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

[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.

Well how come they have the wunderlink test and I have had to take several tests to do jobs.

[Anonymous]

So one thing I would say is I am in house counsel and I always check where outside counsel went to school when I hire them and usually it is not a top undergrad and a top law school. It might be say UC Irvine undergrad and like a Boston College law. Certainly, good schools but not elite in my estimation. I assume they did well in undergrad to get into a good law school and then decent at law school to get into Big Law Firm X.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many people in here huffing and puffing that they don’t care about school rank when they hire.

Yet we know that grads from better schools make more money than grads from lower-tier schools both when they start and 20+ years after graduation. Thus, it is unquestionably clear that writ large, employers DO care about school rank, and do think that grads of top schools make better employees.

Money talks, bullsht stays on DCUM forums.

Hon, the reason those kids make more money is because they all know and hire each other, and then each other's kids. It's nothing to do with making 'better employees.' The term you're looking for is 'nepotism.' You wouldn't know the term, of course; they called it 'merit' at your 'better school,' to make you and the other gentlemen's C students feel better about your poor sweet little mediocre selves.

Hon, if you think every single Ivy grad is personally known to thousands of employers and HR departments across the land, you are truly deluded. That's not how it works. What is happening is that the HR departments and hiring managers get countless applications from countless kids they don't even know, and they are putting the elite school grads at the top of the stack to get interviewed under the assumption (whether you like it or not) that these are smart kids and good students. And then those kids interview well so they get hired.

After that, an elite diploma might be enough to get you in the door but if you don't perform, you won't get promoted. The fact that the grads of top schools do better 20 years after graduating than kids of lesser schools shows that the elite grads are, indeed, performing.

But keep coping that your kid who went to some crappy state school has only been held back due to nepotism, lol.

NP. Have you ever actively worked in an elite environment? I think it’s pretty clear you haven’t.

I have. And nepotism, connections, cronyism, and butt-kissing gets you rich. Being a “smart” “worker bee” makes you a sap.

[Anonymous]

Parents want their kids in the most elite orbits in high school to college because that’s likely where they’ll meet a spouse. You want your kids being orbited by flunkies and drunks with low ambition, be my guest. Take the bribe (merit money) to attend some tier 4 school. In all likelihood it will work out fine for your kid - - or maybe it won’t. And maybe it seems fine at first but doesn’t 10 years out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many people in here huffing and puffing that they don’t care about school rank when they hire.

Yet we know that grads from better schools make more money than grads from lower-tier schools both when they start and 20+ years after graduation. Thus, it is unquestionably clear that writ large, employers DO care about school rank, and do think that grads of top schools make better employees.

Money talks, bullsht stays on DCUM forums.

Hon, the reason those kids make more money is because they all know and hire each other, and then each other's kids. It's nothing to do with making 'better employees.' The term you're looking for is 'nepotism.' You wouldn't know the term, of course; they called it 'merit' at your 'better school,' to make you and the other gentlemen's C students feel better about your poor sweet little mediocre selves.

Hon, if you think every single Ivy grad is personally known to thousands of employers and HR departments across the land, you are truly deluded. That's not how it works. What is happening is that the HR departments and hiring managers get countless applications from countless kids they don't even know, and they are putting the elite school grads at the top of the stack to get interviewed under the assumption (whether you like it or not) that these are smart kids and good students. And then those kids interview well so they get hired.

After that, an elite diploma might be enough to get you in the door but if you don't perform, you won't get promoted. The fact that the grads of top schools do better 20 years after graduating than kids of lesser schools shows that the elite grads are, indeed, performing.

But keep coping that your kid who went to some crappy state school has only been held back due to nepotism, lol.

NP. Have you ever actively worked in an elite environment? I think it’s pretty clear you haven’t.

Give us an example of the elite environments you're talking about.

Big Four
Big Law
FAANG
IB

It is transparently clear to me you’ve never stepped foot in one of those environments.

The only thing transparently clear is that you're a troll.

Actually, she is right on point in all four areas.

