Click here to go to the NEW College Discussion Forum

Ok, the million dollar question when it comes to picking a college, to be a big fish at a mediocre school, with impressive grades and rank, or the small fish at a prestigious school where your grades and standings are only average. your thoughts?

By Usna_Reject (Usna_Reject) on Saturday, February 14, 2004 - 02:02 pm: Edit

hehe, sounds like the Simpsons. I'd rather be the big fish, but that's just me.

By Emilyp114 (Emilyp114) on Saturday, February 14, 2004 - 02:05 pm: Edit

I don't know too many people who would pass up going to a prestigious and great school, just so that they could feel like a 'big fish' at a mediocre one. In fact, I don't know any.

By Jonnieboy905 (Jonnieboy905) on Saturday, February 14, 2004 - 04:04 pm: Edit

what if prestigious schools are ivies plus a select few ie Duke etc., and mediocre are state colleges and universities

By Emilyp114 (Emilyp114) on Saturday, February 14, 2004 - 04:08 pm: Edit

To be honest, I think this is really a silly thing to be contemplating. As I said, who would prefer to go to a mediocre school, if they have a chance to attend a great one? Unless there are other considerations, such as financial aid packages, I think this is a no-brainer. Go to the great school. When you get to college, you'll see that no one goes around saying what their grades and rank are. No one knows. You're a student just like everyone else who got in. If the great school has the program you want, and you get accepted, why wouldn't you want to go there? *shrugs*

By Constellation35 (Constellation35) on Saturday, February 14, 2004 - 04:24 pm: Edit

Because it may be too challenging, and this in turn may mess up your chances of admission to a good graduate school, which is what matters most.

By Emilyp114 (Emilyp114) on Saturday, February 14, 2004 - 04:51 pm: Edit

If you have the stats to be accepted by an Ivy or other great school, then you certainly should have the capability to do well there.

By Northstarmom (Northstarmom) on Saturday, February 14, 2004 - 05:14 pm: Edit

There are students with great stats who could get into top schools, but don't want to. Despite their intellect and achievements, they may not enjoy academics that much, and may not want to work that hard. They may want to get good grades while coasting and partying in college.

There also are bright, accomplished students who lack self confidence and even though they would do fine in places like Ivies, they prefer going to a place where they would feel more comfortable because they'd know they were one of the smartest, most talented students. They are too scared to choose a big pond.

By Ndcountrygirl (Ndcountrygirl) on Saturday, February 14, 2004 - 05:24 pm: Edit

I live in ND and have the stats to attend about any school I would want to, ivy or any other prestigious university. But I am choosing to go to a state school because A) I don't want to be 2000 miles from home. and B) My family would never be able to afford it and I would be paying back loans my whole life!!!!!

Look at it this way...people don't go around saying their grades at college...well people also don't care what college your degree is from and it in no way makes you better at whatever profession you choose. Im going into veterinarian medicine, and I don't think 20 years from now my patients will stop to care where I received my schooling, as long as I do the job right!

By Northstarmom (Northstarmom) on Saturday, February 14, 2004 - 05:29 pm: Edit

Ndcountrygirl,
There are excellent colleges that are not 2,000 miles away from North Dakota. Some include University of Wisconsin, University of Michigan, Carleton, U of Chicago, Kenyan and Oberlin.

Many excellent colleges offer wonderful need-based aid and great merit scholarships, and your being from a state that is underrepresented would be a big plus for you when it comes to being considered for aid. As a girl from an underrepresented state who's planning on being a vet, many financial doors would open for you. if you happen to want to go out of state to an excellent college, you could do this without having many loans to pay back, possibly without having any loans to pay back.

By Farrahday (Farrahday) on Saturday, February 14, 2004 - 05:57 pm: Edit

I would go to the higher school, especially if your idea of mediocre is a state university. Though you would probably be much smarter than the average student at the mediocre school, it would still be difficult to be a really big fish, especially at the large state schools. State schools have honors programs, or attract students who don't want to spend a fortune on an undergrad school. You'd probably get better grades at the State U., but you're not guaranteed straight As, even if you could get into Harvard.

By Jamimom (Jamimom) on Saturday, February 14, 2004 - 06:09 pm: Edit

I know many kids who are big fish in small pools for many different reasons. My daughter is one of them; so was my niece. They wanted to be doctors and went to the school that gave them the best chance. Many other kids decide when they do not get into their first choice schools, to go to schools that offer merit scholarships rather that paying full freight for a school. Parents also often jump in at that time and balk at baying $45000 for say Syracuse, when Susquehanna has a lower sticker price and is throwing in a $10000 merit scholarship. And if the kid is prelaw, he might do a lot better at the smaller, less competitive school. Your grades and LSATs are the most important thing for law schools as grades and MCATS are for med school.
Also there are special programs in some schools that are highly regarded though the school may be relatively unknown. The Harrt School which is the performing arts division of The U of Hartford is an example.

