Engineering and nursing are two areas that if you don't go to a top school, it's okay..

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But you can't get a job in investment banking with an engineering degree from Illinois. This seems to be the common fall back of someone who themselves or their kids sacrificed so much to squeeze a bit extra out of their GPA or test scores to be admitted to the most selective schools.

People who insist you need an engineering degree from a top private college to get hired at top companies are basically stuck in their own heads. They only notice the MIT grad at Google or Apple while completely ignoring all the state school engineers killing it at the same companies. Even when you show them that Apple and Tesla hire from everywhere and care way more about what you can actually do, they dig in deeper.

Admitting a state school grad might be just as hireable feels like their sacrifice was pointless. So instead of dealing with that uncomfortable truth, they just keep insisting the elite private college degree matters more than actual engineering skills and problem solving ability. And when called out on this, they throw out a red herring about IB and private equity hiring from top privates while completely ignoring that finance firms hire for prestige and connections, not engineering skills

I don’t think anyone has dug in…you seem to not be able to understand what multiple posters have said…that the top schools provide a ton of optionality in your career, which again is why nearly 50% of grads from top schools don’t end up working in engineering.

The top IBs, PEs, etc particularly love engineering and other STEM majors at those schools which is why the engineering schools are able to place so many grads into those jobs.

I think others also agree that if you just want to get an engineering job at a large company and you really know that’s what you want…then save the $$$s.

I agree with: "if you just want to get an engineering job at a large company...then save the $$$s." That's exactly what I've been saying. The optionality you're describing is just expensive career insurance that most engineers don't need and probably only valuable at career outset as I'm sure a transition to IB mid-career is tough or impossible regardless of school attended.

If nearly 50% of engineering grads from elite schools don't even work in engineering, which suggests the engineering education isn't what's valuable, it's the schoolsl brand and networking. Furthermore, this makes the engineering degree even less valuable to practicing engineers from these schools as you will have a tiny alumni network in your field.

When you say IBs and PE firms love engineering majors from those schools, you're conflating correlation with causation. Goldman Sachs isn't recruiting Harvard engineers because they mastered thermodynamics, they're recruiting them because of prestige signaling, alumni networks, and credential screening, meaning it's just easier to recruit from a few elite schools than evaluate talent broadly. The engineering degree is incidental, and physics or maths would work just as well.

As an engineer (mechanical) with a dual degree in Math and Engineering, and 20 years in IB, you’re close but missing a key point. The engineering degree is not incidental. I specifically go after engineering grads from top schools because they’re usually better at applied problem solving in the real world compared to physics or math majors.

Most (not all) physics/math programs are highly theoretical. Engineering programs, on the other hand, force students to apply their knowledge where internships, labs, and team projects are the norm. That practical, systems level experience translates directly to the kind of fast, real-world outside the box problem solving we need in IB/PE. So yes, prestige and networks matter, but the training does, too. If I wanted pure theory, I’d hire math PhDs. And we do. We do hire Math PhDs, but not for what we are discussing here. For entry level IB/PE jobs, I will take an Engineer from a top schools over any other engineer at a lower school or Math/Physics majors at the same top schools.

Yes yes and yes. We were given similar advice by family in the field of engineering, and they strongly encouraged top schools for this reason, even helped us evaluate stem curricula

LOL
No

As a person that owns a very large company that hires engineers we do not hire from any religious based schools ever. Automatic no. If we see any religious extracurricular activities same resume tossed.

We hire from all large public engineering and top schools. Large public engineering B schools is like NC State are great hires.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But you can't get a job in investment banking with an engineering degree from Illinois. This seems to be the common fall back of someone who themselves or their kids sacrificed so much to squeeze a bit extra out of their GPA or test scores to be admitted to the most selective schools.

People who insist you need an engineering degree from a top private college to get hired at top companies are basically stuck in their own heads. They only notice the MIT grad at Google or Apple while completely ignoring all the state school engineers killing it at the same companies. Even when you show them that Apple and Tesla hire from everywhere and care way more about what you can actually do, they dig in deeper.

