Private 4 year schools that aren't Top 25 ranked...

[mcmilljb]

Originally posted by: KnickNut3
I would rather attend (or hire someone who attended) Michigan, Virginia, UC Berkeley, even Rutgers, UT-Austin, UNC-CH, or UCLA over a majority of private schools that charge $40k+ just because they can. Judging by my high school class, the top kids went to top 20 schools, the next level went to the honors programs of state schools, and the average kids got mommy and daddy to pony up $200k to attend a private out-of-state (next state over) college that costs triple an in-state education. And the state-school kids are now have better jobs while the private school kids live at home.

They don't charge a lot because they can. They charge a lot because they have to. They don't get funding from the state. It takes a lot of money to run a top notch school.

 

[MrDudeMan]

I went to a small, unranked private school because I loved the atmosphere and the class size. My college experience was exactly what I wanted it to be. My professors were very friendly and always held their office hours, spoke perfect English, and my classes typically had < 10 people. Tons of 1 on 1 attention. I got a job before I even graduated and 2 high profile internships during the summers. It was well worth the money in every way. I have nothing against state schools but after visiting both, the choice was easy. I didn't want to be a statistic. My professors literally cared what happened to me and went the extra mile to help me at any cost.

 

[sjwaste]

Originally posted by: Freshgeardude

Originally posted by: sjwaste
Depends, maybe that school has a particular specialty. Maybe the individual didn't get into a less expensive school. Or maybe they visited, liked the atmosphere, students, etc, and decided to take out the loans or had folks that would pay for it.

School choices aren't always all about rank.

private schools 99999999999999999.999999999/1 are much harder to get into then the state schools.

as long as you have a 3.0 gpa and at least 500 on each SAT you will get in any state school.




OP- maybe they got a full scholarship there. only reason I would go to a school like that

That's not necessarily true. Look at some of the states with some well known, very good state (public) universities.

A 3.0 and 1000 SAT (I took it on the 1600 point scale, I guess 1500 on today's test) will not get you into the following public schools in my state:

University of Virginia
College of William and Mary
James Madison University
Virginia Tech

You might get into George Mason University, but it's not likely. The SAT is probably enough for JMU, Tech, and GMU, but the 3.0 certainly isn't.

 

[sjwaste]

Originally posted by: Freshgeardude

well ya, I misplaced my words in that post. you will get into A state school, not any. Here in florida, I like to make three levels of state schools. FIU at the bottom, then UCF, then UF.

FIU- you get a 3.0 and 500 on each, your in.
UCF- 3.2 and 550 on each your in
UF- jumps to 4.0 and 600 on each and your in

No offense, but Florida isn't exactly known for the strength of its public colleges and universities.

States like California and Virginia have some public schools you couldn't sniff with those scores.

 

[sjwaste]

Originally posted by: Syringer

Originally posted by: sjwaste
Depends, maybe that school has a particular specialty. Maybe the individual didn't get into a less expensive school. Or maybe they visited, liked the atmosphere, students, etc, and decided to take out the loans or had folks that would pay for it.

School choices aren't always all about rank.

Most of these kids end up majoring in Psychology/History or something as worthless..

Ok, that's true. I went to law school with a lot of them, so I know

 

[TruePaige]

Originally posted by: sjwaste

Originally posted by: Freshgeardude

Originally posted by: sjwaste
Depends, maybe that school has a particular specialty. Maybe the individual didn't get into a less expensive school. Or maybe they visited, liked the atmosphere, students, etc, and decided to take out the loans or had folks that would pay for it.

School choices aren't always all about rank.

private schools 99999999999999999.999999999/1 are much harder to get into then the state schools.

as long as you have a 3.0 gpa and at least 500 on each SAT you will get in any state school.




OP- maybe they got a full scholarship there. only reason I would go to a school like that

That's not necessarily true. Look at some of the states with some well known, very good state (public) universities.

A 3.0 and 1000 SAT (I took it on the 1600 point scale, I guess 1500 on today's test) will not get you into the following public schools in my state:

University of Virginia
College of William and Mary
James Madison University
Virginia Tech

You might get into George Mason University, but it's not likely. The SAT is probably enough for JMU, Tech, and GMU, but the 3.0 certainly isn't.

It is true. JMU turns away so many business students a year. They have courses that we like to call "filter courses" as they are just there to flunk out those who aren't willing to try that hard.

Higher general education reqs and GPA requirements, then you have Quantative Methods before you can get into the school of business which is a nice summary of all the general education stuff.

