Choosing the Right College - The Hidden Effect That Changes Everything
Вставка
- Опубліковано 9 чер 2024
- Choosing the Right College - The Hidden Effect That Changes Everything
This is part two of a three-part series centered around "Choosing Your College"...
If you missed part one here is the link to view it: • Choosing Your College ...
Check out my latest training: collegeguidepro.net/webinar-si...
Please subscribe to make sure you don't miss part three (I would also greatly appreciate it!).
Timestamps:
00:00 The effect of the student body
01:49 Hartwick or Harvard?
05:25 Relative Position vs Absolute Position
08:52 Objections Mr. Gladwell
10:17 A Product of environment?
While the cost is often the most asked question surrounding higher education there is a growing movement of students more concerned about a universities student body.
How will the student body affect my college experience?
How will the student body affect my life?
It's not often you hear Hartwick and Harvard Mentioned in the same breath. One of these schools is graduating students at a much higher rate than the other. Why is that?
Well, it has much to do with the relative position a student holds within a student body. Many talented students are making it into highly ranked schools, only to run out of scholastic energy and drop out. Much of this is due to the relative positioning of the student.
Students who have spent much of their scholastic career atop the rankings in their respective schools find it difficult to keep motivated once they make it into a school full of individuals as talented as themselves.
On the flip side when these students attended less selective schools and remained atop their educational class, their chance of dropping out decreased drastically.
In this video, we will examine this growing concern as we follow sample student Jake from Hartwick to Harvard.
Michael MacKelvie
Founder, College Guide Pro
KEYWORDS
choosing your college, college rankings, how to choose a college, college advice, expert advice, expert opinion, ranking colleges, college ranking, how to pick a college, choosing a college, the art of choosing a college, advice for choosing a college, things to consider when choosing a college, how to pick a college to attend, college rankings pros, college rankings importance, Student body, Harvard
#collegedecision #collegechoice #Chosingacollege #college #harvard #highereducation #graduation
This is insane how small the view count is, I thought this was a multi-million subscriber channel, the production quality is so high-quality
my name is jacob and as a math student i had to choose between harvard and wash u and went to harvard. just graduated in may. deeply regret my decision lol this vid is calling me out
mostly bcause of the student body though. fortunately i was in the top third of students so i was fine, but saw so many ppl get overwhelmed bcause of this and was a toxic environment
I’m not gonna lie I’ve never heard anybody around me bring up schools student bodies . But great video
It often comes up in an indirect way (ex:“I want to go to ___ selective school because I want to be around other talented kids, and grow my build a better network”).
We 100% picked up on that while touring schools and what would be the right fit for your sons.
really changing my entire perspective, thank you for this video, the production is AMAZING!
Thank you! Glad to hear it was helpful.
Really enjoyed this video. As an athletic coach, I discuss college choices with my athletes always telling them to find the best programs with their major, first. I often have to challenge their assumptions about college. Also, we discuss that it should be more difficult and they'll have to work hard, especially if they intend on being an athlete as well.
A different thought about relative vs absolute ranking: we often determine our own confidence in an ability based on whether we think we can accomplish something at all, or to a "high enough" proficiency to meet our marker for "success." This determination often incorporates the results of those around us- thus, relative ranking. Dr. Susan Harter coined the term "perceived competence" to describe this phenomenon in educational research; to wit- Michael MacKelvie didn't perceive himself to have competency in math, so he didn't think he was good at it and self-selected out of it (until a math test proved otherwise!).
This is because popular departments like CS have not been given enough funding if any for that matter to keep up with their increasing popularity. So schools will purposefully weed out applicants by making their CS courses in the first two years arbitrarily hard. One simple solution is for colleges to have funding for departments dependent on the number of students that take their courses, but that would never happen.
Facts!!!
Great video, keep up the great work!
super high quality man
Thank you!
Such an important and overlooked aspect to be considered when looking into colleges. After seeing both ends of the spectrum I could not agree more!
A very good video, surprised it does not have more views.
Thank you! Just starting out with the vids…appreciate the kind words.
Very good video!
Thank you!
