Hi Psyguy,
I somehow came across some of the older posts and noticed that you occasionally mention "Ivy" status and marketability.
Essentially, it seems like you said a masters is masters unless you get one from Ivy.
By "Ivy", you often seem to refer to schools such as Harvard, Yale, OxBridge (UK), McGill (CAN), Sorbonne (EU), etc.
I am sure you are aware that the actual Ivy schools on the above list are Harvard and Yale, but Yale actually doesn't offer education degree since it has no graduate school of education.
The only schools in actual Ivy league that offer a masters degree in education are Harvard, Columbia and Penn.
Harvard is Harvard, and it would be great to have it on my resume, but it is also the most difficult to get in.
If I get in to Columbia, would you say it will also give me the "Ivy" status and would you say it's worth the money?
Or would you say it's brand is simply not up there despite it being an actual member of Ivy League schools?
I plan to work in South Korea or Singapore.
Thank you
@Psyguy about Ivy status
-
shopaholic
- Posts: 82
- Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2017 11:42 pm
Re: @Psyguy about Ivy status
Columbia IS Ivy League.
There are 8 Ivies. Ivy League schools are:
Havard
Yale
Princeton
Brown
Columbia
Dartmouth
Cornell
University of Pennsylvania
There are 8 Ivies. Ivy League schools are:
Havard
Yale
Princeton
Brown
Columbia
Dartmouth
Cornell
University of Pennsylvania
-
shadowjack
- Posts: 2140
- Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 9:49 am
Re: @Psyguy about Ivy status
Intotheblue - it doesn't matter about your education degree, but if you have a degree in History/English from Harvard, and then go on to get a teaching credential, that original degree can carry you a long way!
-
Thames Pirate
- Posts: 1150
- Joined: Fri Jul 05, 2013 8:06 am
Re: @Psyguy about Ivy status
School status only matters to a point, in both undergrad and graduate school. It matters more early in one's career. But a Masters from Harvard with poor recs and and a poor employment history is not as strong as a Masters from University of Somewhere Real with excellent references, strong credentials, leadership, etc. It might make the difference in the first two jobs or so, but beyond that, it's generally not significant. Obviously there are exceptions based on what certain recruiters want.
Choose the school that works for you, then focus on doing well and expanding your skill base. Remember that good schools will provide opportunities beyond a pretty name on a resume--that's why they're good. If you don't plan to take advantage of those opportunities, you may as well save your cash. If you plan to take every opportunity, go to the Ivy. You get the idea.
Choose the school that works for you, then focus on doing well and expanding your skill base. Remember that good schools will provide opportunities beyond a pretty name on a resume--that's why they're good. If you don't plan to take advantage of those opportunities, you may as well save your cash. If you plan to take every opportunity, go to the Ivy. You get the idea.
Re: @Psyguy about Ivy status
intotheblue wrote:
> The only schools in actual Ivy league that offer a masters degree in
> education are Harvard, Columbia and Penn.
Not necessarily true. Brown offers a AM (Master of Arts) in Urban Educational Policy and a Master of Arts in Teaching (MAT) in several fields. Both are considered degrees in education.
> The only schools in actual Ivy league that offer a masters degree in
> education are Harvard, Columbia and Penn.
Not necessarily true. Brown offers a AM (Master of Arts) in Urban Educational Policy and a Master of Arts in Teaching (MAT) in several fields. Both are considered degrees in education.
Response
No, of the Unis listed (Harvard, Yale) are members of the Ivy "League", an NCAA athletic conference, which @shopaholic identified. Its not equal to the term "Ivy" when used in context of IE. The UK also has its equivalent of 'Ivys', these are known as the golden triangle unis and I typically only include OxBridge of them when referring to 'Ivys' in the IE context.
Within the IE context 'Ivys' could be other institutions under specific scenarios. A drama/theater IT with an MFA from Juliard in acting could pitch and market that like an Ivy. An east coast wasp with a degree in education or post-bach studies in education with a credential from one of the Seven Sisters like Wellesley pursuing one of those posh boarding ISs in Switzerland is going to have higher marketability than some Edu Masters from State Uni of Somewhere Real.
Even Unis like John Hopkins which is far more renown for its medical science and allied health program demonstrates greater utility for an IT than State Uni of Somewhere Real, though in those scenarios its as much a factor of what the IT is doing with that opportunity (much as @Thames Pirate discussed) as it is the name on the scroll.
