My child attends an elite college. It is overrated.

[Anonymous]

Why shouldn't really motivated scholarly types go to some elite fancy school if they desire? Top ivies are loaded and there are tons of opportunities, classes, interesting professors, internships, study abroad options, research opportunities, very generous financial aid, activities, etc. to choose from.

There are many great colleges but I don't see anything wrong with the top ones if it is good fit and the student understands how to take advantage of what is offered.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I haven't read this whole thread, but I got my undergrad at a mid-level state school and my masters from an Ivy, so I thought I'd contribute my own personal experience.

My perspective on it is this: no college of any level will guarantee you a job afterward. All you have when you graduate is academic knowledge and social connections. It's incumbent on the individual to go out and make things happen with the resources they have. Also, academic knowledge often is only vaguely useful in your chosen job field. When hiring new grads at my business, we anticipate at least a year of training them up to be competent.

The smartest people I encountered at the Ivy I went to were no smarter than the smartest people I encountered at my mid-level state school. Practically speaking, there seems to be an upper limit to how intelligent people can be, and you can find people of that level at most universities. However, I did notice that the AVERAGE intelligence and drive at the Ivy was higher than the average at the state school. I.e. there were a greater number of slackers and dummies at the state school (though there were also slackers and dummies at the Ivy!), so you were more likely to find people at state school who didn't really give a flip and were just there to coast and party. (Again, that personality also existed at the Ivy I went to, just in much smaller quantities).

Thus far (about ten years out from my grad degree) the main difference I've noticed is the social network. Probably 15% - 20% people I went to the Ivy with are now in C-level leadership positions at companies. Having remained friendly and in good contact with these people, they are now business colleagues. Conversely, I've also remained friendly and in good contact with the people I went to state school with, and less than 1% of those people are in any positions of leadership, let alone C-level leadership. I only have continuing business interests with one person from the state school.

Obviously this is just a persona anecdotal story, though, so take it with a grain of salt.

Worth reading. Thank you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Crazy that DCUM is bashing OP because elite colleges are all that DCUM respects. If DCUMers know that top schools won’t transform lives, then why the hype and frustration about not getting into one? For what it’s worth, I went to a Top 15 school, and my kid is going to UVA. Never allowed him to consider the overpriced, overhyped schools.

Only here--on DCUM--is the University of Virginia not recognized as an elite school.

[Anonymous]

I think the ROI studies are interesting data, but it needs to be taken in context. We will Likely spend anywhere from $200k-350k on a humanities type of degree for our daughter over the next 4 years. Full pay, don’t know where she will be going yet so the cost is a range. We are DC residents so no great state school. We are not wealthy but have planned for this. We want her to have a certain kind of opportunity to go to a school that is the best fit for her. If we had to borrow the money or she did, it would be very different kind of analysis. I did not think of return on investment for all the money we have spent on many things for our child, this is the biggest thing, and important in so many ways, but we are not measuring its value with only that in mind.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the ROI studies are interesting data, but it needs to be taken in context. We will Likely spend anywhere from $200k-350k on a humanities type of degree for our daughter over the next 4 years. Full pay, don’t know where she will be going yet so the cost is a range. We are DC residents so no great state school. We are not wealthy but have planned for this. We want her to have a certain kind of opportunity to go to a school that is the best fit for her. If we had to borrow the money or she did, it would be very different kind of analysis. I did not think of return on investment for all the money we have spent on many things for our child, this is the biggest thing, and important in so many ways, but we are not measuring its value with only that in mind.

If you are rich enough, ROI doesn't really matter to you. Thanks for the great insight!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Crazy that DCUM is bashing OP because elite colleges are all that DCUM respects. If DCUMers know that top schools won’t transform lives, then why the hype and frustration about not getting into one? For what it’s worth, I went to a Top 15 school, and my kid is going to UVA. Never allowed him to consider the overpriced, overhyped schools.

Only here--on DCUM--is the University of Virginia not recognized as an elite school.

Oh my goodness. You are trying so very hard to make this happen, it's painful.
NP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the ROI studies are interesting data, but it needs to be taken in context. We will Likely spend anywhere from $200k-350k on a humanities type of degree for our daughter over the next 4 years. Full pay, don’t know where she will be going yet so the cost is a range. We are DC residents so no great state school. We are not wealthy but have planned for this. We want her to have a certain kind of opportunity to go to a school that is the best fit for her. If we had to borrow the money or she did, it would be very different kind of analysis. I did not think of return on investment for all the money we have spent on many things for our child, this is the biggest thing, and important in so many ways, but we are not measuring its value with only that in mind.

If you are rich enough, ROI doesn't really matter to you. Thanks for the great insight!

Exactly lol

[Anonymous]

I think whether it is overrated really depends on the field.

