College decision: Advice?

[JayJay]

Given the two options, UMass. Definitely UMass, IMO.

 

[crazyquik]

Go to UMass. There is no question.

The only question is, out of like 1200 possible schools, how did it come down to these two? They don't seem to share anything in common. Unless, like, your dad went to one and your mom went to the other.

 

[Aspirant Pig]

By now, I fancy myself a kind of expert in questions of this sort. Of course, I never wanted this expertise, and I've gotten it only by virtue of hard knocks. But here's the unvarnished (if somewhat abbreviated) truth about higher education in America: there are only about 15 schools in the United States that will add definite and unmistakable financial value to your degree. Those are places like Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Cal Tech, MIT, etc. The problem, of course, is that unless you're born to a very narrow socioeconomic demographic or belong to a desirable affirmative-action category, the chance that you're going to win admission to any of those schools is abysmal.

Of course, if you can go to a school like Yale, go. But if you can't get into a top school, for the love of God, choose the cheapest school possible. Why? Because once you fall outside the top schools, it doesn't really matter where you go, provided that it's not DeVry or the University of Phoenix. Once you understand that you're going to have to earn a top salary--rather than be handed one simply because you went to Harvard--you'll see that avoiding indebtedness is the most important task before you because you may not make a lot of money immediately after graduation.

 

[leftover_salmon]

You sound like a huge tool. And this is coming from someone who went to one of those "top 15 schools."

That said, your second paragraph is decent advice.

 

[Aspirant Pig]

Originally Posted by leftover_salmon

You sound like a huge tool.
Name-calling is the province of children. We're both better than that.

And this is coming from someone who went to one of those "top 15 schools."

Well, I didn't. Nothing even remotely close, as a matter of fact. So my comment was meant neither to flatter myself nor to disparage others but only to impart my experience. And my experience has been this: corporate America promotes a culture of designer-label academia, wherein one's career prospects are judged in large part on the basis of academic provenance. Of course, as I said above, I think that this is a perfectly terrible system that inures to the undeserved benefit of the upper-middle class and rich. But the overriding fact is that those are the people who run corporate America, so it pays to understand the reality. The point is that unless you're going to a tip-top school, there's no sense in spending a lot of money because you likely won't get it back.

 

[mr.loverman]

Definitely UMass. Smith, Amherst and Hampshire are pretty much tier one schools, so being able to take classes there is a huge bonus. Smith girls are also a bonus. Western mass is very pretty. Nice woods. Organic farms. You're a few hours from the coast and the cities. Kalamazoo is a few hours from nowhere. Study hard and transfer to a tier one or ivy, closer to the coast if you can.

 

[imageWIS]

Got to UMass, then transfer to BU.

 

[limester816]

Originally Posted by imageWIS

Got to UMass, then transfer to BU.

lol@this advice.

(I go to BC. I have to laugh out of sheer responsibility)

 

[LucasCLarson]

Go to the largest of your choices. You will never regret it.

I'm currently at the University of Minnesota. Best decision I made. I, too, was looking at a few small liberal arts schools.

I'm biased, but I feel a large school offers you much more room to grow and find out who you are and what you want to do with your life.

Plus, after 2 years here, campus feels extremely small. So small that I almost want to find a larger school. Wait....

 

[Davidko19]

Originally Posted by limester816

lol@this advice.

(I go to BC. I have to laugh out of sheer responsibility)

he meant butler university, brah.


I think the consensus is go to UMass. Going to a small school was one of the dumbest things I did, in retrospect.

Hell, even when I was there if it wasnt for the frat I woulda transferred in a year as I planned (Another dumb thing, dont stay in a bad situation because of a frat or a girl or cause your comfortable). By my senior year I was so burnt out of the same 2.5k kids and tiny campus.

