- Joined
- Sep 8, 2002
- Messages
- 33
- Reaction score
- 1
happiness (location-wise) vs. reputation, discuss . . .
how important is brand name?
- Thread starter nooreen
- Start date
- Joined
- May 24, 2002
- Messages
- 644
- Reaction score
- 0
Reputation doesn't mean much to me. If I were to choose a program based on reputation, it would be totally different from where I have the best "gut feeling." And both of those places are different from the place that I think has the best "scene" for my emotional well-being. Yeah, I am torn right now.
I thought I had decided to go to MUSC. I have a rotation lined up this summer, I was talking to realtors-basically setting my life up. Then, Mayo pops back in my life like this pesky ex-boyfriend. I thought we had a good thing, then he dumped me (waitlist). Now he wants to get back together. There is a young researcher @ Mayo who I would love to work with (doing a project very similar to the one I have lined up for my summer rotation at MUSC). I am really having a problem with leaving the security and warmth of charleston behind. So I am sleeping on it and getting input from friends. Any advice is appreciated.
So what is your delimma Nooreen?
I thought I had decided to go to MUSC. I have a rotation lined up this summer, I was talking to realtors-basically setting my life up. Then, Mayo pops back in my life like this pesky ex-boyfriend. I thought we had a good thing, then he dumped me (waitlist). Now he wants to get back together. There is a young researcher @ Mayo who I would love to work with (doing a project very similar to the one I have lined up for my summer rotation at MUSC). I am really having a problem with leaving the security and warmth of charleston behind. So I am sleeping on it and getting input from friends. Any advice is appreciated.
So what is your delimma Nooreen?
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2002
- Messages
- 685
- Reaction score
- 0
Hmmm.... I understand your dilemma.
Unfortunately, my advice is one I wouldn't usually like myself.
Generally speaking, I'm not a big believer in brand names. I chose a completely unknown undergrad institution because I thought it was a better fit for me, and I was not proven wrong.
The problem with us, however - and by us I mean MD/PhD applicants - is that we are different by the virtue of our career plans. For any regular medical student who simply wants to practice, there would be little reason to go for the brand name. Unfortunately, if I learned anything in the last several years, and this last year in particular, it is that academia, and especially academic medicine, is ridiculously political and hung up on reputation. I certainly don't like it or agree with it, but I would be silly not to acknowledge it.
I think we all would be.
Presumably we are all in this mess now to gain access to one of the most elite and competitive fields in the world - academic medicine. Please don't confuse this with the reason or the motivation - I know we all have deeper reasons for wanting to become physician scientists. But the fact remains that the only environment where we will be able to prosper in our pursuits is academic medicine (I choose to ignore industry for the sake of the argument).
So, my point is, that, everything else being equal (and I again assume it is: finances are not an issue, it's not MD vs. MD/PhD debate, etc.), we have much more to gain from the reputations of our institutions than our MD counterparts. Now clearly, if going to a better reputation school would be so detrimental (because of the geography, personal reasons, lack of research mentors in a particular area, etc.) that it would clearly significantly affect your preformance, than it's a different situation.
I think we would all be wise (in scenarios described) to make minor sacrifices and go to the school with a better reputation in our fields.
Having said this, I really don't want this to turn into another "it's-not-true-you-get-a-better-education-at-a-brand-name-school" thread. That is not what I'm saying at all. There is no doubt that getting a combined degree in itself gives you unparallel education. I am just pointing out that, given a choice, we might make the next step easier on ourselves by having a name behind us.
Either way, good luck.
And, yeah, out of curiosity, nooreen, what's your dilemma?
I don't know, Isidella - I would very seriously consider Mayo. It's an incredible place (I know a guy in the MD/PhD program there).
Unfortunately, my advice is one I wouldn't usually like myself.
Generally speaking, I'm not a big believer in brand names. I chose a completely unknown undergrad institution because I thought it was a better fit for me, and I was not proven wrong.
The problem with us, however - and by us I mean MD/PhD applicants - is that we are different by the virtue of our career plans. For any regular medical student who simply wants to practice, there would be little reason to go for the brand name. Unfortunately, if I learned anything in the last several years, and this last year in particular, it is that academia, and especially academic medicine, is ridiculously political and hung up on reputation. I certainly don't like it or agree with it, but I would be silly not to acknowledge it.
I think we all would be.