 

[sjwaste]

Originally posted by: TruePaige

It is true. JMU turns away so many business students a year. They have courses that we like to call "filter courses" as they are just there to flunk out those who aren't willing to try that hard.

Higher general education reqs and GPA requirements, then you have Quantative Methods before you can get into the school of business which is a nice summary of all the general education stuff.

You a current JMU student or Alum, Paige? I graduated from the COB.

I still remember Quantitative Methods (COB 291?). I was a math minor, so it wasn't too bad, but I remember having the absolute worst prof for that class and it was at 8am.

COB 300 was a clusterfuck too, but not many schools (any?) are doing anything like that.

 

[suse920]

This is going to blow your mind.
I got a full ride to a state school that isnt my own state.
OMGz !11111

 

[TruePaige]

Originally posted by: sjwaste

Originally posted by: TruePaige

It is true. JMU turns away so many business students a year. They have courses that we like to call "filter courses" as they are just there to flunk out those who aren't willing to try that hard.

Higher general education reqs and GPA requirements, then you have Quantative Methods before you can get into the school of business which is a nice summary of all the general education stuff.

You a current JMU student or Alum, Paige? I graduated from the COB.

I still remember Quantitative Methods (COB 291?). I was a math minor, so it wasn't too bad, but I remember having the absolute worst prof for that class and it was at 8am.

COB 300 was a clusterfuck too, but not many schools (any?) are doing anything like that.

Just finishing up my two year and preparing to transfer.

Thinking about going to MBC and then to JMU for my Master's as MBC might give me a pretty much full ride if I stay above a 3.5 GPA (over 17k in financial aid guaranteed)... (I went right into IT after school and got screwed for financial aid when I moved back to VA, so I couldn't afford to start up at JMU).

But as we all know, JMU is pretty much the premier business college in the reason (No 1 in the southeast.

COB 300 is a horrible course I hear.

Seriously, they get so many applicants to COB that the first few classes are just to drop people out. They really don't have the scalability there otherwise it looks like.

 

[wtfbbq]

Originally posted by: mcmilljb

Originally posted by: vi edit

Originally posted by: yh125d

Originally posted by: duragezic
State university is only $35k for 4 years? More like $80k.

Still a big difference though and I see your point. Also that can easily be $250k since it's not uncommon to go for 5 years for a BA/BS.

Varies with state. Oklahoma state for 4 years in the dorms is only about 40k

Cousin of mine pays about $27,000 a year for instate tuition for UofIL engineering.

Then your cousin is not considered in-state link

you can't live off of knowledge alone, so I'm guessing the extra money goes to cost of living, textbooks, etc. in CA most UC's are ~5k/semester for tuition, but 22-27k total depending on where you live, how much you spend on miscellaneous things and whatnot.

as for the question, there are plenty of reasons:

- they might cost less (financial aid through school, or other scholarships, e.g. athletic, religious, related to faculty)
- couldn't get into state school
- location
- specialty programs offered (major not available at other places, or fast track for post-bachelor's degree like a 5 year guaranteed masters)
- religious reasons (westmont, gordon, point loma, chapman, byu... although those aren't necessarily very religious)
- family reasons (legacy/family tradition)
- afraid of having a harder time at state school (grade deflation, larger classes, less flexibility in switching majors, budget cuts affected courses offered)

that being said, most people I know went just cause they had too much money to spend. *shrug*

 

[Quasmo]

I went to art school

 

[sjwaste]

Originally posted by: TruePaige

Just finishing up my two year and preparing to transfer.

Thinking about going to MBC and then to JMU for my Master's as MBC might give me a pretty much full ride if I stay above a 3.5 GPA (over 17k in financial aid guaranteed)... (I went right into IT after school and got screwed for financial aid when I moved back to VA, so I couldn't afford to start up at JMU).

But as we all know, JMU is pretty much the premier business college in the reason (No 1 in the southeast.

COB 300 is a horrible course I hear.

Seriously, they get so many applicants to COB that the first few classes are just to drop people out. They really don't have the scalability there otherwise it looks like.

The jr college transfer system in VA is really, really good. You're saving a lot of money by doing your gen ed requirements there and transferring.

Are you in-state now? I don't know anything about Mary Baldwin, other than I've driven past it a few times. JMU is pretty reasonable in-state, but it's hard to beat free.

