My child attends an elite college. It is overrated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Elite universities provide opportunities that non-elite universities don't. That's a simply fact. If the students cannot take advantage of those opportunities during or after college, then it is on the student.

Elite universities meaning HYPSM. Not Northwestern, Hopkins, Duke, Cornell, Vanderbilt, etc.

A history major from Harvard can easily get interviews to the cream of the crop investment and consulting firms - McKinsey, Lazard, etc. GPA and extracurricular is not even taken into account.

That same student at UVa would need to be a finance major in McIntire with a 3.7 GPA and multiple industry-focused extracurriculars with leadership positions. Probably leadership positions in certain well-connected frats as well. For an interview.

That same student at Virginia Tech would not even get an interview, regardless of whether they have a 4.0 GPA and president of every industry-focused club. Top investment banking and consulting firms simply do not recruit at Virginia Tech.

The interview may itself be more meritocratic given both students perform similarly, but interviewers are biased towards elite universities and having employees from elite universities is a selling point for the firm to the clients.

Beyond the first job - which itself can be very important as it snowballs into better future opportunities and networks - having an elite university helps in both climbing the career ladder as higher positions are occupied by those from elite universities - regardless of whether it's due to nepotism, inherent drive or most likely both - and graduate school.

According to the data from the Department of the Education;

https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/school/?166027-Harvard-University&fos_code=5401&fos_credential=3

Harvard History starting salary = $49,644

https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/school/?164924-Boston-College&fos_code=5208&fos_credential=3

Boston College Finance starting salary = $75,518
(I picked a school in Boston)

UVA McIntire would be higher.

If something is elite, it is valued more in society and in the market, and they would be willing to pay more $$$ for that.

Almost all the data shows the program/major is more important than the school name alone.

Program/major + school is a much better measurement for eliteness than a school name alone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Elite universities provide opportunities that non-elite universities don't. That's a simply fact. If the students cannot take advantage of those opportunities during or after college, then it is on the student.

Elite universities meaning HYPSM. Not Northwestern, Hopkins, Duke, Cornell, Vanderbilt, etc.

A history major from Harvard can easily get interviews to the cream of the crop investment and consulting firms - McKinsey, Lazard, etc. GPA and extracurricular is not even taken into account.

That same student at UVa would need to be a finance major in McIntire with a 3.7 GPA and multiple industry-focused extracurriculars with leadership positions. Probably leadership positions in certain well-connected frats as well. For an interview.

That same student at Virginia Tech would not even get an interview, regardless of whether they have a 4.0 GPA and president of every industry-focused club. Top investment banking and consulting firms simply do not recruit at Virginia Tech.

The interview may itself be more meritocratic given both students perform similarly, but interviewers are biased towards elite universities and having employees from elite universities is a selling point for the firm to the clients.

Beyond the first job - which itself can be very important as it snowballs into better future opportunities and networks - having an elite university helps in both climbing the career ladder as higher positions are occupied by those from elite universities - regardless of whether it's due to nepotism, inherent drive or most likely both - and graduate school.

yeah, no. nobody wants harvard bottom dwellers.

[Anonymous]

It only means your child was overrated at the time of college application.

[Anonymous]

I love bottom rung morons who repeat that “college only matters for your first job” nonsense. Your college remains on your resume for 40 to 50 years. Yale is going to pop off your resume when you’re job hopping in your 30s and 40s and the selection committee internally refers to you as the “Yale guy.” Only folks who went to bottom rung colleges think credential prestige doesn’t matter past age 22 — and you all don’t really even believe it, you just wish it was true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I love bottom rung morons who repeat that “college only matters for your first job” nonsense. Your college remains on your resume for 40 to 50 years. Yale is going to pop off your resume when you’re job hopping in your 30s and 40s and the selection committee internally refers to you as the “Yale guy.” Only folks who went to bottom rung colleges think credential prestige doesn’t matter past age 22 — and you all don’t really even believe it, you just wish it was true.

It's certanly a plus in general, but there are many other important factors as well.
It can also negatively impact if your performance is not at the level.
That guy went to 'mit'? scoff

[Anonymous]

If it’s so overrated why hasn’t your kid transferred to state school? No difference, right? Right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are no free electives, either. There are only electives in your given field of study.

