Ivy Pet Peeve
This thread is in response of some of the “is Harvard easy†posts yesterday. I find it so ridiculous that ivy kids always claim that they are so superior to top public school kids. The justification of grade inflation via the argument that if ivy kids went to top publics they would get all A’s is asinine. I think it’s even far fetched to claim that just because you go to an ivy you would even be in the top 20% at a top public school. Yes, ivy kids are smart and I’m not attacking their intellectual aptitude. My point is simple; going to an ivy does not translate to success at a top state school.
I have several reasons for support my argument. First and foremost, the institutions run entirely separate academic systems. At ivy schools, and other small private schools for that matter, students are coddled by their professors, teaching assistants and academic advisors. Classes are small and it is defiantly not a sink-or-swim environment. In contrast, top public schools have very large classes and there is very minimal student support. On average my econ classes were in 100+ person auditoriums with class numbers never dipped below the 80-100 person mark. Also, I definitely did not have an academic advisor. It is much easier to be academically successful when one is in significantly smaller classes. I’m sure there are a great number of kids in the ivy system that would falter in said institutions due to either lack of motivation, the need to be taught in a small environment, additional distractions that are prevalent at state schools and overall increased competition. This is not to say that they are unintelligent but rather in a large public school it’s easy to slip through the cracks. I have plenty of friends that chose to go to UCLA/Berkeley over ivy schools because of either financial reasons or just because they preferred Los Angeles/San Francisco to the east coast. As a whole they do not dominate, it’s a mix, some do well and others do alright. I feel this microcosm would be applicable to the general ivy population. I believe that their situations do not imply that they would not have done well at ivies but rather adds support to my argument that the two systems are completely different and success/failure in one environment does not translate to corresponding results in another.
Additionally, the grading systems at top publics and ivies are very different. My econ classes had a B- curve with about 15% of the students getting As whereas at Harvard 50% of the students receive As. The majority of kids that go to the top publics are intelligent, were very successful in high school and are competing for top jobs and grad school programs. The competition is fierce and there are a finite number of As. It is a poor assumption that ivy kids would dominate under these parameters.
I can continue to write but this is long enough and my point has been made. Yes, ivy kids are intelligent. However, do not assume you are superior, more deserving or would be more successful than top public kids. I for one believe I would have actually been more academically successful at an ivy intuition.
every finance/econ exam I
every finance/econ exam I have ever taken was absurdly different than the material given in class or on the practice test. Your teachers give you the same practice exam with changed numbers. What a joke.
And as to your argument about teachers coddling target students and that you need to bust it through 100+ person lectures, that is an argument against you. That shows the quality of the education is lower, and thus so is the product (you).
I too agree that too many ivies stroke themselves too much. It has been shown countless times that success is not based upon where you went to school. But lets be a little realistic and stop thinking that people that go to state schools are even on the same planet as the top students at an ivy (those which get the ib offers... its pretty competitive here too.)
just wanted to follow up.
just wanted to follow up. after posting i saw on you prof that you go to ucla, which in my mind is a totally different situation. You are at a top school and it is just because of your geographical location that you are not a highly sought after target school.
But does this change that IB
Agreed but they get better job placement, spots reserved, et cetera.
they being ivy league kids.
they being ivy league kids.
Re: Ivy Pet Peeve
However, do not assume you are superior, more deserving or would be more successful than top public kids.
They don't assume, they KNOW this from the fact that they are more sought after by recruiters.
That being said, I think the top public kids that actually do manage to break into IB are mostly on a level playing field.
"But lets be a little
"But lets be a little realistic and stop thinking that people that go to state schools are even on the same planet as the top students at an ivy."
Haha, it's funny (mind-boggling) that some people are so exclusive in their thoughts. There are plenty people in state schools as apt as those in ivys. You cannot generalize these sorts of things. You will find geniuses and their opposites at both. The probablity may be higher at ivy's, but there is no need of this separation that the two are not even on the same planet.
Again, I'm not saying that
Again, I'm not saying that the ivy kids are not smart or that top public kids are as smart as them. I am not saying that top public kids are better/worse recruits or which institutions provide a better education. My post was just in response the numerous posts that claim ivy kids would dominate at top publics which, in my opinion, is not the case.
Also, on a side note, most of my econ classes did not have homework or practice tests. You would go into the test blind. There would be one midterm and one final and that was that. I'm not saying this is the best way to learn by any means but to consistently get A's under these circumstances is very difficult.
Re: Ivy Pet Peeve
at Harvard 50% of the students receive As.
Get your sources right, and don't make assumptions about Harvard if you don't go there. Most large social sciences are curved around a B+, and the more generous courses might be curved around an A-. Many Harvard classes, especially econ classes, are notoriously large. Economics 10, the intro course, has well over 500+ students enrolled. I know enough smart public school kids, there's no disrespecting them at all. But I'm sure that 90% of Harvard students would do exceedingly well at UVA or Berkeley.
Re: Again, I'm not saying that
My post was just in response the numerous posts that claim ivy kids would dominate at top publics which, in my opinion, is not the case.
Care to link to some actual statistics to back that up?
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/2002/02/08/ed...
Oh man, classes are curved
Oh man, classes are curved around a B+ and A-, that is the most absurd thing I've ever heard. Everyone knows getting into Harvard is the hard part, the rest is so easy a caveman could do it.
A more current take
http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/2007-03-27-...
Not every Ivy is as easy as Harvard.
We should also clarify our terms
The term Ivy is overused. Though it may be true that some BB recruit at Brown or Dartmouth, the advantages at said schools are paltry compared to HYPW -- the W is for Wharton, Penn in general is not in the same class as HYP.
So when we use Ivy here, I think we should mean only HYPW. The rest of the Ivy League is just a (bad) sports conference.
Before your piss all over
Before your piss all over yourself in righteous anger do some research on Princeton. And yes, I'm sure most Tigers would kick your ass. Harvard is overrated.
Re:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/2002/02/08/edtwof2.htm
There were almost no comparative statistics in that article.
It's in the opinion section
This site
We don't need a website. We
Amen to that, armchair.
The problem here is that
Isn't this iBankingOasis.com... not CollegeConfidential.com?
agreed
Financial Modeling Training
Interview Guides
WSO Resume Review