I Think I've Made a Huge Mistake

[ETH2014]

So, I'm a masters student in Neuroscience at the ETH Zurich currently. Recently I've been asking myself whether or not I've made a mistake by accepting this program. I had the choice to attend Ivy League schools (UPenn, Columbia), and I think if my resume said COLUMBIA instead of ETH, I'd have more success applying for jobs. I had similar thoughts when I accepted UCLA's offer over Berkeley's, and haven't been sure whether or not I've made the right decision. Read these two statements to feel how these two profiles sound different.

 

Graduated from Berkeley undergrad, completed a Masters at Columbia.

 

Graduated from UCLA undergrad, completed a Masters at ETH Zurich.

 

They feel completely different!

[smg]

It could be worse...its not like your doing 25 to life at Angola. 

[bsharpe269]

I guess this is all field dependent...

 

ETH Zurich is huge in my field at least. When I read the school name in your post, in my head I thought "Oh wow, great school." In my field at least, there are only a few schools that are held to the Stanford, UWashington level. ETH Zurich is one of those schools.

[ImHis]

Are you applying locally or internationally?

[GeoDUDE!]

I think I also made a huge mistake. I went to one of the best schools in the world for undergrad and went to one of the best schools in the world for graduate school and it isn't my mentality or personality holding me back, it has to be the weak name brand of me going to top 20 schools overall in the world. 

[1Q84]

[ilovelab]

You're trolling but I'll bite. Your resume could say Harvard Undergrad MIT Master Stanford PHD. It won't make a difference to employers if you haven't done shit at any institution. Do you honestly believe you would get a Postdoc based on where you did your PHD? Its whose lab you're in and what you've published. Also having gone to UCLA for undergrad I find the notion you regretting UCLA for Berkley offensive. It could be worse though, at least its not USC, then I'd have to rub it in how badly we slayed you on saturday.

[ETH2014]

It's not a troll, I'm really looking for some perspective on the situation. At least the way I think, having an ivy on my resume would get me insta-interviews everywhere, whereas 50%+ of people here in Zurich have not heard of UCLA (they haven't heard of Caltech either, wtf?) and ETH is virtually unknown in the US except for people who work in science. I'm a little concerned that I've shot myself in the foot by working so hard, having gotten good acceptances, and then having chosen one of the less prestigious offers. Essentially the biggest reason I chose ETH was the cost: virtually free, vs. Columbia's $40,000/yr program.

[nugget]

Not much you can do about it now, other than to take advantage of the opportunities you currently have and build up your cv as best as you can. Try to publish in journals that are well-known in the US and collaborate on research projects with well-known US-based researchers, if possible.

[ilovelab]

On 11/24/2014 at 2:00 PM, ETH2014 said:

It's not a troll, I'm really looking for some perspective on the situation. At least the way I think, having an ivy on my resume would get me insta-interviews everywhere, whereas 50%+ of people here in Zurich have not heard of UCLA (they haven't heard of Caltech either, wtf?) and ETH is virtually unknown in the US except for people who work in science. I'm a little concerned that I've shot myself in the foot by working so hard, having gotten good acceptances, and then having chosen one of the less prestigious offers. Essentially the biggest reason I chose ETH was the cost: virtually free, vs. Columbia's $40,000/yr program.

 Graduating from and Ivy does not guarantee instant interviews in science. Its whose lab you worked in, who your PI knows and what your CV looks like. Unless all the PI's at ETH as crap it shouldn't be a problem, as long as you can find a supportive PI whose lab you can do good work in. If you are getting your MS in Neuroscience why do you care about people not knowing your schools name outside of science? Do you plan to go into marketing/psych/comm? If you're going to stick with science why does it matter? Or does it bother you that the average person in the US has no idea where your school is? Lets be honest, most people in the US have no idea what Caltech, Reed, WashU, Bowdoin, Amherst, Williams, Rice, Scripps, Janelia, Mayo Clinic etc are. It doesn't mean they aren't great institutions. Who cares! A prestigious school doesn't necessarily have the best program.  You also are saving 80K in debt. That's a lot of $$$ you're going to save by not having student loans.