My kid goes to Cornell for architecture. I think in that field, it really can matter where you go to school, for much of your career. Not about money (you don't go into architecture for money), but prestige and opportunity. A B. Arch. from Cornell, or a masters from Harvard or MIT (perhaps a few others) really sets you apart. This is not to say you can't succeed coming from other schools--but Cornell opens doors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the ROI studies are interesting data, but it needs to be taken in context. We will Likely spend anywhere from $200k-350k on a humanities type of degree for our daughter over the next 4 years. Full pay, don’t know where she will be going yet so the cost is a range. We are DC residents so no great state school. We are not wealthy but have planned for this. We want her to have a certain kind of opportunity to go to a school that is the best fit for her. If we had to borrow the money or she did, it would be very different kind of analysis. I did not think of return on investment for all the money we have spent on many things for our child, this is the biggest thing, and important in so many ways, but we are not measuring its value with only that in mind.

If you are rich enough, ROI doesn't really matter to you. Thanks for the great insight!

Exactly lol

I hear what PP is saying. You don't look at every dime spent on the kid as an investment in need of a return. Sure, to have saved this much, they must be UMC, but they saved and have it and don't view it that way. We are similar though less affluent. We have one in college and another applying next year. We'll get need based FA from top schools or merit for other schools, will have about 100k saved and will plan to pay some as they go. I do want my kid to have options to support herself, which factored into university choice (cache/networks), but I am not looking at numbers on ROI. Part of higher ed is the ed, not just training to a certain income level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the ROI studies are interesting data, but it needs to be taken in context. We will Likely spend anywhere from $200k-350k on a humanities type of degree for our daughter over the next 4 years. Full pay, don’t know where she will be going yet so the cost is a range. We are DC residents so no great state school. We are not wealthy but have planned for this. We want her to have a certain kind of opportunity to go to a school that is the best fit for her. If we had to borrow the money or she did, it would be very different kind of analysis. I did not think of return on investment for all the money we have spent on many things for our child, this is the biggest thing, and important in so many ways, but we are not measuring its value with only that in mind.

If you are rich enough, ROI doesn't really matter to you. Thanks for the great insight!

Exactly lol

I hear what PP is saying. You don't look at every dime spent on the kid as an investment in need of a return. Sure, to have saved this much, they must be UMC, but they saved and have it and don't view it that way. We are similar though less affluent. We have one in college and another applying next year. We'll get need based FA from top schools or merit for other schools, will have about 100k saved and will plan to pay some as they go. I do want my kid to have options to support herself, which factored into university choice (cache/networks), but I am not looking at numbers on ROI. Part of higher ed is the ed, not just training to a certain income level.

The main point of college is ROI. Full stop. And that's doubly true for your kids, who aren't wealthy enough to be from a full-pay family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the ROI studies are interesting data, but it needs to be taken in context. We will Likely spend anywhere from $200k-350k on a humanities type of degree for our daughter over the next 4 years. Full pay, don’t know where she will be going yet so the cost is a range. We are DC residents so no great state school. We are not wealthy but have planned for this. We want her to have a certain kind of opportunity to go to a school that is the best fit for her. If we had to borrow the money or she did, it would be very different kind of analysis. I did not think of return on investment for all the money we have spent on many things for our child, this is the biggest thing, and important in so many ways, but we are not measuring its value with only that in mind.

If you are rich enough, ROI doesn't really matter to you. Thanks for the great insight!

Exactly lol

I hear what PP is saying. You don't look at every dime spent on the kid as an investment in need of a return. Sure, to have saved this much, they must be UMC, but they saved and have it and don't view it that way. We are similar though less affluent. We have one in college and another applying next year. We'll get need based FA from top schools or merit for other schools, will have about 100k saved and will plan to pay some as they go. I do want my kid to have options to support herself, which factored into university choice (cache/networks), but I am not looking at numbers on ROI. Part of higher ed is the ed, not just training to a certain income level.

The main point of college is ROI. Full stop. And that's doubly true for your kids, who aren't wealthy enough to be from a full-pay family.

ROI is not the main point of college if you are going to any kind of professional or grad school (which 50% of top 20 grads are). College sets you up for the next academic choice (M.A., Ph.D. M.D. J.D. etc.). That second choice is where ROI will come in to play.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the ROI studies are interesting data, but it needs to be taken in context. We will Likely spend anywhere from $200k-350k on a humanities type of degree for our daughter over the next 4 years. Full pay, don’t know where she will be going yet so the cost is a range. We are DC residents so no great state school. We are not wealthy but have planned for this. We want her to have a certain kind of opportunity to go to a school that is the best fit for her. If we had to borrow the money or she did, it would be very different kind of analysis. I did not think of return on investment for all the money we have spent on many things for our child, this is the biggest thing, and important in so many ways, but we are not measuring its value with only that in mind.

If you are rich enough, ROI doesn't really matter to you. Thanks for the great insight!

Exactly lol

I hear what PP is saying. You don't look at every dime spent on the kid as an investment in need of a return. Sure, to have saved this much, they must be UMC, but they saved and have it and don't view it that way. We are similar though less affluent. We have one in college and another applying next year. We'll get need based FA from top schools or merit for other schools, will have about 100k saved and will plan to pay some as they go. I do want my kid to have options to support herself, which factored into university choice (cache/networks), but I am not looking at numbers on ROI. Part of higher ed is the ed, not just training to a certain income level.