CAN and AUS are difficult to categorize when discussing 'Ivys' while both regions have poor Unis they are a very small minority, in general both AUS and CAN have highly regarded public/state Unis. McGill is typically recognized as an 'Ivy' even if there is considerable debate on what the other CAN 'Ivys' may be. This is only an issue as CAN as gained increasing market share and recognition in IE.
AUS is even more difficult and its exhausting debating which of the top 4 Uni is the 'Ivy' because they are so very similar in both experience and organization, there isnt a whole lot that differentiates them except for the fervor of their alumni and until AUS gains comparable market interest as a tertiary destination in IE, its not an issue Im motivated to see resolved.
Yes, Yale doesnt offer an edu degree, but thats not relevant nor is it my claim that it is. If youre a Lit IT an MA in Language and Literature or a history IT with an MA in history would have the same high degree of utility as an edu masters from Yale if they had one, and far more utility than an edu masters from sState Uni of Somewhere Real. Its not the subject or the level of the degree, its all those tiger moms and oligarch parents where in there culture its relationships and who you know and the status that goes with it that determines the opportunities you have and they assume that an alumni has access and connections too pathways of admission and acceptance for their children that will avail themselves if they can establish a relationship with those ITs, and so ownership in these IS can market those ITs to these parents, thats what makes it marketable. Just as you stated "Harvard is Harvard" well 'Yale is Yale' and its the name on the scroll that matters, not the field or degree level or even the marks/grades. You could have been a straight average graduate in classics at Yale and it would be worth more than perfect marks/grades and a degree in a chemical engineering program from State Uni of Somewhere Real, because its a 'Yale Graduate'.
The Harvard school of Educations Ed.M programs arent that difficult to gain entry into (relative to other programs such as Business), less than you would think for "Harvard". Their year long programs especially in the more esoteric concentrations dont really have a lot of competition for places, Harvard just isnt the place you associate with for Masters level edu studies compared to the competition for their doctoral programs.
To address your inquiry, what would be the alternatives? An edu Masters from Columbia compared to what and to do what?
A Masters at Columbia is going to cost UD$50K
1) Your interests are SG and SK. i dont see a masters from Columbia being all that helpful given the cost. SGs local Uni NUS is highly regarded and professional educator training is highly rigorous. There are a lot of bright professionals with comparable educations in SG. I dont see the HOSs and senior leadership at the tier 1 ISs in SG salivating at a masters from Columbia, youd get more utility out of a doctorate from anywhere in SG.
SK is different, it would really depend (again as @Thames Pirate discussed) to what you did with it and what your plans were. SK has a very small second tier and really large third tier. If you were going to take that masters from Columbia and peddle it to any third tier IS like a bottom tier bilingual IS thats a single owner business persons hobby with a couple hundred students you could spin the Columbia degree for the keys and leadership. If your goal is to push into one of the first tier ISs, theres some utility in it,but its probably not going to be worth the coin.
2) Looking at alternatives, if your comparing Columbia at USD$50K to something like Uni. Portsmouth at USD$6K and cost is important to you, Columbia is 8 times more for a "Ivy League" masters thats not in the IE group of 'Ivys', is there Utility there, yes, is it worth the coin depends on what your going to do with the opportunity. Push into a bottom third tier ISs leadership right away, than yeah you can recoup those costs in half a decade. If not, if all your going to do is change a line on your resume and push for tier 1 or bust than my coins on 'No', Columbia isnt going to give you the utility of an 'Ivy' in IE.
If the alternative, however is Columbia or TCNJ, TCNJ is about half the coin but the utility of Colombia is going to be worth more than double the marketability of TCNJ once you parse the metrics.
Looking at another alternative, if you were to consider HKU, often cited as an/the 'Ivy' in Asia (assuming you ignore the NUS advocates), their M.Ed is about USD$18K three times Portsmouth but a third of Columbia and in general has comparable marketability as Columbia when comparing similar idealized opportunities in some scenarios and at significantly less cost.
However, back too the beginning... "A Masters is a Masters is a Masters unless your looking at a Global IE 'Ivy' to include Harvard, Yale (US)), OxBridge (UK), McGill (CAN), the Sorbonne (EU), etc."
The twist of the dagger is in that "etc.", the rest arent generally, going to return sufficient utility and/or marketability to justify the coin.
Within the IE context 'Ivys' could be other institutions under specific scenarios. A drama/theater IT with an MFA from Juliard in acting could pitch and market that like an Ivy. An east coast wasp with a degree in education or post-bach studies in education with a credential from one of the Seven Sisters like Wellesley pursuing one of those posh boarding ISs in Switzerland is going to have higher marketability than some Edu Masters from State Uni of Somewhere Real.