[juilletmercredi]

It's not a troll, I'm really looking for some perspective on the situation. At least the way I think, having an ivy on my resume would get me insta-interviews everywhere

 

 

 

Ha ha, it doesn't, trust me.  People are really not all that impressed by the Ivy brand, especially once you get beyond small talk at parties and get into who they're going to pay lots of $$$ to do top-notch research for them.  (I went to Columbia.)

 

whereas 50%+ of people here in Zurich have not heard of UCLA (they haven't heard of Caltech either, wtf?) and ETH is virtually unknown in the US except for people who work in science. I'm a little concerned that I've shot myself in the foot by working so hard, having gotten good acceptances, and then having chosen one of the less prestigious offers. Essentially the biggest reason I chose ETH was the cost: virtually free, vs. Columbia's $40,000/yr program.

 

If you are talking about people on the street - who cares what they have heard of?  As you have demonstrated, the people in Zurich have not heard of one of the U.S.'s (and the world's) top science institutions.  It also makes sense that many Americans have not heard of one of Europe's (and the world's) top institutions.

 

Who really matters are people who work in science, and ETH Zurich is well-known as a respected, top university to people in science.  I know of it and I highly respect it.

 

Even if you think Columbia's name would've gotten you in the door moreso than Zurich...is it enough to make you an extra $120,000 a year?  No?  Because it is often said that you shouldn't borrow more than your first year's salary, and that you should make about as much as your first year's salary to comfortably repay loans.  I think in 3 years' time you will be patting yourself on the back for choosing a world-class university for free rather than borrowing six figures.

[NWFreeheel11]

It's not a troll, I'm really looking for some perspective on the situation. At least the way I think, having an ivy on my resume would get me insta-interviews everywhere, whereas 50%+ of people here in Zurich have not heard of UCLA (they haven't heard of Caltech either, wtf?) and ETH is virtually unknown in the US except for people who work in science. I'm a little concerned that I've shot myself in the foot by working so hard, having gotten good acceptances, and then having chosen one of the less prestigious offers. Essentially the biggest reason I chose ETH was the cost: virtually free, vs. Columbia's $40,000/yr program.

 

I worked as a recruiter at a "top" tech start-up in silicon valley for a while after graduating while I was doing research at Stanford. 

 

Let me tell you: NO ONE CARES IF YOU HAVE AN IVY NAME ON YOUR RESUME. Unless you were coming straight out of undergrad, I would never even look at the school. I have met a ton of very "dumb" ivy people, and some brilliant "nowhere-state" folks. 

 

From a recruiting perspective, it is actually a hesitation for me because many of those type (not all of course) come with arrogant baggage and are miserable to talk to. Also, if you are talking to someone in the US who has never heard of UCLA, then walk out. The same goes for anyone international who has never heard of ETH. You don't want to work for them. 

[ETH2014]

OK, thank you for the feedback. I think part of it is me being a bit of a prestige whore.. I like when people are impressed by my credentials. BUT, I guess that's not a great strategy for finding the right-fit school. Plus with the cost people have told me that it's a no-brainer.

[Vene]

Based on my work in industrial research nobody gives a shit where you went to school.

[pinkgirlcollections]

I worked as a recruiter at a "top" tech start-up in silicon valley for a while after graduating while I was doing research at Stanford. 

 

Let me tell you: NO ONE CARES IF YOU HAVE AN IVY NAME ON YOUR RESUME. Unless you were coming straight out of undergrad, I would never even look at the school. I have met a ton of very "dumb" ivy people, and some brilliant "nowhere-state" folks. 

 

From a recruiting perspective, it is actually a hesitation for me because many of those type (not all of course) come with arrogant baggage and are miserable to talk to. Also, if you are talking to someone in the US who has never heard of UCLA, then walk out. The same goes for anyone international who has never heard of ETH. You don't want to work for them. 

 

Agree with this. I've also worked in the valley for two big companies: G and A. Unless you are fresh out of undergraduate and/or major in non-technical/non-natural science field, ivy name doesn't matter. To a certain degree, it could actually hurt...

 

Just focus on real work, your domain knowledge and hands on experience.

