Top 100 undergrad CS by US News

[Anonymous]

The statement that most CS grads right out of school will be "more than happy to make $60K out of the gate" is completely false. Especially from top schools. I am in NYC and use multiple search services or "headhunters" (a term I despise).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tech / CS hiring manager here - don't discriminate at all among the top 100 schools. don't care at all. Decent GPA? fine, lets move on and talk shop. The higher ranked placement records is just a matter of the quality of the average student. If you expect the school to bring you along, then sure, you should focus on that. The reality is the best CS candidates are passionate about the industry and do a lot on their own time as a hobby. Personal experiences, internships/professional experience, and how competent you are during the interview matters 1000x more than which school you went to

This is commonly known but doesn't invalidate the points made in this thread.
No one is claiming graduating from a top school would automatically guarantee you a job or certain salary. It's more like the graduates from top schools are relatively of higher quality and motivation (college admission is a screening process to some extent).
In addition, as many have said, certain top firms recruit mainly from selected top schools (due to the same reasons mentioned above).
On average, there is a significant difference in going to a top school or not in terms of starting your career, even for fields such as CS. Your observation as a hiring manager from a relatively obscure firm doesn't necessarily proof anything.

This. It will be helpful PPs reveal which firm they work for.

If I am a hiring manager from a top firm and pay $400k for top talent, do I want to sift through thousands of resumes from average schools to find that gem or I limit my search to MIT, CMU, etc where the success rate would be much higher?

The reality is students from top schools are better candidates than regular schools on average.

"$400k for top talent"? Are you crazy? That is so rare, like 20 jobs at most? Why on earth would you use that as a standard for hiring from the top 100 CS schools? Get out in the real world sometime. There's fresh air out there. You've been inhaling your own prestige fumes for too long.

Literally that is the main point of going to top schools - the immediate top compensation.

It's the same case in consulting and banking where top firms restrict recruiting to a select few top schools.

Seriously, just because you do not care about earning a high salary and the freedoms associated with that later in life does not mean everyone else should stick to your principles.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tech / CS hiring manager here - don't discriminate at all among the top 100 schools. don't care at all. Decent GPA? fine, lets move on and talk shop. The higher ranked placement records is just a matter of the quality of the average student. If you expect the school to bring you along, then sure, you should focus on that. The reality is the best CS candidates are passionate about the industry and do a lot on their own time as a hobby. Personal experiences, internships/professional experience, and how competent you are during the interview matters 1000x more than which school you went to

This is commonly known but doesn't invalidate the points made in this thread.
No one is claiming graduating from a top school would automatically guarantee you a job or certain salary. It's more like the graduates from top schools are relatively of higher quality and motivation (college admission is a screening process to some extent).
In addition, as many have said, certain top firms recruit mainly from selected top schools (due to the same reasons mentioned above).
On average, there is a significant difference in going to a top school or not in terms of starting your career, even for fields such as CS. Your observation as a hiring manager from a relatively obscure firm doesn't necessarily proof anything.

This. It will be helpful PPs reveal which firm they work for.

If I am a hiring manager from a top firm and pay $400k for top talent, do I want to sift through thousands of resumes from average schools to find that gem or I limit my search to MIT, CMU, etc where the success rate would be much higher?

The reality is students from top schools are better candidates than regular schools on average.

"$400k for top talent"? Are you crazy? That is so rare, like 20 jobs at most? Why on earth would you use that as a standard for hiring from the top 100 CS schools? Get out in the real world sometime. There's fresh air out there. You've been inhaling your own prestige fumes for too long.

By the time someone is ready to get 400k the work experience and degree matters not where you went to school. I was discussing this with MIT graduated senior manager and he/she said usually they prefer not big school as some of the kids are snobs. Might be one individual opinion.