Presumably we are all in this mess now to gain access to one of the most elite and competitive fields in the world - academic medicine. Please don't confuse this with the reason or the motivation - I know we all have deeper reasons for wanting to become physician scientists. But the fact remains that the only environment where we will be able to prosper in our pursuits is academic medicine (I choose to ignore industry for the sake of the argument).
So, my point is, that, everything else being equal (and I again assume it is: finances are not an issue, it's not MD vs. MD/PhD debate, etc.), we have much more to gain from the reputations of our institutions than our MD counterparts. Now clearly, if going to a better reputation school would be so detrimental (because of the geography, personal reasons, lack of research mentors in a particular area, etc.) that it would clearly significantly affect your preformance, than it's a different situation.
I think we would all be wise (in scenarios described) to make minor sacrifices and go to the school with a better reputation in our fields.
Having said this, I really don't want this to turn into another "it's-not-true-you-get-a-better-education-at-a-brand-name-school" thread. That is not what I'm saying at all. There is no doubt that getting a combined degree in itself gives you unparallel education. I am just pointing out that, given a choice, we might make the next step easier on ourselves by having a name behind us.
Either way, good luck.
And, yeah, out of curiosity, nooreen, what's your dilemma?
I don't know, Isidella - I would very seriously consider Mayo. It's an incredible place (I know a guy in the MD/PhD program there).
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2002
- Messages
- 33
- Reaction score
- 1
I've been pretty decided on Wash U, but I wanted to start thinking about this in the event that Pritzker makes me an offer this week, especially because they want to know by 4/15.
so given that it might not be a dilema in the end, but here goes:
I just interviewed this week at
U Chicago and I LOVED IT. It was one of the best interview experiences I've had. I was walking around in a dream. In addition to the formal interviews whihc were typical, I made arrangements to meet a couple of people whose research interested me. They blew me completely out of the water. One of them (70) said he would WAIT TO RETIRE until I finished my PhD if I came is Chicago. The second person was EXACTLY WHO I WANT TO be in 20 years. Meeting him was like a trip to church. He kept saying things that echoed my core beliefs about science and life.
Also, the students are really cool and down to earth. For example, I met a fourth year med student who gave me an impromptu tour. As it turns out, she transferred from MSTP at Madison.
But in addition to all of that, I am originally from Chicago. Being close to my parents is a big plus, especially as they are nearing retirement age. Eight years is a long time. Plus, Chicago Rocks.
Not that Stink Louis is *that* far away, but 6 hours is 6 hours.
so given that it might not be a dilema in the end, but here goes:
I just interviewed this week at
U Chicago and I LOVED IT. It was one of the best interview experiences I've had. I was walking around in a dream. In addition to the formal interviews whihc were typical, I made arrangements to meet a couple of people whose research interested me. They blew me completely out of the water. One of them (70) said he would WAIT TO RETIRE until I finished my PhD if I came is Chicago. The second person was EXACTLY WHO I WANT TO be in 20 years. Meeting him was like a trip to church. He kept saying things that echoed my core beliefs about science and life.Also, the students are really cool and down to earth. For example, I met a fourth year med student who gave me an impromptu tour. As it turns out, she transferred from MSTP at Madison.
But in addition to all of that, I am originally from Chicago. Being close to my parents is a big plus, especially as they are nearing retirement age. Eight years is a long time. Plus, Chicago Rocks.
Not that Stink Louis is *that* far away, but 6 hours is 6 hours.
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2002
- Messages
- 14,923
- Reaction score
- 8,907
Hey nooreen I personally think that you can't go wrong with any MSTP, so if you loved UChicago I would highly recommend you go there! I have the same thing going on with Northwestern v. Baylor. The reputation difference isn't as great as WashU v. UChicago, but I would say to do it.
As for them wanting a decision by 4/15, if you are accepted, tell Jose to give you more time. They have no right to be one of the last programs to interview and let us know the first week of April, and then want a response 1 - 2 weeks later. Besides, I don't think any program is going to withdraw their acceptance if you don't make a 4/15 deadline. Just contact them and tell them you need more time to think or you're waiting for other programs (e.g. I still have heard nothing from UMich and probably won't till 4/15). If they accept me, I will definately tell them to give me more time.
As of right now, I think Northwestern would be better for me than UChicago. Did you apply/interview at NWU? Regardless though, if UChicago accepted me, I would have to think about that some more.