Admitting a state school grad might be just as hireable feels like their sacrifice was pointless. So instead of dealing with that uncomfortable truth, they just keep insisting the elite private college degree matters more than actual engineering skills and problem solving ability. And when called out on this, they throw out a red herring about IB and private equity hiring from top privates while completely ignoring that finance firms hire for prestige and connections, not engineering skills

I don’t think anyone has dug in…you seem to not be able to understand what multiple posters have said…that the top schools provide a ton of optionality in your career, which again is why nearly 50% of grads from top schools don’t end up working in engineering.

The top IBs, PEs, etc particularly love engineering and other STEM majors at those schools which is why the engineering schools are able to place so many grads into those jobs.

I think others also agree that if you just want to get an engineering job at a large company and you really know that’s what you want…then save the $$$s.

I agree with: "if you just want to get an engineering job at a large company...then save the $$$s." That's exactly what I've been saying. The optionality you're describing is just expensive career insurance that most engineers don't need and probably only valuable at career outset as I'm sure a transition to IB mid-career is tough or impossible regardless of school attended.

If nearly 50% of engineering grads from elite schools don't even work in engineering, which suggests the engineering education isn't what's valuable, it's the schoolsl brand and networking. Furthermore, this makes the engineering degree even less valuable to practicing engineers from these schools as you will have a tiny alumni network in your field.

When you say IBs and PE firms love engineering majors from those schools, you're conflating correlation with causation. Goldman Sachs isn't recruiting Harvard engineers because they mastered thermodynamics, they're recruiting them because of prestige signaling, alumni networks, and credential screening, meaning it's just easier to recruit from a few elite schools than evaluate talent broadly. The engineering degree is incidental, and physics or maths would work just as well.

As an engineer (mechanical) with a dual degree in Math and Engineering, and 20 years in IB, you’re close but missing a key point. The engineering degree is not incidental. I specifically go after engineering grads from top schools because they’re usually better at applied problem solving in the real world compared to physics or math majors.

Most (not all) physics/math programs are highly theoretical. Engineering programs, on the other hand, force students to apply their knowledge where internships, labs, and team projects are the norm. That practical, systems level experience translates directly to the kind of fast, real-world outside the box problem solving we need in IB/PE. So yes, prestige and networks matter, but the training does, too. If I wanted pure theory, I’d hire math PhDs. And we do. We do hire Math PhDs, but not for what we are discussing here. For entry level IB/PE jobs, I will take an Engineer from a top schools over any other engineer at a lower school or Math/Physics majors at the same top schools.

Yes yes and yes. We were given similar advice by family in the field of engineering, and they strongly encouraged top schools for this reason, even helped us evaluate stem curricula

LOL
No

As a person that owns a very large company that hires engineers we do not hire from any religious based schools ever. Automatic no. If we see any religious extracurricular activities same resume tossed.

We hire from all large public engineering and top schools. Large public engineering B schools is like NC State are great hires.

Who mentioned religious schools?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But you can't get a job in investment banking with an engineering degree from Illinois. This seems to be the common fall back of someone who themselves or their kids sacrificed so much to squeeze a bit extra out of their GPA or test scores to be admitted to the most selective schools.

People who insist you need an engineering degree from a top private college to get hired at top companies are basically stuck in their own heads. They only notice the MIT grad at Google or Apple while completely ignoring all the state school engineers killing it at the same companies. Even when you show them that Apple and Tesla hire from everywhere and care way more about what you can actually do, they dig in deeper.

Admitting a state school grad might be just as hireable feels like their sacrifice was pointless. So instead of dealing with that uncomfortable truth, they just keep insisting the elite private college degree matters more than actual engineering skills and problem solving ability. And when called out on this, they throw out a red herring about IB and private equity hiring from top privates while completely ignoring that finance firms hire for prestige and connections, not engineering skills

I don’t think anyone has dug in…you seem to not be able to understand what multiple posters have said…that the top schools provide a ton of optionality in your career, which again is why nearly 50% of grads from top schools don’t end up working in engineering.

The top IBs, PEs, etc particularly love engineering and other STEM majors at those schools which is why the engineering schools are able to place so many grads into those jobs.

I think others also agree that if you just want to get an engineering job at a large company and you really know that’s what you want…then save the $$$s.