JMU is a solid undergraduate business program. Surprisingly well-recognized, even when I moved back to the northeast for a while. UVA is probably still better, but even in-state tuition is rough there.

 

[Mo0o]

Sometimes kids can't get into the best public school in their state and the second choice is god awful.

I know in Washington, UW is a solid public school choice but eveyrthing else is a pile of shit so a lot of kid send up going to Whitman or Gonzaga

 

[AccruedExpenditure]

Originally posted by: Babbles
Seems like the OP - and many other people - seem to to misunderstand that there can be many reasons to choose one school over another. Simply put, not all college experiences are equal.

Personally I view college as a means to an end, demonstrating your ability to learn basic information in a field that may or may not be related to your future career. Regardless of the public/private status of a school you apply for the same jobs and grad schools when you're finished.

I understand some people have a preference for smaller class sizes but I guess it's hard for me to rationalize paying ~ 2 times more for college for smaller class sizes when the end result is the same especially when the Alumni networks at the non top-25 private schools don't a magnitude of doors more than an average state school

Then again I went to UCB so my view might be a bit skewed.

 

[Gibsons]

Considered from another point of view - most of the people who are really interested in teaching at the college level would rather teach at a private college than at large public ones. So, typically (certainly not always) you get a more involved/motivated prof with a smaller class.

A lot of coursework at public places is taught by TA's or in class sizes of 100+ or by someone who'd really rather be someplace else.

 

[kranky]

I don't understand where the concept came from that says if you don't go to a top 10 or top 20 school you are wasting your money.

Do people think the graduates from the other 90% of schools can't ever get a decent job? It's not that tough in the hiring process to figure out who worked hard and is motivated and that counts a heck of a lot more than what the piece of paper says.

I'll always take someone who went to a state school, worked to pay for it him/herself, and is eager to work over someone with a "top school" degree who is unimpressive. And I've interviewed some of them - they think that degree from a top school is their free admission ticket to a huge salary and perks.

 

[stateofbeasley]

Originally posted by: kranky
I don't understand where the concept came from that says if you don't go to a top 10 or top 20 school you are wasting your money.

Where law schools are concerned, there is some truth to that. There are kids spending $150,000 on private diploma mills like Brooklyn Law School and Seton Hall, and they are 90-95% likely to find themselves in jobs that will not allow them to easily service this level of debt.

It all comes down to one simple truth: Know what you'll be paying when you graduate, and make sure you can afford it.


If people did the math, many third-tier (and many second-tier) law schools would go out of business. People would realize just how worthless a degree from these schools is relative to the debt burden.

 

[MrDudeMan]

Originally posted by: Syringer

Originally posted by: sjwaste
Depends, maybe that school has a particular specialty. Maybe the individual didn't get into a less expensive school. Or maybe they visited, liked the atmosphere, students, etc, and decided to take out the loans or had folks that would pay for it.

School choices aren't always all about rank.

Most of these kids end up majoring in Psychology/History or something as worthless..

You sure are an arrogant ass. I mean this isn't news to me, but for some reason this thread finally made me decide to say it (hopefully you are already aware of it).

 

[MrDudeMan]

Originally posted by: kranky
I don't understand where the concept came from that says if you don't go to a top 10 or top 20 school you are wasting your money.

Do people think the graduates from the other 90% of schools can't ever get a decent job? It's not that tough in the hiring process to figure out who worked hard and is motivated and that counts a heck of a lot more than what the piece of paper says.

I'll always take someone who went to a state school, worked to pay for it him/herself, and is eager to work over someone with a "top school" degree who is unimpressive. And I've interviewed some of them - they think that degree from a top school is their free admission ticket to a huge salary and perks.

Exactly. Pimping your school ranking makes no sense to me. College is like a bank - you only get out what you put in. I went to an unranked school and worked my butt off. I'm not the smartest or the quickest but I put my all into it and did fine after school.

 

[miniMUNCH]

My BS in chemical engineering from Cal St. Polytechnic University cost me a grand total of 11k (I lived at home during college). Aside from my freshman biology course, which had over a 100 people, all of my other courses were 35 students or under.

All of my core science and engineering courses were 15 - 25 students. All of my profs in chemical engineering held several hours of office hours every day (open door policy).... over my years in the program I spent numerous hours with my profs, sometimes talking tech, and other times history or politics or just telling funny jokes and funny stories.

Two of the prof had department parties for the juniors and seniors at their respective houses.