That's absolutely true
This is super interesting. I'm a HS junior right now actually in Boston touring colleges (I'm from LA). My counselor warned me about this a lot- aiming for the prestige over the quality. However, I'm still not sure how to feel. After touring top institutions, it appears like they still have the best opportunities and resources, no matter your relative position. Take MIT for example, which I toured yesterday. A current student described it as a plethora of opportunities for research and internships. It feels like the quality of these opportunities may not be available at other colleges of lower calibers.
Although, something to keep in mind is the competition for these offers. Competing against 500 MIT students is a whole lot different than competing against 500 UMass students (no offense to UMass). The question is, does the chance to chance to standout against peers overweigh the chance to get the best internships/research? The answer may be unclear.
A lot to consider...top institutions may have resources - but, from the data I have examined (and personal experience working with over a hundred families) - we tend to overweight where we go to college, and underweight the importance of HOW we go to college. It's as if we assume we will go to college in the exact same manner, regardless of the institution...which, according to the data, doesn't appear to be true. It would seem that there is a definite advantage to sitting atop of a hierarchy, even if it it's a less-selective school (not MIT in your case...). Another assumption is the competition will push us further (being surrounded by the more talented kids)...perhaps...but there might be a point of diminishing returns here (ex: burnout, or studying just to keep with the curve). A lot to think about...I usually lean towards being the top of the hierarchy of a less selective school, but it's case by case.
Hey Mason. From personal experience, I can attest to everything that Michael said. I am a 24 yr old graduate student in the Earth and Planetary Science department at the University of New Mexico and have used this exact "big fish little pond" philosophy to my advantage in both undergrad and grad school applications. TLDR; Go to a school that makes you pay the least tuition, that you will likely be the highest achieving in, all else being equal.
College: I applied and was accepted to four schools: UVA, Virginia Tech, George Mason, and James Madison. All in Virginia. UVA is one of the top public schools in the country. Tech is also very well regarded. JMU and GMU are still good, but do not have the prestige or low acceptance rates of the other two schools. HOWEVER, I received a 3/4 tuition scholarship to JMU, while I did not get a scholarship to any of the other schools. As a result, and knowing this "big fish little pond" theory (along with liking the school's location and vibe and enjoying being heavily recruited), I went to JMU.
This was the best decision I have made in my entire life. I went to high school in an affluent, well-funded school and did the IB diploma. I left there thinking that I was smart, but not necessarily confident in my abilities. I am going to be very blunt here. Do not underestimate the "high" (ego and confidence boost) that you get from being the best student in class. I finished at JMU (where I studied Geology in the Honors College w minors in Math and Stats) with the highest GPA in my department and won five or six department awards in my time there (these had small financial compensation as well, probably about $3000 in total?). I also had the chance to do research with THREE professors and have summer funding to do research in two summers. I got to effectively choose each professor that I wanted to do research with and reject those I did not. I was the person that all my peers went to for help, which also helped me learn the material better. In addition, I was the Vice President of Club Table Tennis and held leadership roles in Geology Club and the Geology Honors Society.
Would I have had these opportunities had I gone to UVA? I don't know. But, I do know several of my high school classmates who I considered to be at a similar caliber as myself who went on to drop out of far more prestigious schools. And again, I cannot emphasize this enough: The feeling of being the best at something (again, relative to those who you know) is just so fucking awesome. It makes you WANT to study and work hard.
Grad school: I applied to UT Austin, Arizona, and New Mexico. I was accepted to UT and UNM and was denied from AZ. UT is a top 5 school for Geology, UNM is top 50. Both good schools, but UT Austin is clearly "better". However, once again, applying to a "worse" school afforded me a pretty sizable financial reward. My initial assistantship offer at UT and UNM was both about $20000/yr (oh yeah you might not know this. In STEM grad schools, they pay you to go to school). However, I received a ~$9000 fellowship from UNM because I was one of the top two students that was accepted to the program.
Now, remember that 3/4 tuition scholarship? I was lucky enough to have a college fund (529 plan), but I didn't really use much of it in college since I wasn't paying much tuition. I was able to supplement my income in grad school with the college fund, such that I could afford a nicer apartment in a nicer part of town than most grad students live in.