I agree with: "if you just want to get an engineering job at a large company...then save the $$$s." That's exactly what I've been saying. The optionality you're describing is just expensive career insurance that most engineers don't need and probably only valuable at career outset as I'm sure a transition to IB mid-career is tough or impossible regardless of school attended.

If nearly 50% of engineering grads from elite schools don't even work in engineering, which suggests the engineering education isn't what's valuable, it's the schoolsl brand and networking. Furthermore, this makes the engineering degree even less valuable to practicing engineers from these schools as you will have a tiny alumni network in your field.

When you say IBs and PE firms love engineering majors from those schools, you're conflating correlation with causation. Goldman Sachs isn't recruiting Harvard engineers because they mastered thermodynamics, they're recruiting them because of prestige signaling, alumni networks, and credential screening, meaning it's just easier to recruit from a few elite schools than evaluate talent broadly. The engineering degree is incidental, and physics or maths would work just as well.

As an engineer (mechanical) with a dual degree in Math and Engineering, and 20 years in IB, you’re close but missing a key point. The engineering degree is not incidental. I specifically go after engineering grads from top schools because they’re usually better at applied problem solving in the real world compared to physics or math majors.

Most (not all) physics/math programs are highly theoretical. Engineering programs, on the other hand, force students to apply their knowledge where internships, labs, and team projects are the norm. That practical, systems level experience translates directly to the kind of fast, real-world outside the box problem solving we need in IB/PE. So yes, prestige and networks matter, but the training does, too. If I wanted pure theory, I’d hire math PhDs. And we do. We do hire Math PhDs, but not for what we are discussing here. For entry level IB/PE jobs, I will take an Engineer from a top schools over any other engineer at a lower school or Math/Physics majors at the same top schools.

Exactly. The reason IB and Consulting value engineering students is because of the trained thinking. Engineering necessitates real world solutions to real world problems. And engineers tend to be both the best educated and the most practical. It's very valuable - both as a skillset and a mindset. Now as to why a Princeton engineering grad is more valuable than a UIUC engineering grad? They're not really. But Wall Street and consulting remain very antiquated in where they recruit. It is always 1955 in finance. But it does give those who graduate from T20 schools with good engineering programs the option of pursuing interesting and very lucrative options on the money side of engineering.

I have an engineering student at one of these schools. I always tell DC if Space doesn't work out, there's always Titan of Wall Street to fall back on. And like every genuine aspirational engineer, that's met with dismissive eye rolling. Natural engineers want to build things and figure things out. But with NASA being devastated and all the drama with SpaceX and Musk, maybe helping private investors find good opportunities in that field would be an interesting thing to do. And that's an opportunity DC might have - entirely because of the school brand. So in that sense the degree name is valuable, because it maintains options in the very oldfangled and archaic world of IB/PE/MBB recruiting. And those are potential opportunities that are not there for equally talented students at non-T20 schools. It's the dinosaur mentality of Wall Street that gives engineering students at certain schools more opportunities.

Non Ivy parents will never understand. It is ok.

Ivy's is a hell of a drug!! Please look for the signs of Ivy addiction before it is too late for you kids.

[Anonymous]

The goalposts for engineering have moved so far in this discussion that we're now arguing about IB, PE and other forms of finance. If someone is interested in those jobs, they should attend a school where these employers actively recruit.

For those waxing poetic about labs, research, top faculty, etc., your kid is going to be working right next to someone from the University of Alabama Huntsville, University of Central Florida, and Mississippi State, just to name a few, and potentially reporting to an Iowa State grad. And the Ivy League/private pedigree isn't doesn't age like fine wine, especially if you're hoping to jump to IB/PE at some point.

For an engineering career, an elite private school is a luxury, not a necessity. Once you get past the bells and whistles of the elite private, you just have a degree, and at some point nobody really cares where you went to school. For engineering careers, that point comes pretty quickly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But you can't get a job in investment banking with an engineering degree from Illinois. This seems to be the common fall back of someone who themselves or their kids sacrificed so much to squeeze a bit extra out of their GPA or test scores to be admitted to the most selective schools.