Even Unis like John Hopkins which is far more renown for its medical science and allied health program demonstrates greater utility for an IT than State Uni of Somewhere Real, though in those scenarios its as much a factor of what the IT is doing with that opportunity (much as @Thames Pirate discussed) as it is the name on the scroll.
CAN and AUS are difficult to categorize when discussing 'Ivys' while both regions have poor Unis they are a very small minority, in general both AUS and CAN have highly regarded public/state Unis. McGill is typically recognized as an 'Ivy' even if there is considerable debate on what the other CAN 'Ivys' may be. This is only an issue as CAN as gained increasing market share and recognition in IE.
AUS is even more difficult and its exhausting debating which of the top 4 Uni is the 'Ivy' because they are so very similar in both experience and organization, there isnt a whole lot that differentiates them except for the fervor of their alumni and until AUS gains comparable market interest as a tertiary destination in IE, its not an issue Im motivated to see resolved.
Yes, Yale doesnt offer an edu degree, but thats not relevant nor is it my claim that it is. If youre a Lit IT an MA in Language and Literature or a history IT with an MA in history would have the same high degree of utility as an edu masters from Yale if they had one, and far more utility than an edu masters from sState Uni of Somewhere Real. Its not the subject or the level of the degree, its all those tiger moms and oligarch parents where in there culture its relationships and who you know and the status that goes with it that determines the opportunities you have and they assume that an alumni has access and connections too pathways of admission and acceptance for their children that will avail themselves if they can establish a relationship with those ITs, and so ownership in these IS can market those ITs to these parents, thats what makes it marketable. Just as you stated "Harvard is Harvard" well 'Yale is Yale' and its the name on the scroll that matters, not the field or degree level or even the marks/grades. You could have been a straight average graduate in classics at Yale and it would be worth more than perfect marks/grades and a degree in a chemical engineering program from State Uni of Somewhere Real, because its a 'Yale Graduate'.
The Harvard school of Educations Ed.M programs arent that difficult to gain entry into (relative to other programs such as Business), less than you would think for "Harvard". Their year long programs especially in the more esoteric concentrations dont really have a lot of competition for places, Harvard just isnt the place you associate with for Masters level edu studies compared to the competition for their doctoral programs.
To address your inquiry, what would be the alternatives? An edu Masters from Columbia compared to what and to do what?
A Masters at Columbia is going to cost UD$50K
1) Your interests are SG and SK. i dont see a masters from Columbia being all that helpful given the cost. SGs local Uni NUS is highly regarded and professional educator training is highly rigorous. There are a lot of bright professionals with comparable educations in SG. I dont see the HOSs and senior leadership at the tier 1 ISs in SG salivating at a masters from Columbia, youd get more utility out of a doctorate from anywhere in SG.
SK is different, it would really depend (again as @Thames Pirate discussed) to what you did with it and what your plans were. SK has a very small second tier and really large third tier. If you were going to take that masters from Columbia and peddle it to any third tier IS like a bottom tier bilingual IS thats a single owner business persons hobby with a couple hundred students you could spin the Columbia degree for the keys and leadership. If your goal is to push into one of the first tier ISs, theres some utility in it,but its probably not going to be worth the coin.
2) Looking at alternatives, if your comparing Columbia at USD$50K to something like Uni. Portsmouth at USD$6K and cost is important to you, Columbia is 8 times more for a "Ivy League" masters thats not in the IE group of 'Ivys', is there Utility there, yes, is it worth the coin depends on what your going to do with the opportunity. Push into a bottom third tier ISs leadership right away, than yeah you can recoup those costs in half a decade. If not, if all your going to do is change a line on your resume and push for tier 1 or bust than my coins on 'No', Columbia isnt going to give you the utility of an 'Ivy' in IE.
If the alternative, however is Columbia or TCNJ, TCNJ is about half the coin but the utility of Colombia is going to be worth more than double the marketability of TCNJ once you parse the metrics.
Looking at another alternative, if you were to consider HKU, often cited as an/the 'Ivy' in Asia (assuming you ignore the NUS advocates), their M.Ed is about USD$18K three times Portsmouth but a third of Columbia and in general has comparable marketability as Columbia when comparing similar idealized opportunities in some scenarios and at significantly less cost.
However, back too the beginning... "A Masters is a Masters is a Masters unless your looking at a Global IE 'Ivy' to include Harvard, Yale (US)), OxBridge (UK), McGill (CAN), the Sorbonne (EU), etc."