By Fiza (Fiza) on Saturday, February 14, 2004 - 06:38 pm: Edit

This is the exact question I have been wrestling with the last few months. I guess I have to first see if I even get the chance to be a small fish
(my big fish schools have already "lured" me in)

Maybe I'll throw in my $.02 come April.

By Usna_Reject (Usna_Reject) on Saturday, February 14, 2004 - 07:10 pm: Edit

I understand your point Emily. It was also said earlier that being a big fish in a mediocre school would be hard to accomplish too. Anyways it seemed more like attending a school just to impress others and not because they have something special to offer you personally. If they did of course I wouldn't miss the opportunity.

By Lunanaut (Lunanaut) on Saturday, February 14, 2004 - 08:07 pm: Edit

I'm a high school senior who's been lucky enough to have gotten into CalTech; in the course of researching my decision I talked with a CalTech alumni who is now a professor at University of Oregon-- so he went to the big pool for undergrad, and now works at the small pool.

And he says that the experiences were completely different; even though they teach similar content at U Oregon as at CalTech (an interesting comment which seems to be true), he says that the big, and important, differences are the quality of the kids and professors-- for him, classroom learning went deeper into the topic, and half of his learning went on outside the classroom.

The flipside, which he also sees now that he works at U Oregon, is that when the profs see a 'big fish' at a small school like that, they pamper him with attention and research opportunities.

An MIT admisssions officer said that grad schools know the effect and adjust grades accordingly; for grad school admissions evidently you should still be 'taking the most challenging course load possible,' just like for undergrad.

hope this helped somebody-- or at least let them join my confusion in seeing both sides of the issue.

By Constellation35 (Constellation35) on Saturday, February 14, 2004 - 08:24 pm: Edit

If someone has a 3.1 GPA at Cornell they stand a low chance of admission to a good medical school. If a person has a 3.6 at Rutgers and the same MCAT scores as the Cornellian, wouldn't they choose the Rutgers guy?

By Jamimom (Jamimom) on Saturday, February 14, 2004 - 10:14 pm: Edit

That is pretty much the case. My niece's best friend from highschool was the salutatorian of her class. She took the heaviest course load possible at that school, excelled with ease, particularly compared to my niece who struggled with the math and science. The girl got stellar test scores, was a National Merit finalist and ended up at Cornell. My niece was waitlisted and chose to go to a small catholic school that had a med school affiliation. To everyone's surprise, she cleared the waitlist that summer. She was sorely tempted to go to Cornell. The prestige was one issue, the school itself another, plus her close friend was urging her mightily. I was miserably tempted to tell her to go. I had never heard of the school she was going to attend and though the med school deal sounded good when she applied, now with Cornell in the hand, I was having misgivings. Her brother told her straight out that she was out of her mind. He went to a cutthroat school with lots of premeds and did not think it was a good experience for her, and he was sure she would not do well enough to get into medschool. She needed to be nurtured through the courses.
Well, 4 years later, my niece was in med school and her best friend at Cornell after getting a 3.2 average at Cornell with C's in Organic or lab ended up going for a master's in hopes of snagging a recommendation from the medical committee. She is in her second year of this program, depressed and discouraged because they want her to stay a little longer. She needs to retake the MCATs (she did very well).
So, yes they would most likely choose the Rutgers guy, though a 3.6 is not a great gpa for med school. The Cornell guy probably would not even be applying with that average because he would not get a committee recommendation with that GPA. He would be doing postgrad work like my niece's friend is doing in an attempt to bring up those grades. Med school is not like college in that you don't just grab a sympathetic teacher for recs. Most schools have a committee and they write the recs for all of the med school candidates, and if they don't want to recommend you, well, it's a waste of time to apply. Your grades then go to a central source where they are sanitized and recalculated. Law school is pretty much the same process--often the law school will not even see the courses you have taken; only the grade and gpa show. Though there is a slight adjustment for the rigidity of your school, it is not going to change a 3.1 to a 3.6.

By Northstarmom (Northstarmom) on Saturday, February 14, 2004 - 10:37 pm: Edit

Janimom,
I am glad that things worked out for your niece's best friend. I have seen such situations not work out. For instance, the top colleges are used to sending lots of students to med school. For that reason, the professors know how to write appropriate recommendations and the students learn from each other and from professors exactly what they need to do to get to med school.
Things can be different at mediocre colleges that send few to med school. I used to teach at a college that was 3rd tier. One of the students whom I taught was one of the few who wished to go to med school, and was one of the best bio majors the school had ever had.