People who insist you need an engineering degree from a top private college to get hired at top companies are basically stuck in their own heads. They only notice the MIT grad at Google or Apple while completely ignoring all the state school engineers killing it at the same companies. Even when you show them that Apple and Tesla hire from everywhere and care way more about what you can actually do, they dig in deeper.

Admitting a state school grad might be just as hireable feels like their sacrifice was pointless. So instead of dealing with that uncomfortable truth, they just keep insisting the elite private college degree matters more than actual engineering skills and problem solving ability. And when called out on this, they throw out a red herring about IB and private equity hiring from top privates while completely ignoring that finance firms hire for prestige and connections, not engineering skills

I don’t think anyone has dug in…you seem to not be able to understand what multiple posters have said…that the top schools provide a ton of optionality in your career, which again is why nearly 50% of grads from top schools don’t end up working in engineering.

The top IBs, PEs, etc particularly love engineering and other STEM majors at those schools which is why the engineering schools are able to place so many grads into those jobs.

I think others also agree that if you just want to get an engineering job at a large company and you really know that’s what you want…then save the $$$s.

I agree with: "if you just want to get an engineering job at a large company...then save the $$$s." That's exactly what I've been saying. The optionality you're describing is just expensive career insurance that most engineers don't need and probably only valuable at career outset as I'm sure a transition to IB mid-career is tough or impossible regardless of school attended.

If nearly 50% of engineering grads from elite schools don't even work in engineering, which suggests the engineering education isn't what's valuable, it's the schoolsl brand and networking. Furthermore, this makes the engineering degree even less valuable to practicing engineers from these schools as you will have a tiny alumni network in your field.

When you say IBs and PE firms love engineering majors from those schools, you're conflating correlation with causation. Goldman Sachs isn't recruiting Harvard engineers because they mastered thermodynamics, they're recruiting them because of prestige signaling, alumni networks, and credential screening, meaning it's just easier to recruit from a few elite schools than evaluate talent broadly. The engineering degree is incidental, and physics or maths would work just as well.

As an engineer (mechanical) with a dual degree in Math and Engineering, and 20 years in IB, you’re close but missing a key point. The engineering degree is not incidental. I specifically go after engineering grads from top schools because they’re usually better at applied problem solving in the real world compared to physics or math majors.

Most (not all) physics/math programs are highly theoretical. Engineering programs, on the other hand, force students to apply their knowledge where internships, labs, and team projects are the norm. That practical, systems level experience translates directly to the kind of fast, real-world outside the box problem solving we need in IB/PE. So yes, prestige and networks matter, but the training does, too. If I wanted pure theory, I’d hire math PhDs. And we do. We do hire Math PhDs, but not for what we are discussing here. For entry level IB/PE jobs, I will take an Engineer from a top schools over any other engineer at a lower school or Math/Physics majors at the same top schools.

Yes yes and yes. We were given similar advice by family in the field of engineering, and they strongly encouraged top schools for this reason, even helped us evaluate stem curricula

LOL
No

As a person that owns a very large company that hires engineers we do not hire from any religious based schools ever. Automatic no. If we see any religious extracurricular activities same resume tossed.

We hire from all large public engineering and top schools. Large public engineering B schools is like NC State are great hires.

I’m pretty sure that making hiring decisions on the basis of religion is illegal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it was about trained thinking instead of prestige schools like Georgia Tech would have good IB placement, which they dont. Even MIT is subpar.

You are so off base and wrong with your bogus made of facts.

https://www.peakframeworks.com/post/ib-target-schools

Gatech ranked 60 for per capita IB placement

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it was about trained thinking instead of prestige schools like Georgia Tech would have good IB placement, which they dont. Even MIT is subpar.

You are so off base and wrong with your bogus made of facts.

https://www.peakframeworks.com/post/ib-target-schools

Gatech ranked 60 for per capita IB placement

Kids at GT are brilliant and actually creating ideas and things to enrich and make people’s lives in this world better. You are on here talking about IB, hedge funds and Wall Street. Lol Go away

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it was about trained thinking instead of prestige schools like Georgia Tech would have good IB placement, which they dont. Even MIT is subpar.