[smpalesh]

As an "older" student (35 yrs old, married, 3 kids) I will tell you that the name brand of your college in the future will be a LOT less important than the amount of debt you're carrying.  I have a lot of debt from school, my husband's school and other things and it really negatively affects the quality of our life.  It takes a lot longer to pay down debt than you think.  I don't know about either of those schools but it sounds like the one that will lead to virtually no debt is a good school so I would definitely go with that.

[prospecting]

So, I'm a masters student in Neuroscience at the ETH Zurich currently. Recently I've been asking myself whether or not I've made a mistake by accepting this program. I had the choice to attend Ivy League schools (UPenn, Columbia), and I think if my resume said COLUMBIA instead of ETH, I'd have more success applying for jobs. I had similar thoughts when I accepted UCLA's offer over Berkeley's, and haven't been sure whether or not I've made the right decision. Read these two statements to feel how these two profiles sound different.

 

Graduated from Berkeley undergrad, completed a Masters at Columbia.

 

Graduated from UCLA undergrad, completed a Masters at ETH Zurich.

 

They feel completely different!

 

Lol this guy - much naivete. 

[Buffalofan4255]

Personally regard ETH as better than a typical ivy degree in the states actually. ETH is known for its quantitative research...and it shows diversity. I think an employer in the states would kill to have an ETH graduate (when thinking about name only) because ivy grads are relatively saturated. 

 

ETH as a brand is pretty damn kick ass. Also...you were in f*ing switzerland. 

[VentiHalfCaff]

I attended a big state school over an early acceptance to MIT for undergrad. I have rarely looked back, even though some people say I was crazy to turn down MIT. I have had huge opportunities at my undergrad school that may not have happened for me at MIT, simply because (I'm guessing) it's much easier to be a standout in an excellent big state school's engineering program than at MIT.

 

But that's not why I chose the state school over the "prestige school" for undergrad. I chose the state school because they aggressively recruited me and made it very clear to me that their program was actually a perfect fit for me, and vice versa. They were correct. Certain folks inside and outside of the school and the engineering department took a big interest in me, professionally and personally. In addition, I was offered a free-ride plus a large annual stipend to attend.

 

I have since read two studies that basically say that those who make college decisions like mine (and like yours, OP) tend to be happier in life and "more successful," if one chooses to define "success" by the output of the graduates once they enter the workplace (proportionately more awards, more publications, more recognized credentials, etc ... it varies dependent on the graduate's career field).

 

Those who did the studies theorized that this may be due to the positive reinforcement and recognition tippy-top high students continue to receive throughout their "supposedly-less-prestigious" undergraduate programs, which is the same sort of recognition they experienced in high school, or better. In contrast, those who choose to attend "supposedly-more-prestigious" undergraduate programs can't all continue to excel and succeed in the same way that they did in high school. There are only so many top spots to go around at every school, and if nearly every student in an undergraduate program was at the top of the top in their high schools, well, SOME of those "top" students are going to find themselves in the middle or at the bottom! That becomes negative reinforcement for them, and they may start to see themselves in a less positive light. 

 

In other words, top high school students continue to see themselves at the top -- and others see them there, too -- in other great programs that are NOT necessarily considered the "most prestigious." Those top students continue to reap the rewards of their tippy top performance. But _the majority of_ top high school students who choose to attend (what are considered) the most prestigious schools will find themselves at places OTHER THAN the top, naturally. And that has its consequences.

 

According to the two studies that I've read over the past few years, those at the top of ALL schools, "prestigious" and otherwise, tend to find themselves at the top of their career fields more often, statistically, AND they tend to define themselves as happier. In other words, according to both of these studies, graduating "at the top" from ANY school is supposedly more relevant to happiness and success than "merely" graduating from a prestigious school.

 

I don't recall the names of the studies, and I don't know if I've done them justice in my synopsis. I also don't know if they've drawn the correct conclusions. But, they were very interesting to read!

 

There are all sorts of rewards for being a top student. Scholarships and grants (equals no debt). The best offers for internships, research, study abroad, jobs. Personal attention from people inside and outside of the program. Etc. And therefore, there are more and more opportunities for top students at ALL schools to excel. 