As for them wanting a decision by 4/15, if you are accepted, tell Jose to give you more time. They have no right to be one of the last programs to interview and let us know the first week of April, and then want a response 1 - 2 weeks later. Besides, I don't think any program is going to withdraw their acceptance if you don't make a 4/15 deadline. Just contact them and tell them you need more time to think or you're waiting for other programs (e.g. I still have heard nothing from UMich and probably won't till 4/15). If they accept me, I will definately tell them to give me more time.
As of right now, I think Northwestern would be better for me than UChicago. Did you apply/interview at NWU? Regardless though, if UChicago accepted me, I would have to think about that some more.
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2003
- Messages
- 25
- Reaction score
- 0
Nooreen,
Here's my two cents (for what it's worth).
Normally I'm inclined to agree with Surge -- the name is important because other people (i.e. grant givers, hiring committees, etc.) make it important. But for your situation, I don't think that there is a gigantic difference between WashU and UChicago. You aren't talking about Harvard versus University of Guam (is there a University of Guam??). It's much better to be happy where you go for 8 years than go after a name, especially when there isn't that much difference between the two. Of course, you don't want to place too much importance on your interview either. Maybe it was a sunny day and you woke up on the good side of the bed. But if you still feel this way after your revisits, I would say go for UChicago.
If you do end up at WashU, there's a good chance we might be classmates!
Good luck,
ptiger
Here's my two cents (for what it's worth).
Normally I'm inclined to agree with Surge -- the name is important because other people (i.e. grant givers, hiring committees, etc.) make it important. But for your situation, I don't think that there is a gigantic difference between WashU and UChicago. You aren't talking about Harvard versus University of Guam (is there a University of Guam??). It's much better to be happy where you go for 8 years than go after a name, especially when there isn't that much difference between the two. Of course, you don't want to place too much importance on your interview either. Maybe it was a sunny day and you woke up on the good side of the bed. But if you still feel this way after your revisits, I would say go for UChicago.
If you do end up at WashU, there's a good chance we might be classmates!
Good luck,
ptiger
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2003
- Messages
- 483
- Reaction score
- 1
i agree with both serge and ptiger -
i do wnat to point that while washU has an amazing track record and program - uchicago has an almost surprisingly high number of successful people out of their mstp program.
take a look at one measure of success (only one measure!) -
http://www.hhmi.org/cgi-bin/scisearch/scisearch.cgi
if you look at their bio's - you'll see that the mstp with the most hhmi alumni is in fact uchicago. now this, of course, guarentees nothing, and other programs do incredibly well also - but its rather impressive. though i know the decsiions is still tough, despite a difference in usnews rankings, both are excellent places (depending on your research area)
are you going to be at the revisit this weekend noreen? or ptiger?
i do wnat to point that while washU has an amazing track record and program - uchicago has an almost surprisingly high number of successful people out of their mstp program.
take a look at one measure of success (only one measure!) -
http://www.hhmi.org/cgi-bin/scisearch/scisearch.cgi
if you look at their bio's - you'll see that the mstp with the most hhmi alumni is in fact uchicago. now this, of course, guarentees nothing, and other programs do incredibly well also - but its rather impressive. though i know the decsiions is still tough, despite a difference in usnews rankings, both are excellent places (depending on your research area)
are you going to be at the revisit this weekend noreen? or ptiger?
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2002
- Messages
- 54
- Reaction score
- 0
It's definitely a hard choice, but I want to mention something that you probably are already thinking about...looking for the school that has the most profs whose research you may be interesed in. While it's awesome that a 70yr olds says he'll wait until you go through to retire, there are many other factors (family, age+8yrs, funding) that may come into play. (My grandfather was still working 2.5 jobs at 79, so I don't doubt the ambition or the ability, but things can/do happen). I also went out of my way to meet with the "person I want to be in 20/30yrs" at Stanford, but I'm not sure he would be the best PhD mentor because of his extremely busy schedule that involces lots of international trips. Our meeting reminded me why I study what I do and why I'm going MD/PhD, but his lab may not be the best for my training.
They're both such great schools, so good luck with the decision.
They're both such great schools, so good luck with the decision.
