Is Harvard over-rated?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Goldman Sachs of 20 years ago is not the GS of today. They are not interested in history and English majors from Harvard anymore. They simply cannot do the math required. Sea change. Physics, CS, math (4 years of rigorous college level math with all As), and engineering majors are who they after. If you are into quantum computing, especially, you will have MANY offers. Same holds true for private equity, venture and hedge funds. They are not interested in the folks who barely passed BC calculus. If you took Math 55 at Harvard, you are probably still in the game.

Tell that to my kid’s rooming group who have multiple history majors going into finance. It’s not changed that much. Quant is not GS.

People with above average intelligence won't come to a conclusion based on a few examples they know.

What do you think the DOE data is?

When the statement is that it is impossible to get a job, actually knowing a few counter examples is all you need.

The fact is that after three years of harvard history degree, the median salary is $60K for whatever reasons.

A few examples don't mean shit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Goldman Sachs of 20 years ago is not the GS of today. They are not interested in history and English majors from Harvard anymore. They simply cannot do the math required. Sea change. Physics, CS, math (4 years of rigorous college level math with all As), and engineering majors are who they after. If you are into quantum computing, especially, you will have MANY offers. Same holds true for private equity, venture and hedge funds. They are not interested in the folks who barely passed BC calculus. If you took Math 55 at Harvard, you are probably still in the game.

Tell that to my kid’s rooming group who have multiple history majors going into finance. It’s not changed that much. Quant is not GS.

People with above average intelligence won't come to a conclusion based on a few examples they know.

What do you think the DOE data is?

When the statement is that it is impossible to get a job, actually knowing a few counter examples is all you need.

The fact is that after three years of harvard history degree, the median salary is $60K for whatever reasons.

A few examples don't mean shit.

As usual you’re missing the point. If you claim it is impossible for history majors to get jobs in finance then a few examples is all you need to demonstrate you are full of it.

The DOE data is limited in scope - do you know who contributes the data?

It’s no surprise you want to take a complicated issue and reduce it to one piece of incomplete data. You are incapable of grasping anything more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard is the type of school where you can study art history or “Government” and still end up with a lucrative career in finance.

Whatever that tangible benefit is called….people really want it. I bet there’s a German word for this.

Nope, again that's your imagination. 

https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/school/?166027-Harvard-University&fos_code=5401&fos_credential=3
Harvard History: $60,343

https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/school/?166027-Harvard-University&fos_code=4510&fos_credential=3
Harvard Political Science: $64,803

History and Political Science are the better ones, but still don't look 'lucrative'
Just a little better than lower tier schools, but not so lucrative.

Again elite majors >>> elite name brand schools
It's 21st century.  Don't rely on rumors or imagination.
Middle class/UMC folks who spend $$ better be aware.

For comparison in Boston area.

https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/school/?167358-Northeastern-University&fos_code=5201&fos_credential=3
Northeatesrn Business: $78,684

https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/school/?164988-Boston-University&fos_code=5202&fos_credential=3
Boston University Business: $71,952

Not even STEM.
Is Harvard overrated? Very Much.

Harvard computer science - $163,896.

That is a massive premium to the CS earnings at Northeastern and BU

Agree, Harvard CS is on par with MIT CS, Stanford CS, and Berkeley CS (can't find the numbers for Princeton CS). Big misconception that it isn't. Same goes for Yale, also on par with all of those four. All five of these fall underneath the Carnegie Mellon though

Of course Harvard + CS is a real deal unlike the ALDC kids in easy majors(43% of White kids)

Many of them actually get into the lucrative finance field mentioned earlier, but not the history major as someone's delusion.

I know you’re bizarrely obsessed with the idea of elite vs easy majors, but if you really think a Harvard history major can’t get a finance job out of school, you are blinded by your beliefs.

Seriously, what is wrong with these people??
It's not about my belief or your imagination.

We have the data, and this is exactly why the Obama administration started it.
https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/school/?166027-Harvard-University&fos_code=5401&fos_credential=3
Harvard history = $60,343

https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/school/?166027-Harvard-University&fos_code=1107&fos_credential=3
Harvard CS = $163,896

Why do you think there's such a  humongous difference?
One is an easy major that is not valued much by society and the industry.
The other one gets tremendous respect hence rewarded as such.