The twist of the dagger is in that "etc.", the rest arent generally, going to return sufficient utility and/or marketability to justify the coin.
-
shopaholic
- Posts: 82
- Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2017 11:42 pm
Re: @Psyguy about Ivy status
Psyguy, no American academic would agree with the following:
"No, of the Unis listed (Harvard, Yale) are members of the Ivy "League", an NCAA athletic conference, which @shopaholic identified. Its not equal to the term "Ivy" when used in context of IE. The UK also has its equivalent of 'Ivys', these are known as the golden triangle unis and I typically only include OxBridge of them when referring to 'Ivys' in the IE context."
PERHAPS some people in the UK refer to the Oxbridge unis as "Ivy", though I'm shocked that, given the number of people I know who attended these schools, I've never heard the term applied this way. But, OK, maybe?
The 8 schools I listed in the American Ivy League are the ONLY schools considered "Ivy" in American academia...this isn't just a sport league. There are some non-Ivies that enjoy a strong reputation, such as MIT, etc., but they aren't Ivy.
Evidence: I attended an "Ivy." I had professors from the UK Oxbridge schools, and they didn't refer to their universities as "Ivy." I work with someone who did a doctorate at Cambridge, and he insists that Cambridge is not "an Ivy."
I believe that you may have heard the term applied to schools such as Harvard, and somehow in your mind confused it as a sort of umbrella term for any prestigious uni.
What are your credentials, exactly, Psyguy? I've been following your posts for a while, and I'm interested.
"No, of the Unis listed (Harvard, Yale) are members of the Ivy "League", an NCAA athletic conference, which @shopaholic identified. Its not equal to the term "Ivy" when used in context of IE. The UK also has its equivalent of 'Ivys', these are known as the golden triangle unis and I typically only include OxBridge of them when referring to 'Ivys' in the IE context."
PERHAPS some people in the UK refer to the Oxbridge unis as "Ivy", though I'm shocked that, given the number of people I know who attended these schools, I've never heard the term applied this way. But, OK, maybe?
The 8 schools I listed in the American Ivy League are the ONLY schools considered "Ivy" in American academia...this isn't just a sport league. There are some non-Ivies that enjoy a strong reputation, such as MIT, etc., but they aren't Ivy.
Evidence: I attended an "Ivy." I had professors from the UK Oxbridge schools, and they didn't refer to their universities as "Ivy." I work with someone who did a doctorate at Cambridge, and he insists that Cambridge is not "an Ivy."
I believe that you may have heard the term applied to schools such as Harvard, and somehow in your mind confused it as a sort of umbrella term for any prestigious uni.
What are your credentials, exactly, Psyguy? I've been following your posts for a while, and I'm interested.
Reply
@shopaholic
Yes they would, Ive heard academics, school counselors, ITs, DTs, researchers in and out of the US refer to institutions as Ivys. Its cited in the literature as a term in the CHE among other publications.
Ive only heard a few English and Brits refer to Golden Triangle or Russel Group Unis as 'Ivys'.
The "Ivy League" is a NCAA athletics conference, it has no formal and official designation outside of that scope. There is no such keeper and regulator of titles in tertiary or higher education in the US that grants or bestows the title of "Ivy" or "Ivy League".
Considered by whom? Is there some regulatory authority that restricts the use and application of language, such that conventions can not be altered, changed, adapted, and reinvented. I dont really need the permission or approval of "whom" ever you may be referring too.
I suppose the membership could refer to them as kumquats as opposed to 'Ivys', but since the citation is from my post and I am the sole source of adjudication in terminology that Im going to use, I see no issue with adapting a term that has a convention for elite, prestigious institutions of learning and applying and adapting it to other such institutions that share similar characteristics and descriptors as an effective adaptation that shares meaning and further defining such terms within the context of how Im going to write in regards to IE.
The field of IE does not require the approval of "academia", American or otherwise.
I believe you somehow got it in your head that I or any contributor somehow need to explain or justify the use of language that despite being operationally defined, consistent and relate-able requires consent or counsel.
Lots of members, readers and contributors are interested. I attended and received a degree from an 'Ivy'.
Yes they would, Ive heard academics, school counselors, ITs, DTs, researchers in and out of the US refer to institutions as Ivys. Its cited in the literature as a term in the CHE among other publications.
Ive only heard a few English and Brits refer to Golden Triangle or Russel Group Unis as 'Ivys'.
The "Ivy League" is a NCAA athletics conference, it has no formal and official designation outside of that scope. There is no such keeper and regulator of titles in tertiary or higher education in the US that grants or bestows the title of "Ivy" or "Ivy League".