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2003
- Messages
- 4
- Reaction score
- 0
Originally posted by nooreen
I've been pretty decided on Wash U, but I wanted to start thinking about this in the event that Pritzker makes me an offer this week, especially because they want to know by 4/15.
so given that it might not be a dilema in the end, but here goes:
I just interviewed this week at
My view is that your decision is a no-brainer. You simply pointed out too many reasons that you like one school over another. If it was a single factor that made UChicago attractive, then you would have a harder decision, but you are talking about multiple, VERY SIGNIFICANT factors, that make this decision clear in my view.
As far as reputation of school, I really don't see much of a difference, a difference large enough to lead to different career outcome. The only time one must start evaluating reputations is if one thinks that attending one school will truly compromise his/her goals, as compared with opportunities that will arise from attending another more prestigious school. In your case, I don't see this happening, as UChicago is an absolutely tremendous academic institution, and excellent work goes on in biomedicine. Uchicago also has an excellent hospital system...as you know. I think you should do it, and enjoy.
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2002
- Messages
- 685
- Reaction score
- 0
Nooreen,
ummm.... while I still stand behind my previous post, I didn't know what schools you were debating between(I assumed WashU was one of them). I thought you were thinking Tufts or USC or something like that vs. WashU....
In your case, it's a no brainer....GO TO UCHICAGO!!!!!!!!!
It's a phenomenal school! Seriously, as far as the reputations go, I wouldn't worry about it one bit. Screw USNews
I absolutely loved WashU, and you obviously cannot go wrong, but given everything you said, I would definitely chose UChicago and never look back.
Either way, let us know what you decide
ummm.... while I still stand behind my previous post, I didn't know what schools you were debating between(I assumed WashU was one of them). I thought you were thinking Tufts or USC or something like that vs. WashU....
In your case, it's a no brainer....GO TO UCHICAGO!!!!!!!!!
It's a phenomenal school! Seriously, as far as the reputations go, I wouldn't worry about it one bit. Screw USNews
I absolutely loved WashU, and you obviously cannot go wrong, but given everything you said, I would definitely chose UChicago and never look back.
Either way, let us know what you decide
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2003
- Messages
- 27
- Reaction score
- 0
Hey Nooreen,
I faced a similar decision last year...I was trying to decide between Columbia, Wash U, and Duke. While Wash U and Duke had slightly better reps, I realized that I would be bored out of my mind in either St. Louis or Durham after about 6 months. Chicago is an incredible, vibrant city...plus you have a lot of other reasons going for that location. In this case, you gotta go for the gusto.
I ended up at Columbia and I am often thankful that I made the decision that I did. I think you will feel the same way if you go to U of C.
I faced a similar decision last year...I was trying to decide between Columbia, Wash U, and Duke. While Wash U and Duke had slightly better reps, I realized that I would be bored out of my mind in either St. Louis or Durham after about 6 months. Chicago is an incredible, vibrant city...plus you have a lot of other reasons going for that location. In this case, you gotta go for the gusto.
I ended up at Columbia and I am often thankful that I made the decision that I did. I think you will feel the same way if you go to U of C.
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2002
- Messages
- 685
- Reaction score
- 0
Again, I would argue that the difference in reputation is too small to be significant. Make sure these are not USNews rankings we're talking about.
Personally, although I didn't apply there, I think the tri-institutional program is one of the best ones out there, lagrely due to the research opportunities at Rockefeller and Sloan-Kettering. I think it'd be hard to argue that you'll find anything at Hopkins you couldn't find there.
I think it's inconcievable that you will ever hear: "we would give you the funding/position/etc. except that you went to Cornell and got your PhD from Rockefeller". It's much more important to go where you will preform your best.
One could argue that I'm facing a similar situation because I'm leaning towards Yale over WashU, which I think it would be silly to claim.
Personally, although I didn't apply there, I think the tri-institutional program is one of the best ones out there, lagrely due to the research opportunities at Rockefeller and Sloan-Kettering. I think it'd be hard to argue that you'll find anything at Hopkins you couldn't find there.
I think it's inconcievable that you will ever hear: "we would give you the funding/position/etc. except that you went to Cornell and got your PhD from Rockefeller". It's much more important to go where you will preform your best.
One could argue that I'm facing a similar situation because I'm leaning towards Yale over WashU, which I think it would be silly to claim.
F
FunnyBones
There are, of course, many sides to this.
Yes, name brands do matter but how do they matter?
