown. Sure, I did have a roommate who took EVERY class pass/fail, but that was by far the exception to the rule. I had a lot of pre-med friends and they worked as hard or harder than those I know from other schools, and overall few people will take more than 10-15% of their classes pass/fail. Personally, I used it as a way to help balance my schedule - one semester I had two heavy coding classes and a hard theory class, so I took a fourth out-of-concentration class pass/fail so I wouldn't have to stress about it. I went to class and sections and did about half of the reading, but my final paper was one 8 hour stream-of-conscious typing exercise that got a quick once-over before it was turned in. Was I engaged in class? Yes. Did I get the most out of it that I could? Probably not, but I still got a lot and my semester was much better off overall.
Yeah, I don't doubt it: every law firm I've dealt with was insane about local connections (outside NYC) and school-rank. If your firm is getting apps from Brooklyn, though, I'm guessing you are at an NYC firm, which explains why you are posting here so late at night . Trying to make your billables for year-end?
nah, im at a global firm (in the tokyo office) which explains the hour. we have a huge new york office though and they take applications from all the local schools too.
Do poor kids who attend Ivy League schools have similar experiences as the rich kids. For example, are they invited to fraternities as regularly?
Hahaha, what a can of pickles you have opened.
I never noticed any problems between the haves and have nots on campus. I was dirt poor, and I never felt snubbed or limited in anything I did or got any grief from any of the filthy rich people I knew.
You won't get tapped for any secret societies, and you miss out on a lot of the legacy stuff (which always seemed cool as hell), but I never heard of someone being discouraged from pledging a frat if they weren't from the right social circle or a legacy. And as far as academics go, they really couldn't give less of a crap who your daddy is.
I guess you've never heard of fraternity-dues. They're generally upwards of three grand per semester here and this is a damn state school. I have difficulty imagining that anything is cheaper at Ivy League schools, especially the exclusive-clubs.
I can't speak for universality, but I knew a fair number of brothers in a lot of different houses, and I can't think of any frat I could have made the dues at, and I was basically as strapped for cash as it's possible to be. Not least because dues can get you room in board in the house, and if you really are hard up there's almost always an alum around who'd be more than happy to help a young brother.
To be fair though, I can't think of a single frat off the top of my head that was north of 15 hundred a year.
I know at GT its actually cheaper to live in the fraternities as a brother (including the cost of dues) than it is to live in the dorms. At least for most of them. If you can live in a house as a pledge you pretty much have it made, since pledges don't pay dues anywhere as far as I know. Infact, its almost half the price to live in my fraternity as a brother than it is to live in the dorms. Though to be fair, I belong to the fraternity with the lowest dues on campus ($200 a semester I believe, I forget if thats the actual figure because I'm a pledge so don't pay any dues).
Ithaca was very very cold and (thanks mostly to the hotel school and working at Banfi's there) it was probably the best I've eaten in my life. That's probably my lasting memory.
And... yeah... Cornell probably doesn't count since half the colleges are state schools and all grades at Cornell are curved, but I've visted all the rest while there. Mostly for hockey/football (band stuff), but *shrug* Dartmouth is in the middle of absolutely nowhere, Princeton has multiple Rolex stores in its collegetown, Harvard is fun to roam, Yale/New Haven is a ghetto, Brown is... I barely even remember Brown honestly. Their hockey rink is far larger than it has any right being. And Columbia is Columbia. It's in the middle of NYC, what do you expect?
Hey I'm currently a Freshman at Statler High. What year did you graduate?
I've been really happy with my first semester at Cornell. I definitely worked my ass off for most of my classes and came out with a B average, so the myth about the Ivies being a breeze once you get in is definitely false in Cornell's case. Then again we have the reputation of being the easiest Ivy to get into but the hardest to get out of.
Ithaca was very very cold and (thanks mostly to the hotel school and working at Banfi's there) it was probably the best I've eaten in my life. That's probably my lasting memory.
And... yeah... Cornell probably doesn't count since half the colleges are state schools and all grades at Cornell are curved, but I've visted all the rest while there. Mostly for hockey/football (band stuff), but *shrug* Dartmouth is in the middle of absolutely nowhere, Princeton has multiple Rolex stores in its collegetown, Harvard is fun to roam, Yale/New Haven is a ghetto, Brown is... I barely even remember Brown honestly. Their hockey rink is far larger than it has any right being. And Columbia is Columbia. It's in the middle of NYC, what do you expect?
Hey I'm currently a Freshman at Statler High. What year did you graduate?