Considered by whom? Is there some regulatory authority that restricts the use and application of language, such that conventions can not be altered, changed, adapted, and reinvented. I dont really need the permission or approval of "whom" ever you may be referring too.
I suppose the membership could refer to them as kumquats as opposed to 'Ivys', but since the citation is from my post and I am the sole source of adjudication in terminology that Im going to use, I see no issue with adapting a term that has a convention for elite, prestigious institutions of learning and applying and adapting it to other such institutions that share similar characteristics and descriptors as an effective adaptation that shares meaning and further defining such terms within the context of how Im going to write in regards to IE.
The field of IE does not require the approval of "academia", American or otherwise.
I believe you somehow got it in your head that I or any contributor somehow need to explain or justify the use of language that despite being operationally defined, consistent and relate-able requires consent or counsel.
Lots of members, readers and contributors are interested. I attended and received a degree from an 'Ivy'.
-
Thames Pirate
- Posts: 1150
- Joined: Fri Jul 05, 2013 8:06 am
Re: @Psyguy about Ivy status
I have never heard of the term Ivy being applied to anything but actual Ivy League schools, though that's just my experience.
-
intotheblue
- Posts: 26
- Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2017 4:31 am
Re: @Psyguy about Ivy status
@PsyGuy
Thank you for the reply.
Then may I ask you what schools in the States are considered as "Ivy" in IE, other than Harvard and Yale?
Would you say Stanford is considered as "Ivy" ?
Yale, Princeton, and MIT don't have any masters program that I am interested in, so applying to these schools are pointless.
Also, I assume Oxford is considered as "Ivy". They offer an online masters degree in TESOL. If I get a master's degree from here, would I still be able to benefit from the "Ivy" status despite it being online program due to the prestige that comes along with Oxford?
At last, I was kind of surprised to hear from you that McGill is typically considered as "Ivy" in IE. I actually have a bachelor's degree from McGill. Although it's one of the top schools in Canada, I think it's nowhere as prestigious as some US schools including Columbia, Upenn, John's Hopkins, ULCA, etc to the perception of people in Canada or East Asia.
If my goal is to get a job in first tier school (if there is any, in South Korea) or at least in 2nd tier school,
would you say Bachelor's degree in BA is enough? I didn't major in education though, and that's why I was asking you about Teach Now previously. I felt like getting teacher certificate form Teach Now plus McGill degree simply wouldn't be enough to get a good chance of getting a job in first tier/second tier schools. For this reason, I was considering of getting a education masters degree from top schools.
With that in mind, what option below would you say is the best? Of course, everything is on the premise that I would be admitted to these schools.
1. Get Teach Now (elementary certificate) on top of my McGill degree
2. Get Teach Now (elementary certificate) + Online Masters degree in TESOL from Oxford
3. Get Masters degree from Stanford or Columbia in elementary education (Harvard only has masters in secondary education)
*I considered of getting Masters degree in elementary education from University of Toronto, but although it costs a lot cheaper than US schools, it takes 2 years to complete the program whereas US schools only take 1 year.
Thank you
Thank you for the reply.
Then may I ask you what schools in the States are considered as "Ivy" in IE, other than Harvard and Yale?
Would you say Stanford is considered as "Ivy" ?
Yale, Princeton, and MIT don't have any masters program that I am interested in, so applying to these schools are pointless.
Also, I assume Oxford is considered as "Ivy". They offer an online masters degree in TESOL. If I get a master's degree from here, would I still be able to benefit from the "Ivy" status despite it being online program due to the prestige that comes along with Oxford?
At last, I was kind of surprised to hear from you that McGill is typically considered as "Ivy" in IE. I actually have a bachelor's degree from McGill. Although it's one of the top schools in Canada, I think it's nowhere as prestigious as some US schools including Columbia, Upenn, John's Hopkins, ULCA, etc to the perception of people in Canada or East Asia.
If my goal is to get a job in first tier school (if there is any, in South Korea) or at least in 2nd tier school,
would you say Bachelor's degree in BA is enough? I didn't major in education though, and that's why I was asking you about Teach Now previously. I felt like getting teacher certificate form Teach Now plus McGill degree simply wouldn't be enough to get a good chance of getting a job in first tier/second tier schools. For this reason, I was considering of getting a education masters degree from top schools.
With that in mind, what option below would you say is the best? Of course, everything is on the premise that I would be admitted to these schools.