Anyone who says that names don't matter at all are either bitter, lying, confused, want/have things over which names don't have influence (or more likely have little influence) or some combination there of. Even though I didn't choose to go to WashU, I still think its a great program--not because I have first hand information but because of it's rep. It's my impression and by and large people make judgements based on impressions, sometimes even in the presence of real data. If I were in the positon of choosing someone for something, ALL OTHER factors being equal, I would give advantage to a brand name or at least my own perceptions of that name.
That said, what is best for you (as an evaluator) is not best for someone else. People also don't typically have running ranking systems for things and even if they do, they are very fluid. Reputations based on general national rankings have a tendency to be replaced (as you move up the academic ladder) and influenced by personal experiences and specific criteria. Again, you may think WashU is generally best for medicine but having had bad experiences with folks from there, have a bias against it. Or you may think for your field that WashU is only mid tier etc.
Names are DEFINITELY great for 2 things:
1. Ego, subtle or ragingly explicit
2. Continuing on with your career at that particular name
Otherwise, it is only a proxy for quality, however you may define it. It's not surprising that people at WashU, a very selective program that looks for high achievers, go on to great Universities to do great things. That's due more to the fact that WashU attracts high achievers rather than produces them. If you're a high achiever, you'll do great things coming from any number of programs.
As for WashU versus Chicago. WashU is an empire of a medical center with top-notch docs and facilities. Pritzker and med center has a friendlier feel to it (and possibly a lower general rep) but don't let it fool you. Don't forget that U of Chi made its reputation with uncompromising and spectacular academics/scholarship (just consider the number of nobel laureates assoc with the U). Nooreen, I would consider both to be elite programs and I'm sure you'll find this to be true as you move on to the next stage of your career. Go where you want to be!
-FunnyBones
Stanford BS, UPenn MD-PhD, UPenn Ortho Res
Yes, name brands do matter but how do they matter?
Anyone who says that names don't matter at all are either bitter, lying, confused, want/have things over which names don't have influence (or more likely have little influence) or some combination there of. Even though I didn't choose to go to WashU, I still think its a great program--not because I have first hand information but because of it's rep. It's my impression and by and large people make judgements based on impressions, sometimes even in the presence of real data. If I were in the positon of choosing someone for something, ALL OTHER factors being equal, I would give advantage to a brand name or at least my own perceptions of that name.
That said, what is best for you (as an evaluator) is not best for someone else. People also don't typically have running ranking systems for things and even if they do, they are very fluid. Reputations based on general national rankings have a tendency to be replaced (as you move up the academic ladder) and influenced by personal experiences and specific criteria. Again, you may think WashU is generally best for medicine but having had bad experiences with folks from there, have a bias against it. Or you may think for your field that WashU is only mid tier etc.
Names are DEFINITELY great for 2 things:
1. Ego, subtle or ragingly explicit
2. Continuing on with your career at that particular name
Otherwise, it is only a proxy for quality, however you may define it. It's not surprising that people at WashU, a very selective program that looks for high achievers, go on to great Universities to do great things. That's due more to the fact that WashU attracts high achievers rather than produces them. If you're a high achiever, you'll do great things coming from any number of programs.
As for WashU versus Chicago. WashU is an empire of a medical center with top-notch docs and facilities. Pritzker and med center has a friendlier feel to it (and possibly a lower general rep) but don't let it fool you. Don't forget that U of Chi made its reputation with uncompromising and spectacular academics/scholarship (just consider the number of nobel laureates assoc with the U). Nooreen, I would consider both to be elite programs and I'm sure you'll find this to be true as you move on to the next stage of your career. Go where you want to be!
-FunnyBones
Stanford BS, UPenn MD-PhD, UPenn Ortho Res
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2003
- Messages
- 483
- Reaction score
- 1
funnybones mentioned something pretty importnat i hitnk. this is something that cuts to the heart of many debates - while the school you goto certainly contributes to your education etc... it guarentees very little. a couple days ago i was thinking, 'almost done with this whole thing' (as i await my last decision) ... but its just begun
seeya on the flipside- Joined
- Aug 1, 2002
- Messages
- 685
- Reaction score
- 0
Very well put, FB.
As jot said, this issue often comes up, and this was a very eloquent summary. Clearly, in the end, it's up to you.
Oh, yes, ladies and gentleman, you are correct.
This is merely an end of a beginning.
It is only now, that we have begun, that the real work begins.
May the gods be mercyful, we'll certainly need it