I've been really happy with my first semester at Cornell. I definitely worked my ass off for most of my classes and came out with a B average, so the myth about the Ivies being a breeze once you get in is definitely false in Cornell's case. Then again we have the reputation of being the easiest Ivy to get into but the hardest to get out of.
2k3. I basically don't know anybody at Cornell anymore except one of the police dispatchers who was my year and a couple of the senior bandies and other hanger-ons.
I think Yale has the most beautiful campus of any school I've seen.
Yale's campus is beautiful, but New Haven, at least from what I saw of it when I visited a few years ago, was kind of depressing.
New Haven does have the distinction of having one of the sharpest economic divides in the country. A damn shame, because it really ruins Yale for me.
Living about 45 minutes from Yale for pretty much my whole life and going into Yale to take some classes during high school, this used to be a lot worse than it is now. I don't know how recently you've been to New Haven, but the city has done a hell of a lot of work trying to clean up the area around Yale so that the rest of the city is at least half as nice as the campus itself. But yeah, most beautiful campus ever.
I go to stanford (well i guess it's not really an Ivy) and it's freaking hard. Of course, that's just my experience. It really depends on what kind of experience you want to have. I could take only 3 classes each quarter and it'd be easier, but I choose to take accelerated classes and a full course load.
The thing I loved most about MIT was when I met a girl I instantly knew she was brilliant, and we both loved science and engineering. Good chance she was a geek as well. Everyone wants to be there, and they had to work for it, that definitely makes for a nice atmosphere. Again you can get the same education at other schools, but I think there's a higher percentage of people who actually want to be there to learn not just party.(Tough man did I go to some Epic parties)
The biggest problem with MIT... is that it's not Caltech ;-)
I went to Bulldog Days at Yale right after going to Caltech's Pre-frosh weekend, and the contrast between New Haven and Pasadena is just... depressing. I think that was a large part of what decided it for me. I'm really glad I went to a "nerd school" too, because I really felt like I fit in for the first time in my life, and it's where I met my boyfriend. As for the quality of education, I don't think anyone in their right minds would criticize Caltech's science curriculum; it might be tempting to say "Oh nerds have no artistic inclination so their humanities must suck," but I thought we had lots of very good profs who were just awesome to take classes from (I've always had this crush on my Medieval history prof), and though our humanities courses may not have as great a variety as bigger, less specialized schools, all the courses were interesting. I've never thought "Oh god I have to write some bullshit busywork essay for this class that is lead by some snooty moron."
I think Yale has the most beautiful campus of any school I've seen.
Yale's campus is beautiful, but New Haven, at least from what I saw of it when I visited a few years ago, was kind of depressing.
New Haven does have the distinction of having one of the sharpest economic divides in the country. A damn shame, because it really ruins Yale for me.
Living about 45 minutes from Yale for pretty much my whole life and going into Yale to take some classes during high school, this used to be a lot worse than it is now. I don't know how recently you've been to New Haven, but the city has done a hell of a lot of work trying to clean up the area around Yale so that the rest of the city is at least half as nice as the campus itself. But yeah, most beautiful campus ever.
This would explain why it seemed nicer when I went there in 2005 than when I went in 1997. I had assumed I was just driving through a better part of town or something.
I assume Ivy league are equivalent to our oxbridge (cambridge and oxford) universities, with about 45-50% of students coming from private schools. Which is amazingly bad when you consider how many people actually attend private schools.
I assume Ivy league are equivalent to our oxbridge (cambridge and oxford) universities, with about 45-50% of students coming from private schools. Which is amazingly bad when you consider how many people actually attend private schools.
I assume Ivy league are equivalent to our oxbridge (cambridge and oxford) universities, with about 45-50% of students coming from private schools. Which is amazingly bad when you consider how many people actually attend private schools.
(I'm just annoyed because I am at a state school)
It's not quite that high, but yeah the trend is still there. For Brown this year 56% of the freshmen (class of 2011) are from public schools, 31% from private schools, 9% from parochial schools (wow, this number seems high), and 4% from "other" (homeschool/military/"alternative schooling environments"). Princeton seems to have an identical ratio (57% public, 32% private, 10.5% parochial, 0.5% other), and while I don't have stats for others, I bet it's about the same.
The question is how much are the high private numbers a result of students at private schools tending to be more academically motivated with very involved parents (and often legacy affiliations) and how much of it is name recognition and institutional backscratching?