Now 'campus life' sucked hard core @ Cal Poly Pomona. But I had tons of friends around since I stayed local for college and several of my friends did the same.... so we had an awesome time.

I wish i could go back and do my undergrad over again exactly as before... it was so fun.

 

[GoSharks]

Originally posted by: MrDudeMan

Originally posted by: kranky
I don't understand where the concept came from that says if you don't go to a top 10 or top 20 school you are wasting your money.

Do people think the graduates from the other 90% of schools can't ever get a decent job? It's not that tough in the hiring process to figure out who worked hard and is motivated and that counts a heck of a lot more than what the piece of paper says.

I'll always take someone who went to a state school, worked to pay for it him/herself, and is eager to work over someone with a "top school" degree who is unimpressive. And I've interviewed some of them - they think that degree from a top school is their free admission ticket to a huge salary and perks.

Exactly. Pimping your school ranking makes no sense to me. College is like a bank - you only get out what you put in. I went to an unranked school and worked my butt off. I'm not the smartest or the quickest but I put my all into it and did fine after school.

Put in the same effort at a top school and you may be doing even better. Then again your best may not be good enough to cut it at a top school..

 

[Mo0o]

Originally posted by: MrDudeMan

Originally posted by: kranky
I don't understand where the concept came from that says if you don't go to a top 10 or top 20 school you are wasting your money.

Do people think the graduates from the other 90% of schools can't ever get a decent job? It's not that tough in the hiring process to figure out who worked hard and is motivated and that counts a heck of a lot more than what the piece of paper says.

I'll always take someone who went to a state school, worked to pay for it him/herself, and is eager to work over someone with a "top school" degree who is unimpressive. And I've interviewed some of them - they think that degree from a top school is their free admission ticket to a huge salary and perks.

Exactly. Pimping your school ranking makes no sense to me. College is like a bank - you only get out what you put in. I went to an unranked school and worked my butt off. I'm not the smartest or the quickest but I put my all into it and did fine after school.

For some really competitive fields liek IBanking or consulting, the top firms only recruit from the best colleges. If you want to be teh best, might as well be the big fish in the big pond rather than a huge fish in a tiny pond that no one is looking at. I never understood examples like kranky's. If someone couldnt hack it at a top 10 school but can do pretty well at a state school, they're essentially masking their lack of ability among weaker competition. On the other hand, if the kid is alreayd really smart, they'll likely do just as well at a top 10 school, in which case, a 4.0 at Harvard looks a lot better than a 4.0 at the local state school (please dont bring up specific majors/programs, im just making a generalization here)

I know the reputation of your undergrad is also a factor when applying to medical school as well. And for getting jobs after graduate programs, the name of the school on the diploman is a huge factor as well.

 

[kranky]

Originally posted by: Mo0o

Originally posted by: MrDudeMan

Originally posted by: kranky
I don't understand where the concept came from that says if you don't go to a top 10 or top 20 school you are wasting your money.

Do people think the graduates from the other 90% of schools can't ever get a decent job? It's not that tough in the hiring process to figure out who worked hard and is motivated and that counts a heck of a lot more than what the piece of paper says.

I'll always take someone who went to a state school, worked to pay for it him/herself, and is eager to work over someone with a "top school" degree who is unimpressive. And I've interviewed some of them - they think that degree from a top school is their free admission ticket to a huge salary and perks.

Exactly. Pimping your school ranking makes no sense to me. College is like a bank - you only get out what you put in. I went to an unranked school and worked my butt off. I'm not the smartest or the quickest but I put my all into it and did fine after school.

For some really competitive fields liek IBanking or consulting, the top firms only recruit from the best colleges. If you want to be teh best, might as well be the big fish in the big pond rather than a huge fish in a tiny pond that no one is looking at. I never understood examples like kranky's. If someone couldnt hack it at a top 10 school but can do pretty well at a state school, they're essentially masking their lack of ability among weaker competition. On the other hand, if the kid is alreayd really smart, they'll likely do just as well at a top 10 school, in which case, a 4.0 at Harvard looks a lot better than a 4.0 at the local state school (please dont bring up specific majors/programs, im just making a generalization here)

I know the reputation of your undergrad is also a factor when applying to medical school as well. And for getting jobs after graduate programs, the name of the school on the diploman is a huge factor as well.

I don't agree with that. 80% of Harvard students graduate with honors. That being the case, I imagine there are plenty of 4.0 grads. Conventional wisdom is that getting in to Harvard is the hardest part, and you can coast through after that. It may impress some people, but not everybody.