Rich people are promoting the delusional value of the elite school because they send their ALDC kids there to take easy majors.  They have rich dads, fancy connections, and the children have trust funds.  Some poor middle class people blindley buy that.Middle class people should be aware of these dumb delusional and fantasy.
Again this is why Obama started this information.
Go with the baseless fantasy or the Department of Education data.
Take a pick.

Because plenty of history majors decide to pursue advanced degrees or do an interim job before attending law school where their income will be zero. The point is that history majors can and do get finance jobs. Or consulting jobs. Or jobs in industry. And the idea that someone who majors in history should just choose to major in CS is inane.

And the department of education data is the definition of small sample size.

You have a point that CS majors make more than history majors but you are wildly overselling it and reaching the wrong conclusions.

I'm sure there are Harvard CS graduates going to a grad school for specialization or research, etc. by choice.
Do you have any source showing your claims or are you just pulling sutff out of the air again.

These are three year out numbers, so if anything middle class folks should plan to spend more money and time for law school, grad school, or whatever according to PP if you are majoring in history at Harvard.  

You really have no idea what the DOE data is do you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard is the type of school where you can study art history or “Government” and still end up with a lucrative career in finance.

Whatever that tangible benefit is called….people really want it. I bet there’s a German word for this.

Nope, again that's your imagination. 

https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/school/?166027-Harvard-University&fos_code=5401&fos_credential=3
Harvard History: $60,343

https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/school/?166027-Harvard-University&fos_code=4510&fos_credential=3
Harvard Political Science: $64,803

History and Political Science are the better ones, but still don't look 'lucrative'
Just a little better than lower tier schools, but not so lucrative.

Again elite majors >>> elite name brand schools
It's 21st century.  Don't rely on rumors or imagination.
Middle class/UMC folks who spend $$ better be aware.

For comparison in Boston area.

https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/school/?167358-Northeastern-University&fos_code=5201&fos_credential=3
Northeatesrn Business: $78,684

https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/school/?164988-Boston-University&fos_code=5202&fos_credential=3
Boston University Business: $71,952

Not even STEM.
Is Harvard overrated? Very Much.

Harvard computer science - $163,896.

That is a massive premium to the CS earnings at Northeastern and BU

Agree, Harvard CS is on par with MIT CS, Stanford CS, and Berkeley CS (can't find the numbers for Princeton CS). Big misconception that it isn't. Same goes for Yale, also on par with all of those four. All five of these fall underneath the Carnegie Mellon though

Of course Harvard + CS is a real deal unlike the ALDC kids in easy majors(43% of White kids)

Many of them actually get into the lucrative finance field mentioned earlier, but not the history major as someone's delusion.

I know you’re bizarrely obsessed with the idea of elite vs easy majors, but if you really think a Harvard history major can’t get a finance job out of school, you are blinded by your beliefs.

Seriously, what is wrong with these people??
It's not about my belief or your imagination.

We have the data, and this is exactly why the Obama administration started it.
https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/school/?166027-Harvard-University&fos_code=5401&fos_credential=3
Harvard history = $60,343

https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/school/?166027-Harvard-University&fos_code=1107&fos_credential=3
Harvard CS = $163,896

Why do you think there's such a  humongous difference?
One is an easy major that is not valued much by society and the industry.
The other one gets tremendous respect hence rewarded as such.

Rich people are promoting the delusional value of the elite school because they send their ALDC kids there to take easy majors.  They have rich dads, fancy connections, and the children have trust funds.  Some poor middle class people blindley buy that.Middle class people should be aware of these dumb delusional and fantasy.
Again this is why Obama started this information.
Go with the baseless fantasy or the Department of Education data.
Take a pick.

Because plenty of history majors decide to pursue advanced degrees or do an interim job before attending law school where their income will be zero. The point is that history majors can and do get finance jobs. Or consulting jobs. Or jobs in industry. And the idea that someone who majors in history should just choose to major in CS is inane.

And the department of education data is the definition of small sample size.

You have a point that CS majors make more than history majors but you are wildly overselling it and reaching the wrong conclusions.