There are kids out of MIT and CMU earning 400k per year right out of bachelors. They don't have work experience.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tech / CS hiring manager here - don't discriminate at all among the top 100 schools. don't care at all. Decent GPA? fine, lets move on and talk shop. The higher ranked placement records is just a matter of the quality of the average student. If you expect the school to bring you along, then sure, you should focus on that. The reality is the best CS candidates are passionate about the industry and do a lot on their own time as a hobby. Personal experiences, internships/professional experience, and how competent you are during the interview matters 1000x more than which school you went to

This is commonly known but doesn't invalidate the points made in this thread.
No one is claiming graduating from a top school would automatically guarantee you a job or certain salary. It's more like the graduates from top schools are relatively of higher quality and motivation (college admission is a screening process to some extent).
In addition, as many have said, certain top firms recruit mainly from selected top schools (due to the same reasons mentioned above).
On average, there is a significant difference in going to a top school or not in terms of starting your career, even for fields such as CS. Your observation as a hiring manager from a relatively obscure firm doesn't necessarily proof anything.

This. It will be helpful PPs reveal which firm they work for.

If I am a hiring manager from a top firm and pay $400k for top talent, do I want to sift through thousands of resumes from average schools to find that gem or I limit my search to MIT, CMU, etc where the success rate would be much higher?

The reality is students from top schools are better candidates than regular schools on average.

"$400k for top talent"? Are you crazy? That is so rare, like 20 jobs at most? Why on earth would you use that as a standard for hiring from the top 100 CS schools? Get out in the real world sometime. There's fresh air out there. You've been inhaling your own prestige fumes for too long.

By the time someone is ready to get 400k the work experience and degree matters not where you went to school. I was discussing this with MIT graduated senior manager and he/she said usually they prefer not big school as some of the kids are snobs. Might be one individual opinion.

I think the previous poster was referring 400k as your first out of college salary.

Get real folks. I am in Tech, and $200k is about the max for a fresh out of school candidate even in the top of the top silicon valley startups, and that too for the rare candidate from Stanford, MIT, CMU, etc. This is less than 0.5% of the graduating class, why are folks here arguing about issues that are not grounded in reality.

Most fresh graduates will be more than happy to get a job, which they will if they graduate from any of these Top 100 CS schools, and they all will be more than happy to make $60K out of the gate. After that, get some job experience, make your resume look good, learn some skills, and certifications, watch your salary double by switching jobs couple of times in the next 5 years. A smart person can double their salary in CS in that timeframe, and that should be more than good enough. CS is hard, no matter what school you go, and anyone who can graduate with a CS major is good enough, stop creating these class distinctions, we are not in communist china but the united states, here the person who can sell themselves better rises to top, not the best PhD Math student. In fact the best Math student from CMU may end up working for the company whose CEO graduated from Penn State because that person is good at marketing themselves

Such a boomer! You need to get out of your shell to see the world.
What kind of Tech are you in? Pretty miserable tech I would say. Making 60k with a CS degree is just laughable.

[Anonymous]

This is anecdotal but widespread: One of the things most kids who attend an elite school will admit to would be getting that internship/first job on the strength of the school's name.

Anecdotal: my colleagues who went to elite schools say their resume still gets second looks 30 years after graduating.

This is a fact: some companies only actively recruit at certain schools. Palantir for one.

There is a hierarchy of CS jobs with wide pay disparities. Even within Google, there is a hierarchy of jobs from very desirable to meh.

Will you get to that dream first/second CS job out of VT or UVA or GMU? Of course. But those UMD resumes are getting deeper and harder looks. And those MIT/Stanford/UCB/CMU resumes are on the top of the pile.

[Anonymous]

Example 1: Heath Shuler was the 3rd overall of the 1993 NFL draft and signed a big contract with the Redskins. Gus Ferrotte was a 12th draft choice by the Skins. Four years later, Shuler got cut by the Skins and Ferrotte signed a huge contract with the Skins.

Example 2: RG3 was the 2nd overall in the 2012 NFL draft. Kirk Cousins was drafted in the 4th round in 2012. Cousins was tagged by the Skins twice for over 20M contract per year. He then sign a 4 years with the Vikings for over 90M.

Example 3: Russell Wilson was drafted in the 3rd round of the NFL 2012 draft and he is now league MVP with a 140M contract with the Seahawks.

