[quote name='Koggit']
What's the difference between the social science classes you took as a journalism major and the social science classes I take as a physics major?
[/quote]
It could vary by school I guess. As a journalism major I had to take 4 specific poli sci classes, 4 specific history classes, 3 econ classes etc. We didn't have many electives, they had our classes mapped out for us. I guess they wanted future reporters to have a good knowledge of these things. We only had like 9 or 12 hours of true electives where we could take whatever we wanted.
We were also required to choose a minor, and I choose sociology which gave me more. A lot of people minor in poli sci or history in the journalism program.
Where as, my friends that majored in engineering, chemistry etc. didn't have that, they just had a lot of electives too choose from, and could have taken no political science classes if they choose, or at most only had to take the lowest level introductory course.
But you're right, and other schools may require more social science classes among people in engineering, CS, hard sciences etc.
he whole "grad program rank matters, undergrad rank doesn't" thing also seems pretty arbitrary.
I never said undergrad ranking doesn't matter. I just said you made a bit too much of it.
Grad rankings matter more, as in grad school, especailly at the Ph D level, you are working directly with faculty not just taking classes from them. So it's important to gain the experience you get doing research with the leading faculty in your field. And having connections with these top scholars is crucial to getting a good job--particularly in academia. Who you're letters of reference are from are huge in where you get academic interviews. Being from a top school and having letters from leading scholars who are friends with other top scholars in other universities will get you interviews over people with more impressive CVs.
It's always important to go to a good school, I won't dispute that. But it's more important at the graduate level for a variety of reasons, in my opinion. Undergrad, as long as you have a high GPA from a decent school you're ok. My undergrad school is tier 3 in the US News rankings (so somewhere in the 51st-74th percentile--they only give exact rankings to the top 50%) and I got into the what is the top ranked graduate program in my field in their rankings.
So I guess my point is there is benefit for sure to going to a top ranked undergrad school, but there's not a lot of harm done in going to a lower ranked one. Where as at the graduate level, it's more important to be at top program, both for the experience and for trhe connections and reputation getting your foot in the door for interviews at other top schools.
But I will also say the grad school rankings are fairly aribitrary. For instance, my program rankings only go through like 12 or 13 schools as that's all the Ph D programs in my field that have been around long enough to be ranked. For the most part, I think students are fine at any of these schools. They all have solid faculties. Of course, it matters more in a field with 100s of Ph D programs, especially since you'll be in competition with a much larger pool of graduates every year.
Edit Also, one thing I'd add about undergraduate programs, is that at top schools/programs the senior faculty don't teach a lot of undergrad courses. For instance, in my program, most of the senior faculty at most teach one upper level undergrad course a year, and many only teach grad level courses. A lot of the undergrad courses are taught by adjunct lecturers and ABD Ph D students. So at top schools sometimes undergrads have less access to the faculty that earn the school that ranking. While the grad students are still getting taught by them and working on research with them etc.
Just one more thing to consider when thinking about undergrad rankings vs. graduate program rankings.