You are so off base and wrong with your bogus made of facts.

https://www.peakframeworks.com/post/ib-target-schools

Gatech ranked 60 for per capita IB placement

Kids at GT are brilliant and actually creating ideas and things to enrich and make people’s lives in this world better. You are on here talking about IB, hedge funds and Wall Street. Lol Go away

No they are not. They work for Lockheed Martin creating weapons of mass destruction. And getting fired from Microsoft.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But you can't get a job in investment banking with an engineering degree from Illinois. This seems to be the common fall back of someone who themselves or their kids sacrificed so much to squeeze a bit extra out of their GPA or test scores to be admitted to the most selective schools.

People who insist you need an engineering degree from a top private college to get hired at top companies are basically stuck in their own heads. They only notice the MIT grad at Google or Apple while completely ignoring all the state school engineers killing it at the same companies. Even when you show them that Apple and Tesla hire from everywhere and care way more about what you can actually do, they dig in deeper.

Admitting a state school grad might be just as hireable feels like their sacrifice was pointless. So instead of dealing with that uncomfortable truth, they just keep insisting the elite private college degree matters more than actual engineering skills and problem solving ability. And when called out on this, they throw out a red herring about IB and private equity hiring from top privates while completely ignoring that finance firms hire for prestige and connections, not engineering skills

I don’t think anyone has dug in…you seem to not be able to understand what multiple posters have said…that the top schools provide a ton of optionality in your career, which again is why nearly 50% of grads from top schools don’t end up working in engineering.

The top IBs, PEs, etc particularly love engineering and other STEM majors at those schools which is why the engineering schools are able to place so many grads into those jobs.

I think others also agree that if you just want to get an engineering job at a large company and you really know that’s what you want…then save the $$$s.

I agree with: "if you just want to get an engineering job at a large company...then save the $$$s." That's exactly what I've been saying. The optionality you're describing is just expensive career insurance that most engineers don't need and probably only valuable at career outset as I'm sure a transition to IB mid-career is tough or impossible regardless of school attended.

If nearly 50% of engineering grads from elite schools don't even work in engineering, which suggests the engineering education isn't what's valuable, it's the schoolsl brand and networking. Furthermore, this makes the engineering degree even less valuable to practicing engineers from these schools as you will have a tiny alumni network in your field.

When you say IBs and PE firms love engineering majors from those schools, you're conflating correlation with causation. Goldman Sachs isn't recruiting Harvard engineers because they mastered thermodynamics, they're recruiting them because of prestige signaling, alumni networks, and credential screening, meaning it's just easier to recruit from a few elite schools than evaluate talent broadly. The engineering degree is incidental, and physics or maths would work just as well.

As an engineer (mechanical) with a dual degree in Math and Engineering, and 20 years in IB, you’re close but missing a key point. The engineering degree is not incidental. I specifically go after engineering grads from top schools because they’re usually better at applied problem solving in the real world compared to physics or math majors.

Most (not all) physics/math programs are highly theoretical. Engineering programs, on the other hand, force students to apply their knowledge where internships, labs, and team projects are the norm. That practical, systems level experience translates directly to the kind of fast, real-world outside the box problem solving we need in IB/PE. So yes, prestige and networks matter, but the training does, too. If I wanted pure theory, I’d hire math PhDs. And we do. We do hire Math PhDs, but not for what we are discussing here. For entry level IB/PE jobs, I will take an Engineer from a top schools over any other engineer at a lower school or Math/Physics majors at the same top schools.

Exactly. The reason IB and Consulting value engineering students is because of the trained thinking. Engineering necessitates real world solutions to real world problems. And engineers tend to be both the best educated and the most practical. It's very valuable - both as a skillset and a mindset. Now as to why a Princeton engineering grad is more valuable than a UIUC engineering grad? They're not really. But Wall Street and consulting remain very antiquated in where they recruit. It is always 1955 in finance. But it does give those who graduate from T20 schools with good engineering programs the option of pursuing interesting and very lucrative options on the money side of engineering.