Just saying.

RG3 is now a backup for the Ravens and he is making a lot less money than cousins and Wilson.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is anecdotal but widespread: One of the things most kids who attend an elite school will admit to would be getting that internship/first job on the strength of the school's name.

Anecdotal: my colleagues who went to elite schools say their resume still gets second looks 30 years after graduating.

This is a fact: some companies only actively recruit at certain schools. Palantir for one.

There is a hierarchy of CS jobs with wide pay disparities. Even within Google, there is a hierarchy of jobs from very desirable to meh.

Will you get to that dream first/second CS job out of VT or UVA or GMU? Of course. But those UMD resumes are getting deeper and harder looks. And those MIT/Stanford/UCB/CMU resumes are on the top of the pile.

"Anecdotal: my colleagues who went to elite schools say their resume still gets second looks 30 years after graduating."

These are your computer programming/architect colleagues? Because 30 years is a long time from college. One would hope they have computer science accomplishments that demonstrate their abilities. Not a college degree from 3 decades ago.

[Anonymous]

A determined troll at work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Example 1: Heath Shuler was the 3rd overall of the 1993 NFL draft and signed a big contract with the Redskins. Gus Ferrotte was a 12th draft choice by the Skins. Four years later, Shuler got cut by the Skins and Ferrotte signed a huge contract with the Skins.

Example 2: RG3 was the 2nd overall in the 2012 NFL draft. Kirk Cousins was drafted in the 4th round in 2012. Cousins was tagged by the Skins twice for over 20M contract per year. He then sign a 4 years with the Vikings for over 90M.

Example 3: Russell Wilson was drafted in the 3rd round of the NFL 2012 draft and he is now league MVP with a 140M contract with the Seahawks.

Just saying.

RG3 is now a backup for the Ravens and he is making a lot less money than cousins and Wilson.

Typical exhibition of a low IQ.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tech / CS hiring manager here - don't discriminate at all among the top 100 schools. don't care at all. Decent GPA? fine, lets move on and talk shop. The higher ranked placement records is just a matter of the quality of the average student. If you expect the school to bring you along, then sure, you should focus on that. The reality is the best CS candidates are passionate about the industry and do a lot on their own time as a hobby. Personal experiences, internships/professional experience, and how competent you are during the interview matters 1000x more than which school you went to

Another CS hiring manager here...I second this!

I doubt these people went to top schools. They went to state unis. A community college grad would say the same thing - “I rejected ivy students and hired capable CC grads.”

One of the previous hiring manager posters here. I went to MIT, so I’d say that counts as a top school. My company (anyone calling a tech company a ‘firm’ is out of their element) is very well recognized. You can count on 2 hands the CS grads making $400k base directly out of undergrad, and no CS grad is going to be happy with $60k right out of school. That was a starting salary 25 years ago

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is anecdotal but widespread: One of the things most kids who attend an elite school will admit to would be getting that internship/first job on the strength of the school's name.

Anecdotal: my colleagues who went to elite schools say their resume still gets second looks 30 years after graduating.

This is a fact: some companies only actively recruit at certain schools. Palantir for one.

There is a hierarchy of CS jobs with wide pay disparities. Even within Google, there is a hierarchy of jobs from very desirable to meh.

Will you get to that dream first/second CS job out of VT or UVA or GMU? Of course. But those UMD resumes are getting deeper and harder looks. And those MIT/Stanford/UCB/CMU resumes are on the top of the pile.

"Anecdotal: my colleagues who went to elite schools say their resume still gets second looks 30 years after graduating."

These are your computer programming/architect colleagues? Because 30 years is a long time from college. One would hope they have computer science accomplishments that demonstrate their abilities. Not a college degree from 3 decades ago.

Sales. But they started out in engineering. Very few stay in a pure tech contributor role their entire careers

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
One of the previous hiring manager posters here. I went to MIT, so I’d say that counts as a top school. My company (anyone calling a tech company a ‘firm’ is out of their element) is very well recognized. You can count on 2 hands the CS grads making $400k base directly out of undergrad, and no CS grad is going to be happy with $60k right out of school. That was a starting salary 25 years ago

I'd say it's between 150-170, maybe 200 all in (base, bonus, RSUs) if you're in the Bay Area or NYC. Most companies pay a differential for only these 2 cities.