The main point of college is ROI. Full stop. And that's doubly true for your kids, who aren't wealthy enough to be from a full-pay family.

ROI is not the main point of college if you are going to any kind of professional or grad school (which 50% of top 20 grads are). College sets you up for the next academic choice (M.A., Ph.D. M.D. J.D. etc.). That second choice is where ROI will come in to play.

The ROI guy computed it for grad school, including cases where the undergrad degree was low ROI but paired with a high ROI grad school. One take-away is that low ROI undergrad degrees (eg English, History, Poli Sci) lock you into a high ROI grad program (law) if you ever want to see a payoff for the education dollars you spent. If you do a low ROI BA and then a low ROI grad degree (BA in English or History plus PhD) then as you would expect, you're screwed.

https://freopp.org/is-graduate-school-worth-it-a-comprehensive-return-on-investment-analysis-a84644f29f9

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think whether it is overrated really depends on the field.

My kid goes to Cornell for architecture. I think in that field, it really can matter where you go to school, for much of your career. Not about money (you don't go into architecture for money), but prestige and opportunity. A B. Arch. from Cornell, or a masters from Harvard or MIT (perhaps a few others) really sets you apart. This is not to say you can't succeed coming from other schools--but Cornell opens doors.

Sorry, but architecture is a low ROI degree no matter where you go to school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the ROI studies are interesting data, but it needs to be taken in context. We will Likely spend anywhere from $200k-350k on a humanities type of degree for our daughter over the next 4 years. Full pay, don’t know where she will be going yet so the cost is a range. We are DC residents so no great state school. We are not wealthy but have planned for this. We want her to have a certain kind of opportunity to go to a school that is the best fit for her. If we had to borrow the money or she did, it would be very different kind of analysis. I did not think of return on investment for all the money we have spent on many things for our child, this is the biggest thing, and important in so many ways, but we are not measuring its value with only that in mind.

If you are rich enough, ROI doesn't really matter to you. Thanks for the great insight!

Exactly lol

I hear what PP is saying. You don't look at every dime spent on the kid as an investment in need of a return. Sure, to have saved this much, they must be UMC, but they saved and have it and don't view it that way. We are similar though less affluent. We have one in college and another applying next year. We'll get need based FA from top schools or merit for other schools, will have about 100k saved and will plan to pay some as they go. I do want my kid to have options to support herself, which factored into university choice (cache/networks), but I am not looking at numbers on ROI. Part of higher ed is the ed, not just training to a certain income level.

The main point of college is ROI. Full stop. And that's doubly true for your kids, who aren't wealthy enough to be from a full-pay family.

No it's not. And, it wasn't for me and my parents either. You live in a very small world if you think you have any idea about higher ed. I have both humanities and fine arts degrees from a middle class background. Your view of higher education is extremely limited -- it's education, not just training.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the ROI studies are interesting data, but it needs to be taken in context. We will Likely spend anywhere from $200k-350k on a humanities type of degree for our daughter over the next 4 years. Full pay, don’t know where she will be going yet so the cost is a range. We are DC residents so no great state school. We are not wealthy but have planned for this. We want her to have a certain kind of opportunity to go to a school that is the best fit for her. If we had to borrow the money or she did, it would be very different kind of analysis. I did not think of return on investment for all the money we have spent on many things for our child, this is the biggest thing, and important in so many ways, but we are not measuring its value with only that in mind.

If you are rich enough, ROI doesn't really matter to you. Thanks for the great insight!

Exactly lol

I hear what PP is saying. You don't look at every dime spent on the kid as an investment in need of a return. Sure, to have saved this much, they must be UMC, but they saved and have it and don't view it that way. We are similar though less affluent. We have one in college and another applying next year. We'll get need based FA from top schools or merit for other schools, will have about 100k saved and will plan to pay some as they go. I do want my kid to have options to support herself, which factored into university choice (cache/networks), but I am not looking at numbers on ROI. Part of higher ed is the ed, not just training to a certain income level.

The main point of college is ROI. Full stop. And that's doubly true for your kids, who aren't wealthy enough to be from a full-pay family.

ROI is not the main point of college if you are going to any kind of professional or grad school (which 50% of top 20 grads are). College sets you up for the next academic choice (M.A., Ph.D. M.D. J.D. etc.). That second choice is where ROI will come in to play.

The ROI guy computed it for grad school, including cases where the undergrad degree was low ROI but paired with a high ROI grad school. One take-away is that low ROI undergrad degrees (eg English, History, Poli Sci) lock you into a high ROI grad program (law) if you ever want to see a payoff for the education dollars you spent. If you do a low ROI BA and then a low ROI grad degree (BA in English or History plus PhD) then as you would expect, you're screwed.

https://freopp.org/is-graduate-school-worth-it-a-comprehensive-return-on-investment-analysis-a84644f29f9

Thanks for confirming my point. Lots of low ROI college grads (heaven forbid!!) go on to high ROI grad degrees. So with most top college kids going on for a second (or third) degree, the ROI for your undergrad college/major choice is clearly NOT the main point of college as the PP asserted.