I have an engineering student at one of these schools. I always tell DC if Space doesn't work out, there's always Titan of Wall Street to fall back on. And like every genuine aspirational engineer, that's met with dismissive eye rolling. Natural engineers want to build things and figure things out. But with NASA being devastated and all the drama with SpaceX and Musk, maybe helping private investors find good opportunities in that field would be an interesting thing to do. And that's an opportunity DC might have - entirely because of the school brand. So in that sense the degree name is valuable, because it maintains options in the very oldfangled and archaic world of IB/PE/MBB recruiting. And those are potential opportunities that are not there for equally talented students at non-T20 schools. It's the dinosaur mentality of Wall Street that gives engineering students at certain schools more opportunities.

100%. Also the parent of an ivy engineering student. The engineering school has the highest salaries of all grads. They also have 35% go to phD and most end up in cutting edge R&D. Not all want $ but the $ for such roles happens to be top 2%

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it was about trained thinking instead of prestige schools like Georgia Tech would have good IB placement, which they dont. Even MIT is subpar.

You are so off base and wrong with your bogus made of facts.

https://www.peakframeworks.com/post/ib-target-schools

Gatech ranked 60 for per capita IB placement

Kids at GT are brilliant and actually creating ideas and things to enrich and make people’s lives in this world better. You are on here talking about IB, hedge funds and Wall Street. Lol Go away

No they are not. They work for Lockheed Martin creating weapons of mass destruction. And getting fired from Microsoft.

You have issues

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it was about trained thinking instead of prestige schools like Georgia Tech would have good IB placement, which they dont. Even MIT is subpar.

You are so off base and wrong with your bogus made of facts.

https://www.peakframeworks.com/post/ib-target-schools

Gatech ranked 60 for per capita IB placement

Kids at GT are brilliant and actually creating ideas and things to enrich and make people’s lives in this world better. You are on here talking about IB, hedge funds and Wall Street. Lol Go away

Brilliant is subjective, SAT scores are 1440. Outcomes are decent for the type of school it is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it was about trained thinking instead of prestige schools like Georgia Tech would have good IB placement, which they dont. Even MIT is subpar.

You are so off base and wrong with your bogus made of facts.

https://www.peakframeworks.com/post/ib-target-schools

Gatech ranked 60 for per capita IB placement

Kids at GT are brilliant and actually creating ideas and things to enrich and make people’s lives in this world better. You are on here talking about IB, hedge funds and Wall Street. Lol Go away

Brilliant is subjective, SAT scores are 1440. Outcomes are decent for the type of school it is.

Your kid got rejected didn’t they?

[Anonymous]

I work as a non-engineer in a civil engineering subfield. The most prestigious institutions in this subfield are all state universities. Cornell does some, but the rest of the ivies only ever contribute the occasional semi-toy paper around the edges. MIT does some important math heavy work, but public land grant institutions are the core.

If you want to actually work as an engineer as opposed to private equity, it's good to investigate the prestige structure of the field you want to actually work in as opposed to going off general-public rankings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it was about trained thinking instead of prestige schools like Georgia Tech would have good IB placement, which they dont. Even MIT is subpar.

You are so off base and wrong with your bogus made of facts.

https://www.peakframeworks.com/post/ib-target-schools

Gatech ranked 60 for per capita IB placement

Kids at GT are brilliant and actually creating ideas and things to enrich and make people’s lives in this world better. You are on here talking about IB, hedge funds and Wall Street. Lol Go away

Brilliant is subjective, SAT scores are 1440. Outcomes are decent for the type of school it is.

GT is a great school.

https://news.em.gatech.edu/2025/03/31/final-decision-release-fall-2025-first-year/ 12% acceptance overall 9% OOS (for a public!)

https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/engineering-doctorate?_sort=rank&_sortDirection=asc

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But you can't get a job in investment banking with an engineering degree from Illinois. This seems to be the common fall back of someone who themselves or their kids sacrificed so much to squeeze a bit extra out of their GPA or test scores to be admitted to the most selective schools.

People who insist you need an engineering degree from a top private college to get hired at top companies are basically stuck in their own heads. They only notice the MIT grad at Google or Apple while completely ignoring all the state school engineers killing it at the same companies. Even when you show them that Apple and Tesla hire from everywhere and care way more about what you can actually do, they dig in deeper.