PlushyCthulhu on
Steam/LoL: plushycthulhu
0
kaliyamaLeft to find less-moderated foraRegistered Userregular
i find the idea of law school in general being a breeze very hard to believe.
youd be surprised. i mean if jack thompson can get a law degree, anyone can, m i rite?
seriously though, the way law school is set up is totally ripe for abuse.
1) for the significant majority of classes, there are no papers or tests. there is one final. that's it.
2) there are outlines for every class, specific to each professor. some of the outlines are so detailed, they include the professor's jokes, which the professors actually use again and again, every year.
3) most of the standard classes (con law, tax, contracts, property law, crim law, etc.) are not taught through the socratic method. they are lectures in front of a hundred students (at least at harvard they were).
4) again, no matter how hard you work, you will most likely get a b.
so the way i saw it was, i could bust my ass, read all the cases, attend all the classes and sweat out the final and get a b, or i could just fool around, study hard the last 2 weeks before finals and still get a b. i think the choice is pretty clear.
funny thing is, i got mostly a's and graduated with a 3.6 or so (and that's without "cheating" by taking cross classes with the undergrad).
To clarify, you will most likely get a B because there's an enforced curve with a very soft bottom. Are you at a firm now?
I go to stanford (well i guess it's not really an Ivy) and it's freaking hard. Of course, that's just my experience. It really depends on what kind of experience you want to have. I could take only 3 classes each quarter and it'd be easier, but I choose to take accelerated classes and a full course load.
The thing I loved most about MIT was when I met a girl I instantly knew she was brilliant, and we both loved science and engineering. Good chance she was a geek as well. Everyone wants to be there, and they had to work for it, that definitely makes for a nice atmosphere. Again you can get the same education at other schools, but I think there's a higher percentage of people who actually want to be there to learn not just party.(Tough man did I go to some Epic parties)
The biggest problem with MIT... is that it's not Caltech ;-)
I went to Bulldog Days at Yale right after going to Caltech's Pre-frosh weekend, and the contrast between New Haven and Pasadena is just... depressing. I think that was a large part of what decided it for me. I'm really glad I went to a "nerd school" too, because I really felt like I fit in for the first time in my life, and it's where I met my boyfriend. As for the quality of education, I don't think anyone in their right minds would criticize Caltech's science curriculum; it might be tempting to say "Oh nerds have no artistic inclination so their humanities must suck," but I thought we had lots of very good profs who were just awesome to take classes from (I've always had this crush on my Medieval history prof), and though our humanities courses may not have as great a variety as bigger, less specialized schools, all the courses were interesting. I've never thought "Oh god I have to write some bullshit busywork essay for this class that is lead by some snooty moron."
I think you missed the part where I got to talk to women at school. You must have been one of what 5? :P
I got a pretty good humanities education to. When you see your history professor on C-span reviewing a biography on Thomas Jefferson you know she's pretty good. I know what you mean about feeling like you belonged for once.
Mishra on
"Give a man a fire, he's warm for the night. Set a man on fire he's warm for the rest of his life."
-Terry Pratchett
Posts
I don't think you should be as amazed by the quality of your fellow students as all that - the fees even in a country like mine, where a degree is the price of a small car thanks to government help, put people who can't/don't-wanna off stumblin' through. There really weren't any people in my classes after the first-year intro stuff who didn't really want to be there, and the only time I saw 'dumbness' was in computer-heavy subjects like GIS, because many people just don't click with computing, even in my age group and younger.
Its interesting reading this stuff about the american experience though, for a couple of reasons. First, over here there's not really a huge quality difference between universities, and there's certainly not the prestige-based gap thing going on, although some people seem to wish it were so :P there's certainly variance in quality between individual faculties at different uni's (for instance, Griffith has a reputation as being shit for pretty much everything besides environmental science, at which it kicks most everyone else's asses, and JCU in Townsville, which you'd expect to be a small-town nowheresville uni, is actually scary good in a lot of fields). Second, my uni is relatively new and spread out, has almost no dorms, and therefore has a reputation as being a social vaccuum - and it pretty much is. Apart from the sports stuff, most of us spent too much time working to support ourselves to be in clubs or party much.
So I guess I have a question stemming from this: do you think its better to be dependant on your parents to put you through college (in many if not most cases) and be able to not work, live on campus etc, or to put yourself through on a government loans program like Aus', being somewhat independent from your parent's finances? I see a lot of US H/A threads where people are stuck somewhere where they hate the course or the institution but don't know how to switch or leave without being 'cut off' by their folks, which isn't really a problem here. On the flipside, a lot of us can't afford to leave home until the later stages of our degrees, and we work while studying much more, which is actually affecting the marks our students achieve. Thoughts?
uhhhh. the bang-something-out-in-a-weekend thing was pretty much my strategy all through uni, in a GPA school. You can never escape us bwahahahahha!