+1. It is very different from the American cafeteria style liberal arts education. You get in on the strength if your talent on a subject and a very difficult interview on same. Plus 15 APs. Perfect SATs and 5s on 5 AP tests. The. You read only in your planned area of study

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If it’s so overrated why hasn’t your kid transferred to state school? No difference, right? Right.

Do you have any idea what it takes to transfer into a good public university these days?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Elite universities provide opportunities that non-elite universities don't. That's a simply fact. If the students cannot take advantage of those opportunities during or after college, then it is on the student.

Elite universities meaning HYPSM. Not Northwestern, Hopkins, Duke, Cornell, Vanderbilt, etc.

A history major from Harvard can easily get interviews to the cream of the crop investment and consulting firms - McKinsey, Lazard, etc. GPA and extracurricular is not even taken into account.

That same student at UVa would need to be a finance major in McIntire with a 3.7 GPA and multiple industry-focused extracurriculars with leadership positions. Probably leadership positions in certain well-connected frats as well. For an interview.

That same student at Virginia Tech would not even get an interview, regardless of whether they have a 4.0 GPA and president of every industry-focused club. Top investment banking and consulting firms simply do not recruit at Virginia Tech.

The interview may itself be more meritocratic given both students perform similarly, but interviewers are biased towards elite universities and having employees from elite universities is a selling point for the firm to the clients.

Beyond the first job - which itself can be very important as it snowballs into better future opportunities and networks - having an elite university helps in both climbing the career ladder as higher positions are occupied by those from elite universities - regardless of whether it's due to nepotism, inherent drive or most likely both - and graduate school.

yeah, no. nobody wants harvard bottom dwellers.

It's not even that...the History major is behind all the Economics, Math, CS and other STEM kids in any pecking order...basically any kid at Harvard that shows quantitative acumen.

Also, for the record, Goldman and McKinsey hire more kids from Michigan (not an alum...I just know how to use Google) then they do Harvard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Elite universities provide opportunities that non-elite universities don't. That's a simply fact. If the students cannot take advantage of those opportunities during or after college, then it is on the student.

Elite universities meaning HYPSM. Not Northwestern, Hopkins, Duke, Cornell, Vanderbilt, etc.

A history major from Harvard can easily get interviews to the cream of the crop investment and consulting firms - McKinsey, Lazard, etc. GPA and extracurricular is not even taken into account.

That same student at UVa would need to be a finance major in McIntire with a 3.7 GPA and multiple industry-focused extracurriculars with leadership positions. Probably leadership positions in certain well-connected frats as well. For an interview.

That same student at Virginia Tech would not even get an interview, regardless of whether they have a 4.0 GPA and president of every industry-focused club. Top investment banking and consulting firms simply do not recruit at Virginia Tech.

The interview may itself be more meritocratic given both students perform similarly, but interviewers are biased towards elite universities and having employees from elite universities is a selling point for the firm to the clients.

Beyond the first job - which itself can be very important as it snowballs into better future opportunities and networks - having an elite university helps in both climbing the career ladder as higher positions are occupied by those from elite universities - regardless of whether it's due to nepotism, inherent drive or most likely both - and graduate school.

yeah, no. nobody wants harvard bottom dwellers.

It's not even that...the History major is behind all the Economics, Math, CS and other STEM kids in any pecking order...basically any kid at Harvard that shows quantitative acumen.

Also, for the record, Goldman and McKinsey hire more kids from Michigan (not an alum...I just know how to use Google) then they do Harvard.

Ok. Michigan is a fine school. Enjoy. Different strokes for different folks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love bottom rung morons who repeat that “college only matters for your first job” nonsense. Your college remains on your resume for 40 to 50 years. Yale is going to pop off your resume when you’re job hopping in your 30s and 40s and the selection committee internally refers to you as the “Yale guy.” Only folks who went to bottom rung colleges think credential prestige doesn’t matter past age 22 — and you all don’t really even believe it, you just wish it was true.

