There is something wrong with our college admission process, as well as the college system. I think a lot of kids now believe that if you don't get into an Ivy or close to that then there really isn't any point of even going to college. There needs to be a move to explain to kids that although the name on the diploma isn't unimportant it isn't the only thing that matters. I've looked at a lot of resumes in my current job, and I glance at where people went to college but it doesn't really thrill me as much as their internship or work experience. I am in the process of selecting grad schools for a PhD program and I applied to 8 schools, I got into 4 schools. I got denied from the very elite schools (Harvard, Stanford, Cornell), but after visiting Penn State and finding professors there that seem amazing I am perfectly content (I visit Madison this weekend so we will see what they have to offer). Of course applying to graduate school is very different than undergraduate, but I do think that the principle stands, name recognition isn't the most important part of going to college. Sidebar: I did went to a fairly unrecognized undergraduate that has now moved up in the rankings which I've been told makes my diploma worth more but I have not seen the return yet.
I went to a school that nobody's heard of my for undergrad (because I was a fuckup in high school, and didn't have a lot of options), and then I went to the same school for my PhD (because I loved it, even though I had lots of options). When you submit journal articles for peer review, they don't ask where you went to school. I can say that going to a non-elite university has not hindered me professionally at all. But to your choices, PSU and UW aren't exactly light weights. Those are great schools that have tons of amazing professors. IMO, the choice for grad school shouldn't be, "Is this a good school?" It should be, "Does this potential thesis adviser's work seem like it will keep me interested all day and on nights and weekends for the next five years?" That's really the issue. If you work on a project that you love and is relevant to the world, you will do great no matter where you are.
Granted I'm not a PhD in anything and far from it, I work in a pretty high level of IT infrastructure/architecture, and NO ONE asks me in interviews where I went to school. All I have is a 2 year AAS degree in computer networking from a local tech/community college, but all that matters in interviews is my experience... which is pretty damn good. No one gives a crap that I don't have a 4 year degree in computer science, they look at my experience with large companies and rapid promotional progress, and that's all they care about. School definitely does matter in the sciences and PhD level stuff that you guys are doing, but for most people in this country in many professions, "working you way up" and getting by on experience is far more important. Sure, a degree can help you get that first job, but that's about it. In my field, I do very well for myself, spent little money on college, never went into debt, and got out into the work force a couple years earlier than my peers. It was win win all around, and I'm making more than most people who go to school for 8 years + (no offense intended). The college system is broken in many aspects. For some fields, it makes sense, for others, it's a waste of money in many cases.they don't ask where you went to school
True, I guess I meant more like Doctors/Surgeons/Medical PhD professionals who many do go into it for the money. But the hard sciences, yeah, everyone I met going for that is doing it for the passion which I have nothing but respect for.
Yea totally agree, it has just taken a while for me to get there. I had my heart initially set on Cornell based on some professors there and thought I had a good chance of getting in. It was my visit to Penn State and talk with professors around then (including a very nice professor at Irvine) that helped me to begin to realize exactly what you are saying. Out of curiosity whats your PhD in?
While I was reading this article, I was totally agreeing with everything the writer had to say. But then I read the original piece by Suze Lee Weiss, and it's clear that Caity Weaver completely misinterpreted something that was supposed to be humorous. My low opinion of Gawker is reinforced.
I think the young Weiss' piece was part humor, but also I think it was very bitter. And Weaver's commentary is spot-on. I think the commentary that's missing is a whole-scale reevaluation of the degree farm ecosystem that college is slowly becoming/already is. College debt has outgrown credit card debt. And is everyone better off for it? University's have benefitted, some part of the collective unconscious desire to further and further educate ourselves is being nourished. But let's face it, school is less and less about learning, more about giving out passing grades, creating a culture that says intelligence=degree, degree=intelligence. And that degree costs more and more every year.