I don't think you should underestimate the gall of some American college students. Getting a degree is the norm, and a lot of people seem to think college is an entitlement, a parent-paid four-year party that's going on while you wait for your degree to materialize. All of my high school friends who went to local New Jersey colleges (like TCNJ, NJIT, or Rutgers) spend almost all of their time dicking around and partying. Based off of their self-reports, not one of them comes anywhere close to the amount of work the average Stanford student puts out. That's the reason I've been so amazed at the quality of my peers' work; I've heard so many horror stories of friends going through college buying every paper online, sleeping through finals, partying every night of the week. Just generally sleepwalking through the academic part of college.
Well I'm lucky enough that my parents can put me through one of the more expensive colleges without blinking an eye. And yeah, I think it's always going to be academically advantageous when a student can devote him/herself entirely to studying, and that's easier if your parents are putting you through. Is that possible, or is it worth the headaches it causes? Beats me.
On the other hand, it's not always necessary to choose between working through college and milking the parental units - there was a navy recruiter at my school last week offering a program to engineering students where they'd pay for your college and give you an on-the-spot paycheck for committing to four years of service as a research engineer, after which they'd put you through grad school (if you opt to go) and give you a hefty raise after that. The army and air force have similar kinds of programs, which is how my parents got through school.
I think Yale has the most beautiful campus of any school I've seen.
Yeah, I don't doubt it: every law firm I've dealt with was insane about local connections (outside NYC) and school-rank. If your firm is getting apps from Brooklyn, though, I'm guessing you are at an NYC firm, which explains why you are posting here so late at night
I guess you've never heard of fraternity-dues. They're generally upwards of three grand per semester here and this is a damn state school. I have difficulty imagining that anything is cheaper at Ivy League schools, especially the exclusive-clubs.
The optimal solution is having awesome parents who will pay for your education no-strings-attached, though, of course, this is not always available.
Financial aid is available to US students, though it's not like the UK or anything like that. The federal aid is mostly a lot of loans, and given that school can be $50,000 a year, you can be staring down a pretty huge debt at the end of it. Really, it will depend on how generous your individual school is.
I can't speak for universality, but I knew a fair number of brothers in a lot of different houses, and I can't think of any frat I could have made the dues at, and I was basically as strapped for cash as it's possible to be. Not least because dues can get you room in board in the house, and if you really are hard up there's almost always an alum around who'd be more than happy to help a young brother.
To be fair though, I can't think of a single frat off the top of my head that was north of 15 hundred a year.
Yale's campus is beautiful, but New Haven, at least from what I saw of it when I visited a few years ago, was kind of depressing.
New Haven does have the distinction of having one of the sharpest economic divides in the country. A damn shame, because it really ruins Yale for me.
This man knows what he is talking about. *Thumbs up approval*
The thing I loved most about MIT was when I met a girl I instantly knew she was brilliant, and we both loved science and engineering. Good chance she was a geek as well. Everyone wants to be there, and they had to work for it, that definitely makes for a nice atmosphere. Again you can get the same education at other schools, but I think there's a higher percentage of people who actually want to be there to learn not just party.(Tough man did I go to some Epic parties)
-Terry Pratchett
It has been my experience that the Ivies are not 10x better than the other top 90 schools, but that the top 100 schools are relatively similar, and miles better than the other schools.
Seriously, if you get into a top 100 school, how good it is really depends on how much you put into it.
It's really not a fair analysis at all. While the lack of a structured curriculum can let an unfocused student muddle through four or five years directionless, it also lets students experiment with many disciplines to see what truly drives them, backloading the committment to a concentration as late as possible (and even then a student can still change as long as they can show they can complete their plan of study). For students that do know what they want, it allows them to take pretty much exactly what they want without having to take ANY required bad/boring/uninteresting classes (outside concentration pre-reqs anyway) or risking GPA on a difficult class that interests them but is outside their field of study/knowledge base/comfort zone. English major who wants to try an advanced game theory class? S/NC and go for it! Computer Science geek who wants to take a modern Japanese History class? Come on down! (that was me, though I took it for a grade).
