Why is it so hard to accept that the students at better colleges are simply better students?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Okay but why should I, as an employer, GAF who is the best student? I don’t have any jobs for studying and taking tests. I need to know who is the best project manager and best salesperson and best communicator. Mind you, I do think student quality has some overlap with the skills I’m looking for, but you’re the one talking about the “best students.”

I find the obsession over where a person spends 4 years of their life really odd. Especially in the DMV, people seem to take more about predictors of success than actual… success.

And before you accuse me of being a naive populist, I went to Northwestern.

The easiest way for you, as an employer, to determine who is the best manager / salesperson / communicator would be to administer some type of IQ or aptitude test to job applicants. But you're not allowed to do that thanks to Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424 (1971). Therefore, you, like all employers, are forced to use proxies to achieve the same effect. The leading proxy for ability to do the job is, of course, "what degree do you have and where did you get it from". That may not be optimal from an employer's perspective but here we are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Okay but why should I, as an employer, GAF who is the best student? I don’t have any jobs for studying and taking tests. I need to know who is the best project manager and best salesperson and best communicator. Mind you, I do think student quality has some overlap with the skills I’m looking for, but you’re the one talking about the “best students.”

I find the obsession over where a person spends 4 years of their life really odd. Especially in the DMV, people seem to take more about predictors of success than actual… success.

And before you accuse me of being a naive populist, I went to Northwestern.

The easiest way for you, as an employer, to determine who is the best manager / salesperson / communicator would be to administer some type of IQ or aptitude test to job applicants. But you're not allowed to do that thanks to Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424 (1971). Therefore, you, like all employers, are forced to use proxies to achieve the same effect. The leading proxy for ability to do the job is, of course, "what degree do you have and where did you get it from". That may not be optimal from an employer's perspective but here we are.

Not at all. To be blunt some of my best sales people surely had unimpressive IQs. Communication skills also are not well-predicted by IQ but are obvious from a good interview process. Getting the most tippy top bright students has never been my goal, because, again, I’ve never hired for a test taker.

[Anonymous]

Where are these students supposed to go? There is a huge variety in where students decide to pursue higher education for lots is reasons. But top students with many academic gifts would overall gravitate to a challenging environment where they can make use of their talents.

[Anonymous]

This whole thread is simply so out of touch with reality. Most people don’t care. I don’t care. I’ve worked with people from ivies and I’ve worked with people from unimpressive party schools. Their educational background has almost no correlation with how good of a coworker (or, in general, how good of an employee) they are.

Do people really feel the way OP does? Caring that much about pedigree just sounds exhausting.

[Anonymous]

We know this isn’t true. Look at the Harvard and UNC lawsuits. Look at TJ’s new admissions standards. Look at the criminal spotlight on rich people buying their kids spots at schools. If it was purely based on a kid being a better student, first generation, minorities, legacies, sports, etc. wouldn’t matter. They do and it means often the smartest kids are excluded somewhere because another student with non academic pros beats him out.

[Anonymous]

Over half the kids at our local high school have over a 4.0. They don’t even publish valedictorian any more because when 300 kids are valedictorian, it’s a meaningless accomplishment. I simply don’t believe any more that high GPA means a more accomplished student.

[Anonymous]

Yes, on average. But there's so much variation within schools that the top students at middling schools are better than the average students at top schools, and there are a few awful students at top schools.

In practical terms, that means that grad schools and employers shouldn't ignore school quality, but they should do some work to look at individuals. And students and parents should stop obsessing over specific schools and recognize that schools make a difference, but that you can get a great education at many different types of schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Okay but why should I, as an employer, GAF who is the best student? I don’t have any jobs for studying and taking tests. I need to know who is the best project manager and best salesperson and best communicator. Mind you, I do think student quality has some overlap with the skills I’m looking for, but you’re the one talking about the “best students.”

I find the obsession over where a person spends 4 years of their life really odd. Especially in the DMV, people seem to take more about predictors of success than actual… success.

And before you accuse me of being a naive populist, I went to Northwestern.

The easiest way for you, as an employer, to determine who is the best manager / salesperson / communicator would be to administer some type of IQ or aptitude test to job applicants. But you're not allowed to do that thanks to Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424 (1971). Therefore, you, like all employers, are forced to use proxies to achieve the same effect. The leading proxy for ability to do the job is, of course, "what degree do you have and where did you get it from". That may not be optimal from an employer's perspective but here we are.

LOL!!!!!!!!

[Anonymous]

I'm bored

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A bad student was 6 APs and a B average? SMH You obsessed people are sick and need professional help. I am so sorry for your kids.

I said 6 AP units, not 6 APs. I graduated high school with one AP class and got 6 units of college credit for it.

My high school barely had any AP’s. I passed 2 AP tests and was considered one of the top students. Multiple kids went on to college with (gasp) no AP classes in high school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Because of people like Olivia Jade, Lori Loughlin's crap kid. Or my friends kid who had a 2.0 GPA and got into a "public ivy" because daddy knew someone.

This. They are either good students or their parents have a lot of money. Lots of people aren't that smart but have rich parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Okay but why should I, as an employer, GAF who is the best student? I don’t have any jobs for studying and taking tests. I need to know who is the best project manager and best salesperson and best communicator. Mind you, I do think student quality has some overlap with the skills I’m looking for, but you’re the one talking about the “best students.”

I find the obsession over where a person spends 4 years of their life really odd. Especially in the DMV, people seem to take more about predictors of success than actual… success.

And before you accuse me of being a naive populist, I went to Northwestern.

+1. I went to an "elite" college and a top 15 law school, but I mostly haven't worked with people with educational pedigrees like that. I've worked with people with two degrees from Liberty and people with law degrees from UDC and the University of Baltimore who were just as good as their jobs as I am at mine. Now, if my boss asked us to take the SAT, I'd smoke 'em, but that's never come up.

Hear, hear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Where are these students supposed to go? There is a huge variety in where students decide to pursue higher education for lots is reasons. But top students with many academic gifts would overall gravitate to a challenging environment where they can make use of their talents.

And where they can afford to go.

Many, many of the best students apply and are admitted to “better” schools than where they ultimately enroll because they cannot afford to go to the more expensive school. Conversely, full pay students are not always the best students but they can pay.

Get you head out of your backside, OP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This whole thread is simply so out of touch with reality. Most people don’t care. I don’t care. I’ve worked with people from ivies and I’ve worked with people from unimpressive party schools. Their educational background has almost no correlation with how good of a coworker (or, in general, how good of an employee) they are.

Do people really feel the way OP does? Caring that much about pedigree just sounds exhausting.

But this thread is about college years, not post college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well better colleges used to have better students. Now I don’t believe it any more. Too many athletes, legacy, and social projects at top colleges. I have confidence only in a few colleges like MIT like Carnegie Mellon.

You would be naive to believe MIT does not do its own social projects. And don't get me started with CMU. They are big in yield protection.