[gyardley]

Quality of education varies with the professor, as always, and what you get depends on how hard you work.

The Ivy League - and other high-prestige schools like Stanford - are primarily useful for the connections you make and the status they convey to others. On many people, knowing that you went to [prestigious school here] has a "these are not the droids you're looking for" effect that comes in handy all over the place, even in areas totally unrelated to your education.

[jimt67]

While quality of education varies with the professor, I would argue that it also varies with the student...possibly even more so.

Let's assume Instructor A teaches Introduction to Nordic Studies at a non-selective university. Two of the factors that control the design of that course (there are many, I'm just isolating two) would be: -the instructor -the students

In ideal conditions, the course iteratively develops into some dynamic equilibrium where aggregate student learning is optimal (yes, I realize this is fantasy). Replace those non-selective students with students from a highly-selective university, while keeping the same instructor. Imagine how different the course might develop.

From a learning standpoint, if you are a student that is talented enough to be admitted to a highly-selective university, the latter course would likely result in you learning more. In reality, there are a lot of other factors that impact the growth and development of any individual student, but all things being equal, if you are a smarty, you will probably learn more in a class with other smarties.

[impendia]

> The Ivy League - and other high-prestige schools like Stanford - are primarily useful for the connections you make and the status they convey to others.

I emphatically disagree.

I taught math at Stanford for three years as a postdoc, and got a permanent job at a second-tier state school. The Stanford students are getting a WAAAAY better education.

A lot of students here are weakly prepared, uninterested in academics, and/or have burdensome part time jobs. (I was amazed at how many full-time students here also work 30 hours a week.) This means the expectations are lower, the peer pressure to succeed is not there, and teachers can't get very far in their syllabi. We do okay, but we sure as heck don't compare to Stanford.

For me as an undergrad the choice of schools would have made a major difference. I always depended at least a little on being pushed by others -- those lucky few that do not can probably thrive anywhere.