One reason for going to a top CS school is to differentiate from the mad zerg rush right now into CS. Everybody is a CS major these days.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tech / CS hiring manager here - don't discriminate at all among the top 100 schools. don't care at all. Decent GPA? fine, lets move on and talk shop. The higher ranked placement records is just a matter of the quality of the average student. If you expect the school to bring you along, then sure, you should focus on that. The reality is the best CS candidates are passionate about the industry and do a lot on their own time as a hobby. Personal experiences, internships/professional experience, and how competent you are during the interview matters 1000x more than which school you went to

This is commonly known but doesn't invalidate the points made in this thread.
No one is claiming graduating from a top school would automatically guarantee you a job or certain salary. It's more like the graduates from top schools are relatively of higher quality and motivation (college admission is a screening process to some extent).
In addition, as many have said, certain top firms recruit mainly from selected top schools (due to the same reasons mentioned above).
On average, there is a significant difference in going to a top school or not in terms of starting your career, even for fields such as CS. Your observation as a hiring manager from a relatively obscure firm doesn't necessarily proof anything.

This. It will be helpful PPs reveal which firm they work for.

If I am a hiring manager from a top firm and pay $400k for top talent, do I want to sift through thousands of resumes from average schools to find that gem or I limit my search to MIT, CMU, etc where the success rate would be much higher?

The reality is students from top schools are better candidates than regular schools on average.

"$400k for top talent"? Are you crazy? That is so rare, like 20 jobs at most? Why on earth would you use that as a standard for hiring from the top 100 CS schools? Get out in the real world sometime. There's fresh air out there. You've been inhaling your own prestige fumes for too long.

By the time someone is ready to get 400k the work experience and degree matters not where you went to school. I was discussing this with MIT graduated senior manager and he/she said usually they prefer not big school as some of the kids are snobs. Might be one individual opinion.

I think the previous poster was referring 400k as your first out of college salary.

Get real folks. I am in Tech, and $200k is about the max for a fresh out of school candidate even in the top of the top silicon valley startups, and that too for the rare candidate from Stanford, MIT, CMU, etc. This is less than 0.5% of the graduating class, why are folks here arguing about issues that are not grounded in reality.

Most fresh graduates will be more than happy to get a job, which they will if they graduate from any of these Top 100 CS schools, and they all will be more than happy to make $60K out of the gate. After that, get some job experience, make your resume look good, learn some skills, and certifications, watch your salary double by switching jobs couple of times in the next 5 years. A smart person can double their salary in CS in that timeframe, and that should be more than good enough. CS is hard, no matter what school you go, and anyone who can graduate with a CS major is good enough, stop creating these class distinctions, we are not in communist china but the united states, here the person who can sell themselves better rises to top, not the best PhD Math student. In fact the best Math student from CMU may end up working for the company whose CEO graduated from Penn State because that person is good at marketing themselves

Such a boomer! You need to get out of your shell to see the world.
What kind of Tech are you in? Pretty miserable tech I would say. Making 60k with a CS degree is just laughable.

Okay, bozo, what do you I know, I have only spent 25 years in the industry, starting with a $50k salary that rapidly rose to double in few years out of college, was leading tech teams before 30, spent a career in building systems for top employers in the DC areas, and now supports two major consulting companies as a independent making over $300k, couple of million in investments that I manage myself, paying $200k tuition to one kid, and saving for another one. I guess I need to get out there more and see more life, yeah I'll take advice from you..

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tech / CS hiring manager here - don't discriminate at all among the top 100 schools. don't care at all. Decent GPA? fine, lets move on and talk shop. The higher ranked placement records is just a matter of the quality of the average student. If you expect the school to bring you along, then sure, you should focus on that. The reality is the best CS candidates are passionate about the industry and do a lot on their own time as a hobby. Personal experiences, internships/professional experience, and how competent you are during the interview matters 1000x more than which school you went to

Another CS hiring manager here...I second this!