If you're in a class with 200 people then one of two things is true - either it's a pre-req class in a popular department and the students there are taking it because they need to (CS15/EC11), or it's a popular class because it's a damn good class (BN01/PS22). If it's a pre-req class then yeah, some will just want to get it over with, but they do need to be there... and if it's a good, interesting class then the students are there because they want to be. If you are unmotivated because a couple of them are taking it pass/fail and giving their papers one or two fewer coats of polish than you are, then yeah Brown isn't the place for you.
The pass/fail thing is also completely overblown. Sure, I did have a roommate who took EVERY class pass/fail, but that was by far the exception to the rule. I had a lot of pre-med friends and they worked as hard or harder than those I know from other schools, and overall few people will take more than 10-15% of their classes pass/fail. Personally, I used it as a way to help balance my schedule - one semester I had two heavy coding classes and a hard theory class, so I took a fourth out-of-concentration class pass/fail so I wouldn't have to stress about it. I went to class and sections and did about half of the reading, but my final paper was one 8 hour stream-of-conscious typing exercise that got a quick once-over before it was turned in. Was I engaged in class? Yes. Did I get the most out of it that I could? Probably not, but I still got a lot and my semester was much better off overall.
Lots of great pizza places though.
nah, im at a global firm (in the tokyo office) which explains the hour. we have a huge new york office though and they take applications from all the local schools too.
Oh yeah. You have to stay on campus.
I know at GT its actually cheaper to live in the fraternities as a brother (including the cost of dues) than it is to live in the dorms. At least for most of them. If you can live in a house as a pledge you pretty much have it made, since pledges don't pay dues anywhere as far as I know. Infact, its almost half the price to live in my fraternity as a brother than it is to live in the dorms. Though to be fair, I belong to the fraternity with the lowest dues on campus ($200 a semester I believe, I forget if thats the actual figure because I'm a pledge so don't pay any dues).
Hey I'm currently a Freshman at Statler High. What year did you graduate?
I've been really happy with my first semester at Cornell. I definitely worked my ass off for most of my classes and came out with a B average, so the myth about the Ivies being a breeze once you get in is definitely false in Cornell's case. Then again we have the reputation of being the easiest Ivy to get into but the hardest to get out of.
2k3. I basically don't know anybody at Cornell anymore except one of the police dispatchers who was my year and a couple of the senior bandies and other hanger-ons.
Living about 45 minutes from Yale for pretty much my whole life and going into Yale to take some classes during high school, this used to be a lot worse than it is now. I don't know how recently you've been to New Haven, but the city has done a hell of a lot of work trying to clean up the area around Yale so that the rest of the city is at least half as nice as the campus itself. But yeah, most beautiful campus ever.
The biggest problem with MIT... is that it's not Caltech ;-)
I went to Bulldog Days at Yale right after going to Caltech's Pre-frosh weekend, and the contrast between New Haven and Pasadena is just... depressing. I think that was a large part of what decided it for me. I'm really glad I went to a "nerd school" too, because I really felt like I fit in for the first time in my life, and it's where I met my boyfriend. As for the quality of education, I don't think anyone in their right minds would criticize Caltech's science curriculum; it might be tempting to say "Oh nerds have no artistic inclination so their humanities must suck," but I thought we had lots of very good profs who were just awesome to take classes from (I've always had this crush on my Medieval history prof), and though our humanities courses may not have as great a variety as bigger, less specialized schools, all the courses were interesting. I've never thought "Oh god I have to write some bullshit busywork essay for this class that is lead by some snooty moron."
This would explain why it seemed nicer when I went there in 2005 than when I went in 1997. I had assumed I was just driving through a better part of town or something.
(I'm just annoyed because I am at a state school)
I thought that's changed in the last ten years?
It's not quite that high, but yeah the trend is still there. For Brown this year 56% of the freshmen (class of 2011) are from public schools, 31% from private schools, 9% from parochial schools (wow, this number seems high), and 4% from "other" (homeschool/military/"alternative schooling environments"). Princeton seems to have an identical ratio (57% public, 32% private, 10.5% parochial, 0.5% other), and while I don't have stats for others, I bet it's about the same.
The question is how much are the high private numbers a result of students at private schools tending to be more academically motivated with very involved parents (and often legacy affiliations) and how much of it is name recognition and institutional backscratching?
To clarify, you will most likely get a B because there's an enforced curve with a very soft bottom. Are you at a firm now?
I think you missed the part where I got to talk to women at school. You must have been one of what 5? :P
I got a pretty good humanities education to. When you see your history professor on C-span reviewing a biography on Thomas Jefferson you know she's pretty good. I know what you mean about feeling like you belonged for once.
-Terry Pratchett