I go back to my original point. In 1980, only 23% of large company CEOs were Ivy League grads, and this number is declining. In 2004, it was 10%. The whole "top school" thing is very overrated. People act like going to a middle-ranked school is a career suicide move and that's just not the case.

 

[Mo0o]

Originally posted by: kranky

Originally posted by: Mo0o

Originally posted by: MrDudeMan

Originally posted by: kranky
I don't understand where the concept came from that says if you don't go to a top 10 or top 20 school you are wasting your money.

Do people think the graduates from the other 90% of schools can't ever get a decent job? It's not that tough in the hiring process to figure out who worked hard and is motivated and that counts a heck of a lot more than what the piece of paper says.

I'll always take someone who went to a state school, worked to pay for it him/herself, and is eager to work over someone with a "top school" degree who is unimpressive. And I've interviewed some of them - they think that degree from a top school is their free admission ticket to a huge salary and perks.

Exactly. Pimping your school ranking makes no sense to me. College is like a bank - you only get out what you put in. I went to an unranked school and worked my butt off. I'm not the smartest or the quickest but I put my all into it and did fine after school.

For some really competitive fields liek IBanking or consulting, the top firms only recruit from the best colleges. If you want to be teh best, might as well be the big fish in the big pond rather than a huge fish in a tiny pond that no one is looking at. I never understood examples like kranky's. If someone couldnt hack it at a top 10 school but can do pretty well at a state school, they're essentially masking their lack of ability among weaker competition. On the other hand, if the kid is alreayd really smart, they'll likely do just as well at a top 10 school, in which case, a 4.0 at Harvard looks a lot better than a 4.0 at the local state school (please dont bring up specific majors/programs, im just making a generalization here)

I know the reputation of your undergrad is also a factor when applying to medical school as well. And for getting jobs after graduate programs, the name of the school on the diploman is a huge factor as well.

I don't agree with that. 80% of Harvard students graduate with honors. That being the case, I imagine there are plenty of 4.0 grads. Conventional wisdom is that getting in to Harvard is the hardest part, and you can coast through after that. It may impress some people, but not everybody.

I go back to my original point. In 1980, only 23% of large company CEOs were Ivy League grads, and this number is declining. In 2004, it was 10%. The whole "top school" thing is very overrated. People act like going to a middle-ranked school is a career suicide move and that's just not the case.

In certain fields its not overrated at all. Most of the bulge bracket banks and top consulting firms usually wont bother interviewing someone not from one of the top schools. Theres no enough spots to go around and they might as well just pick from the top schools. Sure you can work your way up, but why not just get in at the top

 

[Babbles]

Originally posted by: AccruedExpenditure

Originally posted by: Babbles
Seems like the OP - and many other people - seem to to misunderstand that there can be many reasons to choose one school over another. Simply put, not all college experiences are equal.

Personally I view college as a means to an end, demonstrating your ability to learn basic information in a field that may or may not be related to your future career. Regardless of the public/private status of a school you apply for the same jobs and grad schools when you're finished.

I understand some people have a preference for smaller class sizes but I guess it's hard for me to rationalize paying ~ 2 times more for college for smaller class sizes when the end result is the same especially when the Alumni networks at the non top-25 private schools don't a magnitude of doors more than an average state school

Then again I went to UCB so my view might be a bit skewed.

Frankly your idea of judgement schools as non top-25 is absolutely ridiculous. Whose judgement are you using? Even if you go by a "standard" of US News, then you still have a shit ton of fabulous schools that number greater than 25. It is the perpetuating notion that only top 25 (or top ten) schools are worth anything that is the fundamental problem. Granted I do realize law schools and some graduate programs do matter, but that is such a small percentage of the population it should be disregarded when generalizing the typical undergraduate experience.

Fundamentally I think that if you can not understand why somebody would choose to pay their money to have the college experience that they want, then this speaks far more about your small-mindedness than it does about the choices made by these students.

Originally posted by: Syringer

Originally posted by: sjwaste
Depends, maybe that school has a particular specialty. Maybe the individual didn't get into a less expensive school. Or maybe they visited, liked the atmosphere, students, etc, and decided to take out the loans or had folks that would pay for it.

School choices aren't always all about rank.

Most of these kids end up majoring in Psychology/History or something as worthless..

This is so ridiculously ignorant, Syringer should feel absolutely embarrassed for even thinking this much less stating it.