Here's the leadership team from PWC. Take a look at where they studied and then tell me going to an elite college matters to the Big Four.

https://www.pwc.com/us/en/about-us/leadership.html

I'm confident the same is true for all of the other areas listed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many people in here huffing and puffing that they don’t care about school rank when they hire.

Yet we know that grads from better schools make more money than grads from lower-tier schools both when they start and 20+ years after graduation. Thus, it is unquestionably clear that writ large, employers DO care about school rank, and do think that grads of top schools make better employees.

Money talks, bullsht stays on DCUM forums.

Hon, the reason those kids make more money is because they all know and hire each other, and then each other's kids. It's nothing to do with making 'better employees.' The term you're looking for is 'nepotism.' You wouldn't know the term, of course; they called it 'merit' at your 'better school,' to make you and the other gentlemen's C students feel better about your poor sweet little mediocre selves.

Hon, if you think every single Ivy grad is personally known to thousands of employers and HR departments across the land, you are truly deluded. That's not how it works. What is happening is that the HR departments and hiring managers get countless applications from countless kids they don't even know, and they are putting the elite school grads at the top of the stack to get interviewed under the assumption (whether you like it or not) that these are smart kids and good students. And then those kids interview well so they get hired.

After that, an elite diploma might be enough to get you in the door but if you don't perform, you won't get promoted. The fact that the grads of top schools do better 20 years after graduating than kids of lesser schools shows that the elite grads are, indeed, performing.

But keep coping that your kid who went to some crappy state school has only been held back due to nepotism, lol.

NP. Have you ever actively worked in an elite environment? I think it’s pretty clear you haven’t.

Give us an example of the elite environments you're talking about.

Big Four
Big Law
FAANG
IB

It is transparently clear to me you’ve never stepped foot in one of those environments.

The only thing transparently clear is that you're a troll.

Actually, she is right on point in all four areas.

Here's the leadership team from PWC. Take a look at where they studied and then tell me going to an elite college matters to the Big Four.

https://www.pwc.com/us/en/about-us/leadership.html

I'm confident the same is true for all of the other areas listed.

Top feeders to business school: Dartmouth, Chicago, Claremont, Yale, Williams, Harvard, Northwestern, Stanford, Duke, Amherst
Top feeders to Wall Street: Penn, NYU, Cornall, Michigan, Harvard, Columbia, Chicago, Berkeley, Notre Dame, Duke

You confidence that elite colleges "don't matter" in the business world is stupid and misplaced.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many people in here huffing and puffing that they don’t care about school rank when they hire.

Yet we know that grads from better schools make more money than grads from lower-tier schools both when they start and 20+ years after graduation. Thus, it is unquestionably clear that writ large, employers DO care about school rank, and do think that grads of top schools make better employees.

Money talks, bullsht stays on DCUM forums.

Hon, the reason those kids make more money is because they all know and hire each other, and then each other's kids. It's nothing to do with making 'better employees.' The term you're looking for is 'nepotism.' You wouldn't know the term, of course; they called it 'merit' at your 'better school,' to make you and the other gentlemen's C students feel better about your poor sweet little mediocre selves.

Hon, if you think every single Ivy grad is personally known to thousands of employers and HR departments across the land, you are truly deluded. That's not how it works. What is happening is that the HR departments and hiring managers get countless applications from countless kids they don't even know, and they are putting the elite school grads at the top of the stack to get interviewed under the assumption (whether you like it or not) that these are smart kids and good students. And then those kids interview well so they get hired.

After that, an elite diploma might be enough to get you in the door but if you don't perform, you won't get promoted. The fact that the grads of top schools do better 20 years after graduating than kids of lesser schools shows that the elite grads are, indeed, performing.

But keep coping that your kid who went to some crappy state school has only been held back due to nepotism, lol.

NP. Have you ever actively worked in an elite environment? I think it’s pretty clear you haven’t.

Give us an example of the elite environments you're talking about.

Big Four
Big Law
FAANG
IB

It is transparently clear to me you’ve never stepped foot in one of those environments.

The only thing transparently clear is that you're a troll.

Actually, she is right on point in all four areas.

Here's the leadership team from PWC. Take a look at where they studied and then tell me going to an elite college matters to the Big Four.

https://www.pwc.com/us/en/about-us/leadership.html

I'm confident the same is true for all of the other areas listed.