I'm sure there are Harvard CS graduates going to a grad school for specialization or research, etc. by choice.
Do you have any source showing your claims or are you just pulling sutff out of the air again.

These are three year out numbers, so if anything middle class folks should plan to spend more money and time for law school, grad school, or whatever according to PP if you are majoring in history at Harvard.  

You really have no idea what the DOE data is do you?

Please share your wisdom and insight
Please Please Please

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Goldman Sachs of 20 years ago is not the GS of today. They are not interested in history and English majors from Harvard anymore. They simply cannot do the math required. Sea change. Physics, CS, math (4 years of rigorous college level math with all As), and engineering majors are who they after. If you are into quantum computing, especially, you will have MANY offers. Same holds true for private equity, venture and hedge funds. They are not interested in the folks who barely passed BC calculus. If you took Math 55 at Harvard, you are probably still in the game.

Tell that to my kid’s rooming group who have multiple history majors going into finance. It’s not changed that much. Quant is not GS.

People with above average intelligence won't come to a conclusion based on a few examples they know.

What do you think the DOE data is?

When the statement is that it is impossible to get a job, actually knowing a few counter examples is all you need.

The fact is that after three years of harvard history degree, the median salary is $60K for whatever reasons.

A few examples don't mean shit.

As usual you’re missing the point. If you claim it is impossible for history majors to get jobs in finance then a few examples is all you need to demonstrate you are full of it.

The DOE data is limited in scope - do you know who contributes the data?

It’s no surprise you want to take a complicated issue and reduce it to one piece of incomplete data. You are incapable of grasping anything more.

When the F did I say it is impossible for history majors to get jobs in finance??
There might always be some lucky ones here and there.
The DOE data is much much much X 100000 better than your imagination and fantasy.

[Anonymous]

If you have a Harvard degree it signals you are smart and/or talented no matter what field you major in. Among schools that signal graduates are smart and/or talented, a Harvard degree signals you are at or near the top of the pack. If you have a degree from almost all other other top schools, it signals you are smart and/or talented, but not quite to the extent to make it to Harvard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Doing some research for my DC who is a sophomore. Recent grad outcomes appear very pedestrian and it appears many are struggling to find work. Are the glory days for Harvard behind them? Serious question. I cannot find reasons why Harvard is any better than other schools in the top 50 USNWR rankings. Recent matriculants I have known personally are not that impressive and seem to be a blend of legacy, VIP and athlete. What am I missing? Perhaps it is a dying brand - what am I missing? Does the emperor have any clothes here?

Harvard is a mediocre university but an excellent "golf club" to know the right people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you have a Harvard degree it signals you are smart and/or talented no matter what field you major in. Among schools that signal graduates are smart and/or talented, a Harvard degree signals you are at or near the top of the pack. If you have a degree from almost all other other top schools, it signals you are smart and/or talented, but not quite to the extent to make it to Harvard.

+1 still helped me and a few friends lately with mid career changes etc

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you have a Harvard degree it signals you are smart and/or talented no matter what field you major in. Among schools that signal graduates are smart and/or talented, a Harvard degree signals you are at or near the top of the pack. If you have a degree from almost all other other top schools, it signals you are smart and/or talented, but not quite to the extent to make it to Harvard.

There may have been a brief period when this was the case (1970s to 1990s), but now it just signals you had the right connections or ticked the right boxes, at least if we’re talking about the undergraduate program. No one really thinks a Malia Obama is any smarter or more talented than the typical graduate of a big state school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you have a Harvard degree it signals you are smart and/or talented no matter what field you major in. Among schools that signal graduates are smart and/or talented, a Harvard degree signals you are at or near the top of the pack. If you have a degree from almost all other other top schools, it signals you are smart and/or talented, but not quite to the extent to make it to Harvard.

There may have been a brief period when this was the case (1970s to 1990s), but now it just signals you had the right connections or ticked the right boxes, at least if we’re talking about the undergraduate program. No one really thinks a Malia Obama is any smarter or more talented than the typical graduate of a big state school.

Why pick on Malia?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard is the type of school where you can study art history or “Government” and still end up with a lucrative career in finance.