1. Get Teach Now (elementary certificate) on top of my McGill degree
2. Get Teach Now (elementary certificate) + Online Masters degree in TESOL from Oxford
3. Get Masters degree from Stanford or Columbia in elementary education (Harvard only has masters in secondary education)
*I considered of getting Masters degree in elementary education from University of Toronto, but although it costs a lot cheaper than US schools, it takes 2 years to complete the program whereas US schools only take 1 year.
Thank you
Re: @Psyguy about Ivy status
Oh Dave, This is such nonsense: "Ive (sic) only heard a few English and Brits refer to Golden Triangle or Russel (sic) Group Unis as 'Ivys' (sic)." No Brit would EVER use such a term.
But this line is funnier still: "I attended and received a degree from an 'Ivy'." You forget, I've seen your resume. I suppose there's no harm in using the Forum as a kind of "Second Life" game, but what you are doing is making use of false claims and experiences to give greater weight to your opinions. Now that may not strictly be a breach of Forum rules, but it does seem to me to be a breach of etiquette.
But this line is funnier still: "I attended and received a degree from an 'Ivy'." You forget, I've seen your resume. I suppose there's no harm in using the Forum as a kind of "Second Life" game, but what you are doing is making use of false claims and experiences to give greater weight to your opinions. Now that may not strictly be a breach of Forum rules, but it does seem to me to be a breach of etiquette.
Re: @Psyguy about Ivy status
I don't know why people are splitting hairs over the use of the term Ivy to generalize the most elite universities in the world. It is pretty easy to understand what Psyguy means, even if the term is being applied in a more general way. But there are also plenty of "name" schools with prestige like UCLA and they are going to give you a leg up with recruiters, so no way are all non Ivy masters created equal.
Reply
@intotheblue
It would depend on the scenario, in general US 'Ivys' for IE would include Harvard, Yale and Stanford. There are others scenarios however where other institutions (such as the Juilliard example above) or MIT, etc. would give the presenting IT equivalent utility (such as the John Hopkins example above). The other Unis even those in the "Ivy League" and certainly not UCLA, etc. dont make the cut.
This is why statements that "only X unis are Ivys because they are in the Ivy League" are rather absurd, anyone at Harvard or Yale who sets there ego aside would be a nutter if they didnt consider Stanford as a peer.
OxBridge which comprises Oxford and Cambridge in the UK are IE 'Ivys', they are two unis part of the Golden Triangle Unis but generally those Unis dont make it into IE 'Ivys', of course as above a case could be made for those as well that a presenting IT could enjoy equivalent utility. An economics IT who got their Business or Economics Masters from LSE (London School of Economics) can very likely enjoy some utility in that scenario.
If you are conferred your Masters from Oxford, you will have IE 'Ivy' utility, no one will care how you got it, or what the mode of delivery was. Your resume and scroll will say "University of Oxford" (and your college) and nothing beyond that except trying to sound like a humble, down to earth snob will matter. The Oxford program you mentioned is also a lot less expensive in coin, about a third of Columbia, and standing a top the Oxford platform and looking down you wouldnt even be able to see Columbia.
Well its CAN and Canadians tend not to be the "were number ONE" types. Understand that even IE 'Ivys" are on a continuum, being part of the same group doesnt make them equal. If a Chinese students tiger mom had a choice between her child going to Harvard or McGill for a first degree in Business, its not even a scenario you have to think about, Harvard is going to win. CAN is gaining market share though.
There are 1st tier ISs in SK, every region has 1st, 2nd, and 3rd tier, tier status is regionally restricted. The issue in SK is that its 2nd tier ivery small and tends to pull on the floater ISs from the third tier, nature (including human nature) just abhors a vacuum.
Would a BA from McGill and a DC credential be enough for a tier 1 IS as a primary HRT in SK. What kind of experience do you have? Assuming you have none that youre an intern class IT and at best your only experience was in ESOL, my coin is on 'No', but it would give you better utility in getting into something in a higher third tier that would see you in a tier 1 IS sooner.
One of the issues is that while 'Ivys' provide utility and marketability, you still have to do the job and teaching as a profession is as much craft as it is theory and no amount of study can give you the craft regardless of where your degree is from. While there are ISs that wouldnt care if you could do the job as long as you stood on the right side of the classroom and gave out high marks and there are higher tier ISs that wouldnt care as long as they got to put your Oxford degree on their marketing materials and sell that to parents, tier 1 ISs will require actual competence and expertise. The walk int he door and get the keys because I graduated Oxford works in the third tier and with ESs, not first tier ISs.