Lol. Big four aka state school worker bees. You are truly clueless.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many people in here huffing and puffing that they don’t care about school rank when they hire.

Yet we know that grads from better schools make more money than grads from lower-tier schools both when they start and 20+ years after graduation. Thus, it is unquestionably clear that writ large, employers DO care about school rank, and do think that grads of top schools make better employees.

Money talks, bullsht stays on DCUM forums.

Hon, the reason those kids make more money is because they all know and hire each other, and then each other's kids. It's nothing to do with making 'better employees.' The term you're looking for is 'nepotism.' You wouldn't know the term, of course; they called it 'merit' at your 'better school,' to make you and the other gentlemen's C students feel better about your poor sweet little mediocre selves.

Hon, if you think every single Ivy grad is personally known to thousands of employers and HR departments across the land, you are truly deluded. That's not how it works. What is happening is that the HR departments and hiring managers get countless applications from countless kids they don't even know, and they are putting the elite school grads at the top of the stack to get interviewed under the assumption (whether you like it or not) that these are smart kids and good students. And then those kids interview well so they get hired.

After that, an elite diploma might be enough to get you in the door but if you don't perform, you won't get promoted. The fact that the grads of top schools do better 20 years after graduating than kids of lesser schools shows that the elite grads are, indeed, performing.

But keep coping that your kid who went to some crappy state school has only been held back due to nepotism, lol.

NP. Have you ever actively worked in an elite environment? I think it’s pretty clear you haven’t.

Give us an example of the elite environments you're talking about.

Big Four
Big Law
FAANG
IB

It is transparently clear to me you’ve never stepped foot in one of those environments.

The only thing transparently clear is that you're a troll.

Actually, she is right on point in all four areas.

Here's the leadership team from PWC. Take a look at where they studied and then tell me going to an elite college matters to the Big Four.

https://www.pwc.com/us/en/about-us/leadership.html

I'm confident the same is true for all of the other areas listed.

Top feeders to business school: Dartmouth, Chicago, Claremont, Yale, Williams, Harvard, Northwestern, Stanford, Duke, Amherst
Top feeders to Wall Street: Penn, NYU, Cornall, Michigan, Harvard, Columbia, Chicago, Berkeley, Notre Dame, Duke

You confidence that elite colleges "don't matter" in the business world is stupid and misplaced.

Goodbye, troll.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many people in here huffing and puffing that they don’t care about school rank when they hire.

Yet we know that grads from better schools make more money than grads from lower-tier schools both when they start and 20+ years after graduation. Thus, it is unquestionably clear that writ large, employers DO care about school rank, and do think that grads of top schools make better employees.

Money talks, bullsht stays on DCUM forums.

Hon, the reason those kids make more money is because they all know and hire each other, and then each other's kids. It's nothing to do with making 'better employees.' The term you're looking for is 'nepotism.' You wouldn't know the term, of course; they called it 'merit' at your 'better school,' to make you and the other gentlemen's C students feel better about your poor sweet little mediocre selves.

Hon, if you think every single Ivy grad is personally known to thousands of employers and HR departments across the land, you are truly deluded. That's not how it works. What is happening is that the HR departments and hiring managers get countless applications from countless kids they don't even know, and they are putting the elite school grads at the top of the stack to get interviewed under the assumption (whether you like it or not) that these are smart kids and good students. And then those kids interview well so they get hired.

After that, an elite diploma might be enough to get you in the door but if you don't perform, you won't get promoted. The fact that the grads of top schools do better 20 years after graduating than kids of lesser schools shows that the elite grads are, indeed, performing.

But keep coping that your kid who went to some crappy state school has only been held back due to nepotism, lol.

NP. Have you ever actively worked in an elite environment? I think it’s pretty clear you haven’t.

Give us an example of the elite environments you're talking about.

Big Four
Big Law
FAANG
IB

It is transparently clear to me you’ve never stepped foot in one of those environments.

The only thing transparently clear is that you're a troll.

Actually, she is right on point in all four areas.

