[This is the initial e-mail that started this blog.]
A week ago, I chatted with relatives
 whose daughter at UMass 
Amherst just finished her freshman year.  She has the option to transfer
 to Boston University.  The parents would prefer for her to transfer 
because 
of higher 
ranking and better job prospects for BU.  I wrote the e-mail below to 
share my thoughts.  I then forwarded my message to friends and 
acquaintances, asking for their feeling about this topic.
Hi Josh and Marisa!
I just wanted to follow up on our discussion at the bar-mitzvah.
Naturally,
 you should take everything that I say with a grain of salt - I have not
 gone to Umass or to BU.  So, all of my thoughts are completely generic 
and abstract.
Josh, you graduated from the BU law school, right? 
 However, you know a lot more about the law school than any other 
department.  NYU is stellar in math and horrible in biology.  Moreover, 
you know BU, but not the undergraduate training there.  For a molecular 
biology Ph.D. program, I would avoid NYU like the plague, but I would 
instantly choose NYU over Berkeley for an undergraduate in pre-med or 
biology.
And even if you do know about the undergraduate 
experience at BU, you don't have the proper alternative experience at 
UMass Amherst to make a comparison.
Since few 
people get undergraduate degrees simultaneously at two different 
colleges, no one can reasonably compare the undergraduate experience of 
Amherst to BU.  That's why we rely on rankings.  And this is something 
that I have a huge issue with.  The rankings are indicative of very 
little.  Yes, the number 1 school is better than the school ranked #500.
  But comparing US News rankings of BU at 53 and UMass Amherst at 94 - 
the difference in ranking here is completely meaningless.  I can write 
pages on this, but luckily, Malcom Gladwell already did.  Please read his essay "The Order of Things (What college rankings really tell us)". 
If we ignore the rankings, there is still the 
argument of "job prospects."  Here, I think the statistics truly do not 
tell us anything.  There may be more unemployed Amherst graduates, but 
that does not mean anything for Mia's prospects.  The proper 
question is not how many graduates from this or that school get jobs in a
 particular field.  The proper question is whether  a given student, 
after Amherst or BU has different job prospects.  This is a much tougher
 question to answer in a proper study.  If you could do the study well, 
correcting for all socio-economic factors, I bet you would find that 
there is zero difference for a similar student in their life/career 
prospects.  I am positive that Mia, as a graduate of either college,
 would achieve the exact same success.
I do agree that the network of 
alumni matters. 
 Although, I think it matters little out of undergraduate, compared to 
MBA, law, or other graduate training.  Furthermore, I think Mia might 
have a better network out of Amherst, because everyone is on 
campus in a community, rather than the urban setting of BU.  Speaking of
 network and lifestyle, UMass Amherst has a 50-50 male/female split.  BU
 has an enormous gender bias with only 40% males.  That is a horrible 
setup.  I don't mean with respect to finding a husband.  I mean for 
everything.  It's awful.  NYC has a slight female majority, and it has 
dramatic  consequences for women in the city.  The BU female majority is
 
insane and probably has a hugely negative impact on friendships and 
competition 
between females.  If I had a son, I'd have nothing against him going to 
BU.  For Eeva, I would strongly advise her against BU.
I repeat, I don't know BU or UMass Amherst per se. 
 I am just sharing what I think are the wrong metrics.  We all use the 
wrong metrics because they are so accessible and easy to compare.  They 
are wrong.
The questions that Mia should be asking in deciding between BU and Amherst are:
1)
 Given the majors that I am likely to be interested in, which school has
 better teachers/professors?  Are the professors teaching (you don't 
want teaching assistants, most of the time)?  Does the school value 
teaching when it hires?  Columbia math department couldn't care less 
about teaching skills.  I've been on the Berkeley hiring committee of 
faculty - no one asks about teaching; it's all about research and 
ability to bring in millions of NIH dollars.  Some professors are 
spectacular teachers, most mediocre, and some atrocious.  A school that 
cares about the teaching talents when it hires can have most of its 
professors as stellar.
2) Are both schools equally stimulating 
environments, intellectually?  Are the people next to me better than me?
  If you think you are smarter than most, you are in the wrong place. 
 You should always feel inferior (at least slightly worse than most 
people in your class).
3) Which lifestyle, campus, surrounding activity 
appeals to me more?  Where will I enjoy myself more?  It's four years of
 your life.  You are working hard.  It should not be miserable.  These 
should be some of the best years of one's life.
4) Given the majors that I am thinking of, what are 
the required courses?  Are they interesting to me?  How much flexibility is 
there in the curriculum?
5) Which place will inspire me more and keep me interested in learning and discovering myself and the world?
I
 have no doubt that Mia will do well, regardless of the school. 
 Worrying about BU or Umass Amherst on the undergraduate level is like 
me worrying about Columbia versus Stanford, 15 years ago.