I doubt these people went to top schools. They went to state unis. A community college grad would say the same thing - “I rejected ivy students and hired capable CC grads.”

One of the previous hiring manager posters here. I went to MIT, so I’d say that counts as a top school. My company (anyone calling a tech company a ‘firm’ is out of their element) is very well recognized. You can count on 2 hands the CS grads making $400k base directly out of undergrad, and no CS grad is going to be happy with $60k right out of school. That was a starting salary 25 years ago

I thought people were talking about 400k total, not base.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tech / CS hiring manager here - don't discriminate at all among the top 100 schools. don't care at all. Decent GPA? fine, lets move on and talk shop. The higher ranked placement records is just a matter of the quality of the average student. If you expect the school to bring you along, then sure, you should focus on that. The reality is the best CS candidates are passionate about the industry and do a lot on their own time as a hobby. Personal experiences, internships/professional experience, and how competent you are during the interview matters 1000x more than which school you went to

This is commonly known but doesn't invalidate the points made in this thread.
No one is claiming graduating from a top school would automatically guarantee you a job or certain salary. It's more like the graduates from top schools are relatively of higher quality and motivation (college admission is a screening process to some extent).
In addition, as many have said, certain top firms recruit mainly from selected top schools (due to the same reasons mentioned above).
On average, there is a significant difference in going to a top school or not in terms of starting your career, even for fields such as CS. Your observation as a hiring manager from a relatively obscure firm doesn't necessarily proof anything.

This. It will be helpful PPs reveal which firm they work for.

If I am a hiring manager from a top firm and pay $400k for top talent, do I want to sift through thousands of resumes from average schools to find that gem or I limit my search to MIT, CMU, etc where the success rate would be much higher?

The reality is students from top schools are better candidates than regular schools on average.

"$400k for top talent"? Are you crazy? That is so rare, like 20 jobs at most? Why on earth would you use that as a standard for hiring from the top 100 CS schools? Get out in the real world sometime. There's fresh air out there. You've been inhaling your own prestige fumes for too long.

By the time someone is ready to get 400k the work experience and degree matters not where you went to school. I was discussing this with MIT graduated senior manager and he/she said usually they prefer not big school as some of the kids are snobs. Might be one individual opinion.

I think the previous poster was referring 400k as your first out of college salary.

Get real folks. I am in Tech, and $200k is about the max for a fresh out of school candidate even in the top of the top silicon valley startups, and that too for the rare candidate from Stanford, MIT, CMU, etc. This is less than 0.5% of the graduating class, why are folks here arguing about issues that are not grounded in reality.

Most fresh graduates will be more than happy to get a job, which they will if they graduate from any of these Top 100 CS schools, and they all will be more than happy to make $60K out of the gate. After that, get some job experience, make your resume look good, learn some skills, and certifications, watch your salary double by switching jobs couple of times in the next 5 years. A smart person can double their salary in CS in that timeframe, and that should be more than good enough. CS is hard, no matter what school you go, and anyone who can graduate with a CS major is good enough, stop creating these class distinctions, we are not in communist china but the united states, here the person who can sell themselves better rises to top, not the best PhD Math student. In fact the best Math student from CMU may end up working for the company whose CEO graduated from Penn State because that person is good at marketing themselves

Such a boomer! You need to get out of your shell to see the world.
What kind of Tech are you in? Pretty miserable tech I would say. Making 60k with a CS degree is just laughable.

Okay, bozo, what do you I know, I have only spent 25 years in the industry, starting with a $50k salary that rapidly rose to double in few years out of college, was leading tech teams before 30, spent a career in building systems for top employers in the DC areas, and now supports two major consulting companies as a independent making over $300k, couple of million in investments that I manage myself, paying $200k tuition to one kid, and saving for another one. I guess I need to get out there more and see more life, yeah I'll take advice from you..

Not impressed at all even if it’s true. And all the evidence points to you’re making things up. Now tell me that 60k story again.