Here's the leadership team from PWC. Take a look at where they studied and then tell me going to an elite college matters to the Big Four.

https://www.pwc.com/us/en/about-us/leadership.html

I'm confident the same is true for all of the other areas listed.

Lol. Big four aka state school worker bees. You are truly clueless.

And buh-bye, troll.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many people in here huffing and puffing that they don’t care about school rank when they hire.

Yet we know that grads from better schools make more money than grads from lower-tier schools both when they start and 20+ years after graduation. Thus, it is unquestionably clear that writ large, employers DO care about school rank, and do think that grads of top schools make better employees.

Money talks, bullsht stays on DCUM forums.

Hon, the reason those kids make more money is because they all know and hire each other, and then each other's kids. It's nothing to do with making 'better employees.' The term you're looking for is 'nepotism.' You wouldn't know the term, of course; they called it 'merit' at your 'better school,' to make you and the other gentlemen's C students feel better about your poor sweet little mediocre selves.

Hon, if you think every single Ivy grad is personally known to thousands of employers and HR departments across the land, you are truly deluded. That's not how it works. What is happening is that the HR departments and hiring managers get countless applications from countless kids they don't even know, and they are putting the elite school grads at the top of the stack to get interviewed under the assumption (whether you like it or not) that these are smart kids and good students. And then those kids interview well so they get hired.

After that, an elite diploma might be enough to get you in the door but if you don't perform, you won't get promoted. The fact that the grads of top schools do better 20 years after graduating than kids of lesser schools shows that the elite grads are, indeed, performing.

But keep coping that your kid who went to some crappy state school has only been held back due to nepotism, lol.

NP. Have you ever actively worked in an elite environment? I think it’s pretty clear you haven’t.

Give us an example of the elite environments you're talking about.

Big Four
Big Law
FAANG
IB

It is transparently clear to me you’ve never stepped foot in one of those environments.

The only thing transparently clear is that you're a troll.

Actually, she is right on point in all four areas.

Here's the leadership team from PWC. Take a look at where they studied and then tell me going to an elite college matters to the Big Four.

https://www.pwc.com/us/en/about-us/leadership.html

I'm confident the same is true for all of the other areas listed.

80% of them are white

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many people in here huffing and puffing that they don’t care about school rank when they hire.

Yet we know that grads from better schools make more money than grads from lower-tier schools both when they start and 20+ years after graduation. Thus, it is unquestionably clear that writ large, employers DO care about school rank, and do think that grads of top schools make better employees.

Money talks, bullsht stays on DCUM forums.

Hon, the reason those kids make more money is because they all know and hire each other, and then each other's kids. It's nothing to do with making 'better employees.' The term you're looking for is 'nepotism.' You wouldn't know the term, of course; they called it 'merit' at your 'better school,' to make you and the other gentlemen's C students feel better about your poor sweet little mediocre selves.

Hon, if you think every single Ivy grad is personally known to thousands of employers and HR departments across the land, you are truly deluded. That's not how it works. What is happening is that the HR departments and hiring managers get countless applications from countless kids they don't even know, and they are putting the elite school grads at the top of the stack to get interviewed under the assumption (whether you like it or not) that these are smart kids and good students. And then those kids interview well so they get hired.

After that, an elite diploma might be enough to get you in the door but if you don't perform, you won't get promoted. The fact that the grads of top schools do better 20 years after graduating than kids of lesser schools shows that the elite grads are, indeed, performing.

But keep coping that your kid who went to some crappy state school has only been held back due to nepotism, lol.

NP. Have you ever actively worked in an elite environment? I think it’s pretty clear you haven’t.

Give us an example of the elite environments you're talking about.

Big Four
Big Law
FAANG
IB

It is transparently clear to me you’ve never stepped foot in one of those environments.

The only thing transparently clear is that you're a troll.

Actually, she is right on point in all four areas.

Here's the leadership team from PWC. Take a look at where they studied and then tell me going to an elite college matters to the Big Four.

https://www.pwc.com/us/en/about-us/leadership.html

I'm confident the same is true for all of the other areas listed.

