Jobs and elite colleges

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You post about your lacrosse team networking like every week.

If your brother BOTH went to Ivy, I doubt you are some rags to riches story off the back of hard work and sportsmanship.

I mean Lacrosse is already a rich sport, I know it’s not played in poorer communities and requires expensive equipment and large fields.

Lacrosse is NOT a rich sport, it is for MC folks. Tennis or golf is a sport for the rich. It costs money to play lacrosse but nowhere near the amount for golf or tennis. Golf costs around 40k/yr and tennis around 35k/yr.

- Signed by a parent with two kids that play golf and tennis.

Lacrosse is a team sport and pretty much every Ivy lacrosse player is recruited from a powerhouse private school (often boarding school) team. Nobody from outside a certain set of schools (same with Ivy hockey recruiting 5th year prep school players and Ivy crew recruiting from certain prep schools and private UK schools ). So lacrosse players build connections early on with each other in these high schools and getting recruited often requires the cost of private school education. It isn’t just about what you pay to play.

Lots of average private schools and great public schools on this list

https://gocrimson.com/sports/mens-lacrosse/roster

[Anonymous]

Outside of finance and consulting I don’t think it helps much. I went to an Ivy and never pursued those companies (I worked in “less sexy” non FAANG Fortune50 companies and now I’m a Fed) and I never felt like it helped me. I have the same job and pay as graduates of many of the good state schools. In fact, they have a better network than I do and in certain jobs there is anti-Ivy sentiment, so I don’t share where I went to school. Makes me wish I saved money and went to a state school, I probably would have had more fun too!

I’m very happy with where I ended up professionally, not complaining. I found my Ivy classmates mostly insufferable and it influenced my decision to not pursue the finance/consulting/other elitist companies.

[Anonymous]

I’m more concerned with work ethic and acumen. Our rock stars came out of a mix of schools - HYP, regional LACs, flagship state Us.

I have had terrible luck with hiring out of UVA over the years, though - I do not prioritize those resumes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You post about your lacrosse team networking like every week.

If your brother BOTH went to Ivy, I doubt you are some rags to riches story off the back of hard work and sportsmanship.

I mean Lacrosse is already a rich sport, I know it’s not played in poorer communities and requires expensive equipment and large fields.

Lacrosse is NOT a rich sport, it is for MC folks. Tennis or golf is a sport for the rich. It costs money to play lacrosse but nowhere near the amount for golf or tennis. Golf costs around 40k/yr and tennis around 35k/yr.

- Signed by a parent with two kids that play golf and tennis.

Lacrosse is a team sport and pretty much every Ivy lacrosse player is recruited from a powerhouse private school (often boarding school) team. Nobody from outside a certain set of schools (same with Ivy hockey recruiting 5th year prep school players and Ivy crew recruiting from certain prep schools and private UK schools ). So lacrosse players build connections early on with each other in these high schools and getting recruited often requires the cost of private school education. It isn’t just about what you pay to play.

Lots of average private schools and great public schools on this list

https://gocrimson.com/sports/mens-lacrosse/roster

“Average” private schools are still very expensive. That list is mostly private with a few W type school. And one guy from rural PA.

It’s a sport for the rich, that’s why the networking is so good.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It depends on the field. In finance and consulting it matters a lot. You could be the best student at the University of Georgia but you're not getting an interview at McKinsey or Goldman. It's dumb and outdated but that's how they roll. Pedigree degrees are important in those fields.

In STEM fields, it doesn't matter that much. MIT, Stanford, Rice and Cornell probably open a few more doors. But for the most part, publics like UIUC, Michigan, Maryland, Purdue, Georgia Tech, Texas A&M and others do a much better job than the Ivies. An Ohio State or Wisconsin degree in engineering will be taken more seriously than one from Yale or Brown.

The benefit of going to a top name school is the networking. Harvard engineering might suck, but that's a very good network for a young grad to plug into. But a lot depends on the state you live in. In states like California, Michigan, or Virginia, it's almost always better to go to the state flagship schools. If you live in Oklahoma and you're ambitious it's probably best to leave the sate.

It is NOT about the school, it is about the network. You attend the University of Georgia and you know someone who is a member of the Augusta Country Club, where the Masters is annually held, you will have a much better opportunity than someone who attended Harvard but without connections. It all comes down to networking and who you know.

This is exactly right.

I went to a top 25 SLAC with a really strong network, plus a strong network of family friends and a strong high school network and never particularly excelled but I’ve found myself in a good setup with work/life balance and high salary. Plenty of people who went to better schools who would be envious. Plenty of people who went to worse schools than me have better set ups.