Admitting a state school grad might be just as hireable feels like their sacrifice was pointless. So instead of dealing with that uncomfortable truth, they just keep insisting the elite private college degree matters more than actual engineering skills and problem solving ability. And when called out on this, they throw out a red herring about IB and private equity hiring from top privates while completely ignoring that finance firms hire for prestige and connections, not engineering skills

I don’t think anyone has dug in…you seem to not be able to understand what multiple posters have said…that the top schools provide a ton of optionality in your career, which again is why nearly 50% of grads from top schools don’t end up working in engineering.

The top IBs, PEs, etc particularly love engineering and other STEM majors at those schools which is why the engineering schools are able to place so many grads into those jobs.

I think others also agree that if you just want to get an engineering job at a large company and you really know that’s what you want…then save the $$$s.

I agree with: "if you just want to get an engineering job at a large company...then save the $$$s." That's exactly what I've been saying. The optionality you're describing is just expensive career insurance that most engineers don't need and probably only valuable at career outset as I'm sure a transition to IB mid-career is tough or impossible regardless of school attended.

If nearly 50% of engineering grads from elite schools don't even work in engineering, which suggests the engineering education isn't what's valuable, it's the schoolsl brand and networking. Furthermore, this makes the engineering degree even less valuable to practicing engineers from these schools as you will have a tiny alumni network in your field.

When you say IBs and PE firms love engineering majors from those schools, you're conflating correlation with causation. Goldman Sachs isn't recruiting Harvard engineers because they mastered thermodynamics, they're recruiting them because of prestige signaling, alumni networks, and credential screening, meaning it's just easier to recruit from a few elite schools than evaluate talent broadly. The engineering degree is incidental, and physics or maths would work just as well.

As an engineer (mechanical) with a dual degree in Math and Engineering, and 20 years in IB, you’re close but missing a key point. The engineering degree is not incidental. I specifically go after engineering grads from top schools because they’re usually better at applied problem solving in the real world compared to physics or math majors.

Most (not all) physics/math programs are highly theoretical. Engineering programs, on the other hand, force students to apply their knowledge where internships, labs, and team projects are the norm. That practical, systems level experience translates directly to the kind of fast, real-world outside the box problem solving we need in IB/PE. So yes, prestige and networks matter, but the training does, too. If I wanted pure theory, I’d hire math PhDs. And we do. We do hire Math PhDs, but not for what we are discussing here. For entry level IB/PE jobs, I will take an Engineer from a top schools over any other engineer at a lower school or Math/Physics majors at the same top schools.

Exactly. The reason IB and Consulting value engineering students is because of the trained thinking. Engineering necessitates real world solutions to real world problems. And engineers tend to be both the best educated and the most practical. It's very valuable - both as a skillset and a mindset. Now as to why a Princeton engineering grad is more valuable than a UIUC engineering grad? They're not really. But Wall Street and consulting remain very antiquated in where they recruit. It is always 1955 in finance. But it does give those who graduate from T20 schools with good engineering programs the option of pursuing interesting and very lucrative options on the money side of engineering.

I have an engineering student at one of these schools. I always tell DC if Space doesn't work out, there's always Titan of Wall Street to fall back on. And like every genuine aspirational engineer, that's met with dismissive eye rolling. Natural engineers want to build things and figure things out. But with NASA being devastated and all the drama with SpaceX and Musk, maybe helping private investors find good opportunities in that field would be an interesting thing to do. And that's an opportunity DC might have - entirely because of the school brand. So in that sense the degree name is valuable, because it maintains options in the very oldfangled and archaic world of IB/PE/MBB recruiting. And those are potential opportunities that are not there for equally talented students at non-T20 schools. It's the dinosaur mentality of Wall Street that gives engineering students at certain schools more opportunities.

100%. Also the parent of an ivy engineering student. The engineering school has the highest salaries of all grads. They also have 35% go to phD and most end up in cutting edge R&D. Not all want $ but the $ for such roles happens to be top 2%

That's really great, but 35% seems high and I bet not better than Clarkson. Ask your student where kids went to school at their summer internship and report back please.