Accounting is one of the more egalitarian professional fields. It's not like IB where you have to be Bradford, Chatford, Schmuckford, or Tripp.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Parents want their kids in the most elite orbits in high school to college because that’s likely where they’ll meet a spouse. You want your kids being orbited by flunkies and drunks with low ambition, be my guest. Take the bribe (merit money) to attend some tier 4 school. In all likelihood it will work out fine for your kid - - or maybe it won’t. And maybe it seems fine at first but doesn’t 10 years out.

Bored teens on Xmas morning are so tiresome. You are so, so unaware of how the real world works, child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Parents want their kids in the most elite orbits in high school to college because that’s likely where they’ll meet a spouse. You want your kids being orbited by flunkies and drunks with low ambition, be my guest. Take the bribe (merit money) to attend some tier 4 school. In all likelihood it will work out fine for your kid - - or maybe it won’t. And maybe it seems fine at first but doesn’t 10 years out.

Bored teens on Xmas morning are so tiresome. You are so, so unaware of how the real world works, child.

“You can still succeed even if you attend a mediocre state school” isn’t how the real world works now either, Boomer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Parents want their kids in the most elite orbits in high school to college because that’s likely where they’ll meet a spouse. You want your kids being orbited by flunkies and drunks with low ambition, be my guest. Take the bribe (merit money) to attend some tier 4 school. In all likelihood it will work out fine for your kid - - or maybe it won’t. And maybe it seems fine at first but doesn’t 10 years out.

Bored teens on Xmas morning are so tiresome. You are so, so unaware of how the real world works, child.

“You can still succeed even if you attend a mediocre state school” isn’t how the real world works now either, Boomer.

Lol, you are 13 and have no idea how the real world works. Go play with your new steam deck, child, and stop with your nonsense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many people in here huffing and puffing that they don’t care about school rank when they hire.

Yet we know that grads from better schools make more money than grads from lower-tier schools both when they start and 20+ years after graduation. Thus, it is unquestionably clear that writ large, employers DO care about school rank, and do think that grads of top schools make better employees.

Money talks, bullsht stays on DCUM forums.

Hon, the reason those kids make more money is because they all know and hire each other, and then each other's kids. It's nothing to do with making 'better employees.' The term you're looking for is 'nepotism.' You wouldn't know the term, of course; they called it 'merit' at your 'better school,' to make you and the other gentlemen's C students feel better about your poor sweet little mediocre selves.

Hon, if you think every single Ivy grad is personally known to thousands of employers and HR departments across the land, you are truly deluded. That's not how it works. What is happening is that the HR departments and hiring managers get countless applications from countless kids they don't even know, and they are putting the elite school grads at the top of the stack to get interviewed under the assumption (whether you like it or not) that these are smart kids and good students. And then those kids interview well so they get hired.

After that, an elite diploma might be enough to get you in the door but if you don't perform, you won't get promoted. The fact that the grads of top schools do better 20 years after graduating than kids of lesser schools shows that the elite grads are, indeed, performing.

But keep coping that your kid who went to some crappy state school has only been held back due to nepotism, lol.

NP. Have you ever actively worked in an elite environment? I think it’s pretty clear you haven’t.

Give us an example of the elite environments you're talking about.

Big Four
Big Law
FAANG
IB

It is transparently clear to me you’ve never stepped foot in one of those environments.

The only thing transparently clear is that you're a troll.

Actually, she is right on point in all four areas.

Here's the leadership team from PWC. Take a look at where they studied and then tell me going to an elite college matters to the Big Four.

https://www.pwc.com/us/en/about-us/leadership.html

I'm confident the same is true for all of the other areas listed.

Top feeders to business school: Dartmouth, Chicago, Claremont, Yale, Williams, Harvard, Northwestern, Stanford, Duke, Amherst
Top feeders to Wall Street: Penn, NYU, Cornall, Michigan, Harvard, Columbia, Chicago, Berkeley, Notre Dame, Duke

You confidence that elite colleges "don't matter" in the business world is stupid and misplaced.

Attending "business school" denotes obtaining a 4-year bachelor of business degree in a business school major. Not mere grad school after studying basket weaving for 4 years. So your post is nonsensical