Whatever that tangible benefit is called….people really want it. I bet there’s a German word for this.

Nope, again that's your imagination. 

https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/school/?166027-Harvard-University&fos_code=5401&fos_credential=3
Harvard History: $60,343

https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/school/?166027-Harvard-University&fos_code=4510&fos_credential=3
Harvard Political Science: $64,803

History and Political Science are the better ones, but still don't look 'lucrative'
Just a little better than lower tier schools, but not so lucrative.

Again elite majors >>> elite name brand schools
It's 21st century.  Don't rely on rumors or imagination.
Middle class/UMC folks who spend $$ better be aware.

For comparison in Boston area.

https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/school/?167358-Northeastern-University&fos_code=5201&fos_credential=3
Northeatesrn Business: $78,684

https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/school/?164988-Boston-University&fos_code=5202&fos_credential=3
Boston University Business: $71,952

Not even STEM.
Is Harvard overrated? Very Much.

Harvard computer science - $163,896.

That is a massive premium to the CS earnings at Northeastern and BU

Agree, Harvard CS is on par with MIT CS, Stanford CS, and Berkeley CS (can't find the numbers for Princeton CS). Big misconception that it isn't. Same goes for Yale, also on par with all of those four. All five of these fall underneath the Carnegie Mellon though

Of course Harvard + CS is a real deal unlike the ALDC kids in easy majors(43% of White kids)

Many of them actually get into the lucrative finance field mentioned earlier, but not the history major as someone's delusion.

I know you’re bizarrely obsessed with the idea of elite vs easy majors, but if you really think a Harvard history major can’t get a finance job out of school, you are blinded by your beliefs.

Seriously, what is wrong with these people??
It's not about my belief or your imagination.

We have the data, and this is exactly why the Obama administration started it.
https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/school/?166027-Harvard-University&fos_code=5401&fos_credential=3
Harvard history = $60,343

https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/school/?166027-Harvard-University&fos_code=1107&fos_credential=3
Harvard CS = $163,896

Why do you think there's such a  humongous difference?
One is an easy major that is not valued much by society and the industry.
The other one gets tremendous respect hence rewarded as such.

Rich people are promoting the delusional value of the elite school because they send their ALDC kids there to take easy majors.  They have rich dads, fancy connections, and the children have trust funds.  Some poor middle class people blindley buy that.Middle class people should be aware of these dumb delusional and fantasy.
Again this is why Obama started this information.
Go with the baseless fantasy or the Department of Education data.
Take a pick.

Because plenty of history majors decide to pursue advanced degrees or do an interim job before attending law school where their income will be zero. The point is that history majors can and do get finance jobs. Or consulting jobs. Or jobs in industry. And the idea that someone who majors in history should just choose to major in CS is inane.

And the department of education data is the definition of small sample size.

You have a point that CS majors make more than history majors but you are wildly overselling it and reaching the wrong conclusions.

I'm sure there are Harvard CS graduates going to a grad school for specialization or research, etc. by choice.
Do you have any source showing your claims or are you just pulling sutff out of the air again.

These are three year out numbers, so if anything middle class folks should plan to spend more money and time for law school, grad school, or whatever according to PP if you are majoring in history at Harvard.  

You really have no idea what the DOE data is do you?

Please share your wisdom and insight
Please Please Please

Not the PP but DOE is department of Energy. Education is always Education or “Ed” because it came after DOE. Anyone who has worked in the White House or other agencies can tell you that

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you have a Harvard degree it signals you are smart and/or talented no matter what field you major in. Among schools that signal graduates are smart and/or talented, a Harvard degree signals you are at or near the top of the pack. If you have a degree from almost all other other top schools, it signals you are smart and/or talented, but not quite to the extent to make it to Harvard.

There may have been a brief period when this was the case (1970s to 1990s), but now it just signals you had the right connections or ticked the right boxes, at least if we’re talking about the undergraduate program. No one really thinks a Malia Obama is any smarter or more talented than the typical graduate of a big state school.

Why pick on Malia?