 

[HRoi]

Originally Posted by Aspirant Pig

By now, I fancy myself a kind of expert in questions of this sort. Of course, I never wanted this expertise, and I've gotten it only by virtue of hard knocks. But here's the unvarnished (if somewhat abbreviated) truth about higher education in America: there are only about 15 schools in the United States that will add definite and unmistakable financial value to your degree. Those are places like Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Cal Tech, MIT, etc. The problem, of course, is that unless you're born to a very narrow socioeconomic demographic or belong to a desirable affirmative-action category, the chance that you're going to win admission to any of those schools is abysmal. Of course, if you can go to a school like Yale, go. But if you can't get into a top school, for the love of God, choose the cheapest school possible. Why? Because once you fall outside the top schools, it doesn't really matter where you go, provided that it's not DeVry or the University of Phoenix. Once you understand that you're going to have to earn a top salary--rather than be handed one simply because you went to Harvard--you'll see that avoiding indebtedness is the most important task before you because you may not make a lot of money immediately after graduation.
i sort of agree with this, but disagree that it's only the Top 15 that add value. it's more like Top 50, especially if you factor in schools that are second or third tier nationally but add huge value locally/regionally (either thru name recognition or alumni networks, or both). i also only think this is true from year 0 to year 3-ish, and again when/if you apply to grad school. past that, your academic record takes a distant backseat to your professional record

 

[jagmqt]

Originally Posted by Jekyll

I vote Kalamazoo because Michigan is AWESOME!!!1!!1

Not really.

I'm a lifer in Michigan and I've been to every area in the state. I live 40 minutes north of Kalamazoo, and can assure you it is not a great town, and it's pretty far from anything exciting. (You can get to chicago in a couple hours, but that's about it)

If you want to go into engineering or medicine, the area is becoming a corridor for pharmecuticals and medical research...but if you're interested in K-zoo, i'm guessing hard sciences is not your strong point.

MI has the worst economy and jobless rate in the nation, and it won't be better anytime soon. Of those two, I'd choose UMass, based soely on how depressing 4 years in K-zoo would be.

jag

 

[Aspirant Pig]

Originally Posted by HRoi

i sort of agree with this, but disagree that it's only the Top 15 that add value. it's more like Top 50

I respectfully disagree.

Keep in mind that I'm talking about "definite financial value," meaning that, come hell or high water, you're going to have more and better opportunities solely by virtue of the name on your diploma. That is true of only a small group of schools.

As it happens, I had occasion to pick up the US News & World Report rankings last week, and I couldn't help but laugh upon seeing NYU ranked as the 32nd undergraduate program in the country. Now I don't dispute that NYU is a good school, but the idea that NYU will provide your kid with opportunities worth a $175,000 investment is ludicrous. Living in the area, I know about 10 fairly recent NYU grads. Three of them are full-time waiters. Another graduated magna *** laude and works an administrative assistant at a law firm, making about $55,000 a year. The only one who really went on to any financial success (HBS, IB, private equity) was a hispanic female. Of course, I don't know whether that had anything to do with her admission to HBS or with her hiring at BB banks, but, um, I wouldn't doubt it.

 

[pseudonym]

^ I wouldn't doubt it either.

 

[v.freeman]

Originally Posted by Aspirant Pig

I respectfully disagree.

Keep in mind that I'm talking about "definite financial value," meaning that, come hell or high water, you're going to have more and better opportunities solely by virtue of the name on your diploma. That is true of only a small group of schools.

As it happens, I had occasion to pick up the US News & World Report rankings last week, and I couldn't help but laugh upon seeing NYU ranked as the 32nd undergraduate program in the country. Now I don't dispute that NYU is a good school, but the idea that NYU will provide your kid with opportunities worth a $175,000 investment is ludicrous. Living in the area, I know about 10 fairly recent NYU grads. Three of them are full-time waiters. Another graduated magna *** laude and works an administrative assistant at a law firm, making about $55,000 a year. The only one who really went on to any financial success (HBS, IB, private equity) was a hispanic female. Of course, I don't know whether that had anything to do with her admission to HBS or with her hiring at BB banks, but, um, I wouldn't doubt it.

There's a pretty big difference between the schools within NYU. I'd probably agree that it's not worth closer to $200,000 to get an undergraduate liberal arts degree, but plenty of my friends in the business program are headed to BB banking positions and sales/trading. Most are white or asian. Then again, my view is a bit skewed because I'm in the position to actually make a return on my investment.