In response to your choices, its not a fork in the road and you can choose only one (the red pill or the blue pill), there are a mix of options.
looking at them its great you understand that a professional credential is highly marketable and youve settled on a program (teach Now) that will provide that to you with a balance of factors including costs and resources. I would strongly advise that after obtaining the DC credential in primary and adding ESOL and/or SPED/LS/LD/SEN you apply for QTS in the UK. You can then rest easier knowing that you wont have to worry about PD.
I would first start by pitching your credential and McGill degree and see what interest you get. Start recruiting while working on your credential in Teach Now, youre going to have to do your field experience somewhere, start with the first tier ISs in SK and see if one of them will give you the opportunity. If that works out well, once you have the credential they may happily offer you an appointment.
Moving on, after parsing the data its really difficult to justify the US (Stanford) option compared to Oxford and the value of costs that are a third of Stanfords and allows you to study part time by distance, allowing you to work and use your classroom as a living case study. Allowing you to gain experience in at worst a lower tier IS so that when your done with the Oxford Masters youll have the requisite two years (possibly 3 years) experience as well:
- Three Years Primary Experience @ Acme AS, South Korea
- District of Columbia Standard License in Elementary Education and ESL
- QTS, UK
- Master of Science (Teaching), University of Oxford, UK
- Bachelor of Arts (Stuff), McGill University, CAN
Thats 5 very marketable bullet points that allows you to work, gaining experience and coin, gives you 'Ivy' marketability for your degrees all while studying part time and staying in the classroom doing it. That will get you talk and tea at a tier 1 ISs in SK and SG.
It would depend on the scenario, in general US 'Ivys' for IE would include Harvard, Yale and Stanford. There are others scenarios however where other institutions (such as the Juilliard example above) or MIT, etc. would give the presenting IT equivalent utility (such as the John Hopkins example above). The other Unis even those in the "Ivy League" and certainly not UCLA, etc. dont make the cut.
This is why statements that "only X unis are Ivys because they are in the Ivy League" are rather absurd, anyone at Harvard or Yale who sets there ego aside would be a nutter if they didnt consider Stanford as a peer.
OxBridge which comprises Oxford and Cambridge in the UK are IE 'Ivys', they are two unis part of the Golden Triangle Unis but generally those Unis dont make it into IE 'Ivys', of course as above a case could be made for those as well that a presenting IT could enjoy equivalent utility. An economics IT who got their Business or Economics Masters from LSE (London School of Economics) can very likely enjoy some utility in that scenario.
If you are conferred your Masters from Oxford, you will have IE 'Ivy' utility, no one will care how you got it, or what the mode of delivery was. Your resume and scroll will say "University of Oxford" (and your college) and nothing beyond that except trying to sound like a humble, down to earth snob will matter. The Oxford program you mentioned is also a lot less expensive in coin, about a third of Columbia, and standing a top the Oxford platform and looking down you wouldnt even be able to see Columbia.
Well its CAN and Canadians tend not to be the "were number ONE" types. Understand that even IE 'Ivys" are on a continuum, being part of the same group doesnt make them equal. If a Chinese students tiger mom had a choice between her child going to Harvard or McGill for a first degree in Business, its not even a scenario you have to think about, Harvard is going to win. CAN is gaining market share though.
There are 1st tier ISs in SK, every region has 1st, 2nd, and 3rd tier, tier status is regionally restricted. The issue in SK is that its 2nd tier ivery small and tends to pull on the floater ISs from the third tier, nature (including human nature) just abhors a vacuum.
Would a BA from McGill and a DC credential be enough for a tier 1 IS as a primary HRT in SK. What kind of experience do you have? Assuming you have none that youre an intern class IT and at best your only experience was in ESOL, my coin is on 'No', but it would give you better utility in getting into something in a higher third tier that would see you in a tier 1 IS sooner.
One of the issues is that while 'Ivys' provide utility and marketability, you still have to do the job and teaching as a profession is as much craft as it is theory and no amount of study can give you the craft regardless of where your degree is from. While there are ISs that wouldnt care if you could do the job as long as you stood on the right side of the classroom and gave out high marks and there are higher tier ISs that wouldnt care as long as they got to put your Oxford degree on their marketing materials and sell that to parents, tier 1 ISs will require actual competence and expertise. The walk int he door and get the keys because I graduated Oxford works in the third tier and with ESs, not first tier ISs.
In response to your choices, its not a fork in the road and you can choose only one (the red pill or the blue pill), there are a mix of options.
looking at them its great you understand that a professional credential is highly marketable and youve settled on a program (teach Now) that will provide that to you with a balance of factors including costs and resources. I would strongly advise that after obtaining the DC credential in primary and adding ESOL and/or SPED/LS/LD/SEN you apply for QTS in the UK. You can then rest easier knowing that you wont have to worry about PD.