OK. Jared Kushner will do equally well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Goldman Sachs of 20 years ago is not the GS of today. They are not interested in history and English majors from Harvard anymore. They simply cannot do the math required. Sea change. Physics, CS, math (4 years of rigorous college level math with all As), and engineering majors are who they after. If you are into quantum computing, especially, you will have MANY offers. Same holds true for private equity, venture and hedge funds. They are not interested in the folks who barely passed BC calculus. If you took Math 55 at Harvard, you are probably still in the game.

Tell that to my kid’s rooming group who have multiple history majors going into finance. It’s not changed that much. Quant is not GS.

People with above average intelligence won't come to a conclusion based on a few examples they know.

What do you think the DOE data is?

When the statement is that it is impossible to get a job, actually knowing a few counter examples is all you need.

The fact is that after three years of harvard history degree, the median salary is $60K for whatever reasons.

A few examples don't mean shit.

So, here is what I don't get. The median salary for the Harvard history major is still significantly higher than the median salary for the Northeastern (and basically any other school) history major. I believe DOE said it was $37k for Northeastern.

It is unclear to me why anyone should think that a Harvard (or any) history major should make more than a random CS major, or even an accounting major. Many of the Harvard history kids will probably go to law school or some other graduate school, or they come from a wealthy family and it is a lifestyle career. The Harvard history major is still making 62% more than the Northeastern history major. So, it does not appear over-rated.

This apples-to-oranges analysis makes no sense. It was pointed out earlier that the Harvard CS majors are paid quite well, especially compared to a Northeastern CS major. Again, like a 60% premium.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Goldman Sachs of 20 years ago is not the GS of today. They are not interested in history and English majors from Harvard anymore. They simply cannot do the math required. Sea change. Physics, CS, math (4 years of rigorous college level math with all As), and engineering majors are who they after. If you are into quantum computing, especially, you will have MANY offers. Same holds true for private equity, venture and hedge funds. They are not interested in the folks who barely passed BC calculus. If you took Math 55 at Harvard, you are probably still in the game.

Tell that to my kid’s rooming group who have multiple history majors going into finance. It’s not changed that much. Quant is not GS.

People with above average intelligence won't come to a conclusion based on a few examples they know.

What do you think the DOE data is?

When the statement is that it is impossible to get a job, actually knowing a few counter examples is all you need.

The fact is that after three years of harvard history degree, the median salary is $60K for whatever reasons.

A few examples don't mean shit.

So, here is what I don't get. The median salary for the Harvard history major is still significantly higher than the median salary for the Northeastern (and basically any other school) history major. I believe DOE said it was $37k for Northeastern.

It is unclear to me why anyone should think that a Harvard (or any) history major should make more than a random CS major, or even an accounting major. Many of the Harvard history kids will probably go to law school or some other graduate school, or they come from a wealthy family and it is a lifestyle career. The Harvard history major is still making 62% more than the Northeastern history major. So, it does not appear over-rated.

This apples-to-oranges analysis makes no sense. It was pointed out earlier that the Harvard CS majors are paid quite well, especially compared to a Northeastern CS major. Again, like a 60% premium.

So premium majors matter much more than premium brand school names.

Below is overall 10-year-out from the begging of colleges.

- Boston College - Average Annual Cost $37k, Median Earnings $93k
- Harvard - Average Annual Cost $14k, Median Earnings $85k
- Northeastern - Average Annual Cost $30k, Median Earnings $80k

Harvard seems very overrated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Doing some research for my DC who is a sophomore. Recent grad outcomes appear very pedestrian and it appears many are struggling to find work. Are the glory days for Harvard behind them? Serious question. I cannot find reasons why Harvard is any better than other schools in the top 50 USNWR rankings. Recent matriculants I have known personally are not that impressive and seem to be a blend of legacy, VIP and athlete. What am I missing? Perhaps it is a dying brand - what am I missing? Does the emperor have any clothes here?

Harvard's student and faculty quality are still excellent and it is unmatched as a global university outside of maybe Stanford. I think it is just the few things you've personally observed.

Also, I'm genuinely curious about what would really impress you in a high school/young college kid you only have a limited relationship with? I always crack up reading the "I know a few people and they don't impress me much line" on these boards.

False on both accounts.

Harvard has been hijacked by SJWs intent on destroying its legacy.