It's certanly a plus in general, but there are many other important factors as well.
It can also negatively impact if your performance is not at the level.
That guy went to 'mit'? scoff

It also sets a high bar. I'm always concerned when I see a "drop" between undergrad and graduate school in terms of prestige. It someone did undergrad at Yale but some podunk graduate program, I tend to assume they were coached into the undergraduate program with parental support but weren't actually able to perform once they arrived.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Elite universities provide opportunities that non-elite universities don't. That's a simply fact. If the students cannot take advantage of those opportunities during or after college, then it is on the student.

Elite universities meaning HYPSM. Not Northwestern, Hopkins, Duke, Cornell, Vanderbilt, etc.

A history major from Harvard can easily get interviews to the cream of the crop investment and consulting firms - McKinsey, Lazard, etc. GPA and extracurricular is not even taken into account.

That same student at UVa would need to be a finance major in McIntire with a 3.7 GPA and multiple industry-focused extracurriculars with leadership positions. Probably leadership positions in certain well-connected frats as well. For an interview.

That same student at Virginia Tech would not even get an interview, regardless of whether they have a 4.0 GPA and president of every industry-focused club. Top investment banking and consulting firms simply do not recruit at Virginia Tech.

The interview may itself be more meritocratic given both students perform similarly, but interviewers are biased towards elite universities and having employees from elite universities is a selling point for the firm to the clients.

Beyond the first job - which itself can be very important as it snowballs into better future opportunities and networks - having an elite university helps in both climbing the career ladder as higher positions are occupied by those from elite universities - regardless of whether it's due to nepotism, inherent drive or most likely both - and graduate school.

yeah, no. nobody wants harvard bottom dwellers.

It's not even that...the History major is behind all the Economics, Math, CS and other STEM kids in any pecking order...basically any kid at Harvard that shows quantitative acumen.

Also, for the record, Goldman and McKinsey hire more kids from Michigan (not an alum...I just know how to use Google) then they do Harvard.

Ok. Michigan is a fine school. Enjoy. Different strokes for different folks.

Just use a more realistic example next time. I actually worked on Wall Street and you basically never ran into a Harvard History major. Lots of Econ, Math, STEM...maybe a History major that "minored" in Econ, which means they woke up one day, realized they were not getting a PhD in History or going to Law school, and decided they needed to take courses that showed some quantitative ability/interest in making $$s.

[Anonymous]

The history major elite college grad I know went to law school, went to Asia and made a ton of money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love bottom rung morons who repeat that “college only matters for your first job” nonsense. Your college remains on your resume for 40 to 50 years. Yale is going to pop off your resume when you’re job hopping in your 30s and 40s and the selection committee internally refers to you as the “Yale guy.” Only folks who went to bottom rung colleges think credential prestige doesn’t matter past age 22 — and you all don’t really even believe it, you just wish it was true.

It's certanly a plus in general, but there are many other important factors as well.
It can also negatively impact if your performance is not at the level.
That guy went to 'mit'? scoff

It also sets a high bar. I'm always concerned when I see a "drop" between undergrad and graduate school in terms of prestige. It someone did undergrad at Yale but some podunk graduate program, I tend to assume they were coached into the undergraduate program with parental support but weren't actually able to perform once they arrived.

Sometimes they get scholarships at less prestigious colleges for graduate schools.
I personally know this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love bottom rung morons who repeat that “college only matters for your first job” nonsense. Your college remains on your resume for 40 to 50 years. Yale is going to pop off your resume when you’re job hopping in your 30s and 40s and the selection committee internally refers to you as the “Yale guy.” Only folks who went to bottom rung colleges think credential prestige doesn’t matter past age 22 — and you all don’t really even believe it, you just wish it was true.

It's certanly a plus in general, but there are many other important factors as well.
It can also negatively impact if your performance is not at the level.
That guy went to 'mit'? scoff

It also sets a high bar. I'm always concerned when I see a "drop" between undergrad and graduate school in terms of prestige. It someone did undergrad at Yale but some podunk graduate program, I tend to assume they were coached into the undergraduate program with parental support but weren't actually able to perform once they arrived.

Sometimes they get scholarships at less prestigious colleges for graduate schools.
I personally know this.

Bullsh*t. This is spin and you know it. Prestige whores don't value shop graduate school.