Again, I was a top student in my class (grad school is different, everybody is very motivated and grades don't particularly matter, so it's hard and kinda meaningless to do direct comparisons). However, I am almost finished with my Master's, and my professor wanted me back for the PhD so much that he applied for and got funding to pay me double my original salary (the max allowable for a grad student at UNM).
In summary, the big fish little pond theory, at least for me, has worked out splendidly. Harvard might have more opportunities for EVERYONE, but that doesn't mean that it has more opportunities for you (if you are just the top student in your class and you think you can be a big fish at Harvard, then by all means do that). I have been given many opportunities, both financial and otherwise, BECAUSE I was the top student in my class.
As a caveat, I will admit that I am a very competitive person. Maybe you do not care about your relative ranking and you won't get the same "high" that I got by being a top student, but I wouldn't count it out.
Good luck in your future endeavors.
Damn, I didn't understand much of that. You're obviously very smart. Good luck at MIT! 😊
4:53 HOLY MOLY this is actually VERY surprising!! 😮😳
Great insight - way to challenge Malcom Gladwell.
I agree with most of what you said about diligence and all and depends on thr students him or her self. But i think you forgot the intangibles which is the alum network or ppl call it the Harvard Connection. It is these that edges out the rest.
Also schools like MIT or CMU cs program are a different caliber than regular school.. i can attest to that. Thats why employers recruits mostly from those schools and requires gpa of only 3 out of 4 minimum to acreen candidates while other regular schools require a 3.2 or 3.5 out of 4 gpa because they know the quality of the course and course load is harder and more intense..and kids there can adapt to that stress level and wont quit as easily whereas you dont know if the kids at the regulars school will quit easily.
Also the thing about SAT and grades is not only because of hard work. They must have brains to be able to ace them becausei they understand the mateials super well to be able to complete the test within the time frame given. Of course there needles in the haysack or even exceptions but im talking about in general here.
I would watch the first video I did in the series, as I addressed this exact question (regarding the alumni network). When the correct controls are applied to eliminate a selection bias, researchers in every legitimate study (I have read the whitepapers for Krueger/Dale, and others) found a difference in income that was "statistically insignificant"...meaning, when isolated as a singular variable, the college did not affect future incomes (the most talented kids are going to Harvard/MIT...so, they are already more likely to make more than others).
When speaking broadly like this, it's best to avoid narratives (the "Harvard Connection is always worth it" and look at the data). Again, I think you will find the first video I did in this series helpful here...
Not sure if your other points are questions or objections, but those were also addressed in both videos.
Can we talk about how universities with higher acceptance rates get worse reputations why is that? If every student went to Harvard or any other ivy league institution, would it have the same amount of allure as it does now?
It's obvious. If a student has a high acceptance rate, then it means that it takes damn near anyone, no matter how bad their GPA or SAT is. You'll be around a lot of dopey and lazy students
Can you give me a shout out. I really love this
Appreciate it, thank you!
Feels like you watched Gladwells talk then just copy pasted his ideas into this video and talked slower while adding nothing new. At least link the original.
I cited him and his video (but will provide a link now)...curious though...what about the three minutes of me animating/creating an example of his point, the five minutes where I provided own personal anecdote/context on the theory of relative deprivation, and the two minutes of objections to Gladwell (where I call out his oversimplification, which he is known for)? Was this copied and pasted from him? Maybe you didn't watch that far - (it's okay if you didn't, I bounce from vids all the time). Appreciate the feedback/criticism, just want to make sure I understand.
Anyways, here is the link if it's helpful: ua-cam.com/video/7J-wCHDJYmo/v-deo.html
@@michaelmackelvie Nah watched your entire video good job finding the link.
We do not have a shortage in STEM graduates, nor doctors, nor anything that isn't wildly multiplying in price. STEM grads make very pedestrian wages. The idea of a shortage is propaganda from big tech companies that benefit from substituting cheaper skilled foreign labor they can (and therefore do) exploit on H1B work visas. It makes it easier to support their scheme. I'm pro-immigrant. But also pro-truth. Let's not lie about shortages that don't exist.
Didn't a whole bunch of students graduate Harvard after frauding their way in through fake sports? How difficult can that school actually be? :)