When she applied to med school, she had an attitude that was overly humble. For instane, in writing her application essays, she said that she had decided to apply to apply to specific med schools because of the services they offered med students who were academically struggling.

I had to tell her that med schools weren't interested in students who so lacked confidence that they were assuming they'd need remedial services. I also had to tell her that she needed to project confidence to the level that at her college would have been seen as arrogance even though it really was confidence.

She did get into med school, but if I hadn't gone out of my way to coach her, I don't think she would have made it even though she was capable,. In addition, her MCAT scores were mediocre, reflecting inadequate teaching, not a lack of studying or intellect. There really are major differences between scientists who teach at top universities and those who end up at second and third tier ones, particularly at universities and colleges that don't send lots of students to med school.

By Jamimom (Jamimom) on Saturday, February 14, 2004 - 10:51 pm: Edit

You bring up a good point. Just going to a noncompetitive college is not going to enhance your med school chances. The quality of the teaching and the difficulty of the material covered in the premed courses would show up in the MCATs. When I investigated programs for my girls, that was where I really focused. Though I did not care about the prestige of the school when evaluating it, I very carefully looked at how many of the kids who ENTERED their premed programs ended up in med school. Surprisingly, I had difficulties getting statistics of this sort from the big boy premed schools. They flat out would not give me those numbers saying that they do not track them. If you took the number of natural science type majors freshman year and compared it to the kids going to med school , you could come up with some sort of figure, and it was not good.
Niece's friend is not in med school. Still in limbo. Not a good situation for her. She is not happy being a biochem (I believe) grad student. She really wants to be a doctor. But she needs to up that average and get the school's rec.
The schools that tend to send a lot of kids to med school mostly have that committee system in place these days which pushes the kids along the process and triages them. The school simply will not recommend kids who don't make their mark so these kids are cut before they even apply. Med school acceptance rates are one of the most useless stats about a school because of these committees and how they work. Of course a school will have a high acceptancce rate if they gatekeep the apps.

By Maemay04 (Maemay04) on Sunday, February 15, 2004 - 05:01 pm: Edit

WHOAH... My brother is attending a regional state university. one of his professors went to the U of Wyoming and Yale. He claims that he is teaching the exact same thing at the little 4,000 student college as he was taught at both U of W and Yale. The only difference in colleges is lifestyle classes. If you think you can afford to fit in with the type of money that goes to the ivies, then go to the ivies. Personally, I don't want to fit in with the rich kids, so I'm going to a small-town state university. But that doesn't mean I'm not getting an education.

By Jonnieboy905 (Jonnieboy905) on Monday, February 16, 2004 - 12:27 am: Edit

Good Call Maemay, i really would like to focus on my own education and not have to worry about some stuck up guy pestering me about my grades, but how much do you think businesses look at the flashy name of the college opposed to your grades?

By Zephyrmaster (Zephyrmaster) on Monday, February 16, 2004 - 03:36 am: Edit

I'm planning to be an infintesmally small fish at Chicago.

I would rather challenge myself to my limits, then cruise, like I have been doing... or so I think, I could be wrong . Crusing is nice... ah...

By Haon (Haon) on Monday, February 16, 2004 - 03:04 pm: Edit

uh...there are less "rich kids" at many Ivies than at many state universities. Most of the Ivies are extremely generous with aid and most have over 1/2 of their student body on some sort of aid (and the average aid package is very generous).

As for big fish or small fish, you're making the assumption that you'll work equally as hard at either school...that's a false assumption. At a better school you'll be surrounded by better peers and be pushed to work much harder...thus you'll end up doing better (adjusted for school differences) than you would as a big fish. Also, one of the largest parts of college is learning and you learn as much from your fellow students outside of class as you do from your profs inside of class.

Either way you're going to be trying to be a big fish...why limit yourself to a worse institution? The answer's easy--go to the better school.

By Maemay04 (Maemay04) on Saturday, February 28, 2004 - 01:21 pm: Edit

But what, necessarily, is the better school?

Does more money really mean a better education? If simply putting more money into education worked, many of our states wouldn't continue to have the problems they've had. It's not what you pay to go, it's how the institution uses the money.

And as to whether or not they look at the college's "flashy" name or grades, I don't know... I've heard both sides and heard both views... My dad used to own a petroleum company, he didn't necessarily look at where they went to school or their grades, he asked the questions about the industry... He always said that just because you crammed and got an A doesn't mean you remember or understand the material. However, a high GPA does help when you are even in everything else with another candidate...