I would first start by pitching your credential and McGill degree and see what interest you get. Start recruiting while working on your credential in Teach Now, youre going to have to do your field experience somewhere, start with the first tier ISs in SK and see if one of them will give you the opportunity. If that works out well, once you have the credential they may happily offer you an appointment.
Moving on, after parsing the data its really difficult to justify the US (Stanford) option compared to Oxford and the value of costs that are a third of Stanfords and allows you to study part time by distance, allowing you to work and use your classroom as a living case study. Allowing you to gain experience in at worst a lower tier IS so that when your done with the Oxford Masters youll have the requisite two years (possibly 3 years) experience as well:
- Three Years Primary Experience @ Acme AS, South Korea
- District of Columbia Standard License in Elementary Education and ESL
- QTS, UK
- Master of Science (Teaching), University of Oxford, UK
- Bachelor of Arts (Stuff), McGill University, CAN
Thats 5 very marketable bullet points that allows you to work, gaining experience and coin, gives you 'Ivy' marketability for your degrees all while studying part time and staying in the classroom doing it. That will get you talk and tea at a tier 1 ISs in SK and SG.
-
intotheblue
- Posts: 26
- Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2017 4:31 am
Re: @Psyguy about Ivy status
@psyguy
Thank you very much for the detailed explanation.
Few more things to ask if you don't mind.
First of all, what is Acme AS? and what is ES?
After I acquire the DC certificate through Teach-Now, will that prepare me to get a teaching job in South Korea in conjunction with McGill degree despite Teach Now being online program? I am bit worried, because I heard there are many international schools that look down on online programs and disregard them.
Also, it seems like most international schools in South Korea require "2 years" of experience. Where would I get this at a proper international school in the first place, when everyone is looking for 2 years of experience here?
I do have 1.5 yrs of teaching experience at a bilingual school, but I guess that doesn't count since it was from bilingual school, not international school that didn't even require teaching certificate from English teachers?
Like you said, I like the relatively low cost and distance learning format at Oxford. I think these factors are great and this is why I am mostly interested in this program. However, I learned that this program may be extremely competitive to get in because they only have 10 spots for candidates each year.
If I fail to get into one of the "Ivy" schools you mention (Stanford, Oxford, Cambridge. Again, there is no suitable program for me at Harvard or Yale), would you say getting a masters degree fro Columbia or University of Toronto is still worth it compared to having only Bachelor's degree from McGill + teach now certificate?
Again, my concern is not being able to get a job at 2nd tier or 1st tier schools due to the fact that I don't have a formal education related degree except for online degree program (teach now).
And out of curiosity... Is the "Ivy" status essentially defined by layman's prestige?
If so, I can see why Princeton wasn't included on the list you mentioned, and understand why there is so much gap between Oxford and Columbia, when they are both considered as excellent schools in academia.
Thank you very much for the detailed explanation.
Few more things to ask if you don't mind.
First of all, what is Acme AS? and what is ES?
After I acquire the DC certificate through Teach-Now, will that prepare me to get a teaching job in South Korea in conjunction with McGill degree despite Teach Now being online program? I am bit worried, because I heard there are many international schools that look down on online programs and disregard them.
Also, it seems like most international schools in South Korea require "2 years" of experience. Where would I get this at a proper international school in the first place, when everyone is looking for 2 years of experience here?
I do have 1.5 yrs of teaching experience at a bilingual school, but I guess that doesn't count since it was from bilingual school, not international school that didn't even require teaching certificate from English teachers?
Like you said, I like the relatively low cost and distance learning format at Oxford. I think these factors are great and this is why I am mostly interested in this program. However, I learned that this program may be extremely competitive to get in because they only have 10 spots for candidates each year.
If I fail to get into one of the "Ivy" schools you mention (Stanford, Oxford, Cambridge. Again, there is no suitable program for me at Harvard or Yale), would you say getting a masters degree fro Columbia or University of Toronto is still worth it compared to having only Bachelor's degree from McGill + teach now certificate?
Again, my concern is not being able to get a job at 2nd tier or 1st tier schools due to the fact that I don't have a formal education related degree except for online degree program (teach now).
And out of curiosity... Is the "Ivy" status essentially defined by layman's prestige?
If so, I can see why Princeton wasn't included on the list you mentioned, and understand why there is so much gap between Oxford and Columbia, when they are both considered as excellent schools in academia.