10-18-2020, 09:18 AM
I'm glad I was applying for college more than 50 years ago and not today. I would guess the population of the country has doubled since then and how much have spaces in top schools increased in the same period? The one frequent remark I heard at my last Stanford class reunion was how we didn't think we could be admitted today.
Growing up in the Bay Area back in the day, the academic pecking order was pretty much Stanford, then Berkeley, then the other UC's, the Cal St schools (with SJSU first), then Foothill. There were some outliers that tended mostly to reflect family or religious ties. But the Bay Area then was just as provincial as anywhere else. During my 4 years in HS, we sent at least 12 to Stanford and only 1 to an Ivy.
Back in the day, I'm sure my Stanford undergraduate degree initially opened a lot more doors, and especially in the Bay Area. It looked good on a resume applying for a job at Hewlett-Packard, especially when Bill and Dave were still alive and roaming the bullpens on Page Mill Rd. But as we all know, there's a lot to be done after you get to that open door. So I look at it as an entry point and not much more.
When my daughter was applying for college, I really did have to pause to think if $200-250K would be worth it for a Stanford degree. She didn't get in, but she went to Berkeley (as did my dad) and had a great experience there.
Through the years I've observed a lot of helicopter parents and have a lot of mixed feelings about that. They all want the best for their kids but so many of them just don't get it. They see grades as the only metric and forget that top schools have the pick of the litter and that well-rounded students win the tie-breaker every time.
Being old school, I myself don't get it when I meet a student and they are majoring in "business." Just always seemed to me that undergrad years are the perfect time and opportunity to expand and explore your knowledge in different directions. (When I later went back for an MBA, the business majors had a head start in the fundamental accounting and finance courses, but that was about it.)
Growing up in the Bay Area back in the day, the academic pecking order was pretty much Stanford, then Berkeley, then the other UC's, the Cal St schools (with SJSU first), then Foothill. There were some outliers that tended mostly to reflect family or religious ties. But the Bay Area then was just as provincial as anywhere else. During my 4 years in HS, we sent at least 12 to Stanford and only 1 to an Ivy.
Back in the day, I'm sure my Stanford undergraduate degree initially opened a lot more doors, and especially in the Bay Area. It looked good on a resume applying for a job at Hewlett-Packard, especially when Bill and Dave were still alive and roaming the bullpens on Page Mill Rd. But as we all know, there's a lot to be done after you get to that open door. So I look at it as an entry point and not much more.
When my daughter was applying for college, I really did have to pause to think if $200-250K would be worth it for a Stanford degree. She didn't get in, but she went to Berkeley (as did my dad) and had a great experience there.
Through the years I've observed a lot of helicopter parents and have a lot of mixed feelings about that. They all want the best for their kids but so many of them just don't get it. They see grades as the only metric and forget that top schools have the pick of the litter and that well-rounded students win the tie-breaker every time.
Being old school, I myself don't get it when I meet a student and they are majoring in "business." Just always seemed to me that undergrad years are the perfect time and opportunity to expand and explore your knowledge in different directions. (When I later went back for an MBA, the business majors had a head start in the fundamental accounting and finance courses, but that was about it.)