 

Like you, OP, I will not be attending a "most prestigious" graduate school either. I will be attending a state school for grad school. That state school is widely recognized for "my" program, but there are several other schools that a lot of people find "more prestigious" in my field. I have chosen my grad school for the professor I want to work with and for that prof's lab. I think I will continue to have no regrets.

 

I hope you can find satisfaction in your decisions, too. Don't worry about what others think. You're doing this for you. If the programs you chose are a good match for you and your interests, then you made all the right choices! Best of luck to you!

[GradHooting]

While I frequently suffer from the influences of "name-brand" recognition, and am certainly not in the best place to advise you on how to treat your degree, your huge mistake is how you're thinking right now.  The good news is that the mistake is just limited to your thoughts, and not on your actions, yet.  ETH Zurich is an excellent institution.  EPFL is an excellent institution, as is TU Delft, U of Nottingham, Uppsala Univ, Aalto Univ, etc.  I implore you to make the most of wherever you get your degree and not worry about transferring.  For every minute you spend mulling over whether you made the right decision because of something as whimsical as how a theoretical job interviewer will perceive the name, you are being self-destructive.  Trust me.  I get caught in the same thought pattern, and I am trying to stop it.  The times where I worry about such things exactly correlate to times where I am suffering in my concentration, research output, networking in academia, and just enjoying friends.

 

I had to double take when you said you're in neuroscience.  Based on your wording, I thought you were in advertising, business, law, etc.  Being in a scientific field offers you a great opportunity to network through the science that you create.  This is not a simple case of "Welcome to Dazzling Name University, here's your alumni network."  You want name recognition?  Let it be ETH2014 (or whatever your name is).  Publish, attend conferences, travel the world.  ETH collaborates massively in Europe, and I frequently see collaboration between them and many US universities.  The only name recognition you should be worrying about is yourself.

 

This is me, someone who is frequently concerned about the "brand" of their degree, telling you, someone who is similarly concerned: Don't do it.  Be concerned about your research output, and physical and emotional health.  The process of getting out of that thought pattern is something that I still have not solved.  But, I am trying to stay out of it.  Occasionally I vent here to get some answers and further ideas.

 

As a side note: My goodness.  You're in Zurich.  You're going to have a very tough time finding a more beautiful place to pursue your degree.  It seems that Albert Einstein didn't have much trouble going up against the brand of his ETH Zurich degree

[Icydubloon]

I think I also made a huge mistake. I went to one of the best schools in the world for undergrad and went to one of the best schools in the world for graduate school and it isn't my mentality or personality holding me back, it has to be the weak name brand of me going to top 20 schools overall in the world.

And me, a resume screener for a company, will filter based on school name and brand recognition. So yes, the OP should be questioning whether he made a mistake or not.

However OP, brand is less of an issue if you're applying to jobs in academia since they value your research output more.

[Tez92]

If you are planning on coming back to America for future graduate study, I think it would be great to discuss how studying internationally brings a unique perspective to their program. 

[DeleteMePlease]

It's not a troll, I'm really looking for some perspective on the situation. At least the way I think, having an ivy on my resume would get me insta-interviews everywhere, whereas 50%+ of people here in Zurich have not heard of UCLA (they haven't heard of Caltech either, wtf?) and ETH is virtually unknown in the US except for people who work in science. I'm a little concerned that I've shot myself in the foot by working so hard, having gotten good acceptances, and then having chosen one of the less prestigious offers. Essentially the biggest reason I chose ETH was the cost: virtually free, vs. Columbia's $40,000/yr program.

 

Europeans haven't heard of American schools that are thousands of miles away? Weird.

[Kleene]

You probably should have realized that Europe is half a world away from the US. In Europe random people outside of academia have only heard of Harvard and maybe one or two other US schools. Columbia, Caltech, or UCLA on your CV would not give you any more edge in Europe than a random state university. Similarly, random people in the US will not be familiar with good European schools such as ETH. Therefore, if you are concerned with random people's knowledge or recognition of your university, you would probably have been better off staying in the US, like European students would be better off staying in Europe.

Edited January 18, 2015 by Kleene

[btsulliv]

If you didn't make this Arrested Development joke I would have ;-)