Schools don’t matter. Networks and individuals do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Outside of finance and consulting I don’t think it helps much. I went to an Ivy and never pursued those companies (I worked in “less sexy” non FAANG Fortune50 companies and now I’m a Fed) and I never felt like it helped me. I have the same job and pay as graduates of many of the good state schools. In fact, they have a better network than I do and in certain jobs there is anti-Ivy sentiment, so I don’t share where I went to school. Makes me wish I saved money and went to a state school, I probably would have had more fun too!

I’m very happy with where I ended up professionally, not complaining. I found my Ivy classmates mostly insufferable and it influenced my decision to not pursue the finance/consulting/other elitist companies.

I am an ivy grad and the bolded is so true. It really depends on the industry you want to go into. If you want to work in private equity, NOT having an elite degree will set you back. But, as the above poster mentioned, in other industries having an elite degree is not viewed favorably and puts a target on your back.

In certain work contexts, I have also avoided telling people where I went to school so I can fit in and avoid the negative perceptions an elite degree background evokes. But there have also been many instances where having the pedigree has helped me fit in...as I said, it depends on what you want to do. If you want to work in oil and gas, they don't care about Harvard and Yale but Blackstone cares very much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It depends on the field. In finance and consulting it matters a lot. You could be the best student at the University of Georgia but you're not getting an interview at McKinsey or Goldman. It's dumb and outdated but that's how they roll. Pedigree degrees are important in those fields.

In STEM fields, it doesn't matter that much. MIT, Stanford, Rice and Cornell probably open a few more doors. But for the most part, publics like UIUC, Michigan, Maryland, Purdue, Georgia Tech, Texas A&M and others do a much better job than the Ivies. An Ohio State or Wisconsin degree in engineering will be taken more seriously than one from Yale or Brown.

The benefit of going to a top name school is the networking. Harvard engineering might suck, but that's a very good network for a young grad to plug into. But a lot depends on the state you live in. In states like California, Michigan, or Virginia, it's almost always better to go to the state flagship schools. If you live in Oklahoma and you're ambitious it's probably best to leave the sate.

It is NOT about the school, it is about the network. You attend the University of Georgia and you know someone who is a member of the Augusta Country Club, where the Masters is annually held, you will have a much better opportunity than someone who attended Harvard but without connections. It all comes down to networking and who you know.

This is exactly right.

I went to a top 25 SLAC with a really strong network, plus a strong network of family friends and a strong high school network and never particularly excelled but I’ve found myself in a good setup with work/life balance and high salary. Plenty of people who went to better schools who would be envious. Plenty of people who went to worse schools than me have better set ups.

Schools don’t matter. Networks and individuals do.

I agree with you that networks and individuals are what matters, but I think that schools matter as well, especially for first gen, low income kids who do not have a network and don't have access to a country club. For them, an elite college becomes that very first network and it exposes them to kids from UMC and 1% families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You post about your lacrosse team networking like every week.

If your brother BOTH went to Ivy, I doubt you are some rags to riches story off the back of hard work and sportsmanship.

I mean Lacrosse is already a rich sport, I know it’s not played in poorer communities and requires expensive equipment and large fields.

Lacrosse is NOT a rich sport, it is for MC folks. Tennis or golf is a sport for the rich. It costs money to play lacrosse but nowhere near the amount for golf or tennis. Golf costs around 40k/yr and tennis around 35k/yr.

- Signed by a parent with two kids that play golf and tennis.

Lacrosse is a team sport and pretty much every Ivy lacrosse player is recruited from a powerhouse private school (often boarding school) team. Nobody from outside a certain set of schools (same with Ivy hockey recruiting 5th year prep school players and Ivy crew recruiting from certain prep schools and private UK schools ). So lacrosse players build connections early on with each other in these high schools and getting recruited often requires the cost of private school education. It isn’t just about what you pay to play.

Lots of average private schools and great public schools on this list

https://gocrimson.com/sports/mens-lacrosse/roster

so whyte lol!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m more concerned with work ethic and acumen. Our rock stars came out of a mix of schools - HYP, regional LACs, flagship state Us.

I have had terrible luck with hiring out of UVA over the years, though - I do not prioritize those resumes.

lol, sure, troll

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve been on the hiring panel for a large, multinational bank. We do care where people went to school, but it’s certainly not Ivy or bust. I don’t have a firm cutoff, but T50 is roughly where I want to see degrees from.

However, much more important is how someone comes across and what their skill set is. Show me what you bring to the table. I would hire a Fordham grad over a Harvard grad in a second if the Fordham grad brought the skill set we need.

That's great and all, but you just said that you would trash the JMU or UMBC resume and hire the less skilled Harvard grad. That's not Ivy or bust, but it's great school or bust

When did I say that? I actually said the opposite. I ultimately look at skills rather than where the degree came from.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It depends on the field. In finance and consulting it matters a lot. You could be the best student at the University of Georgia but you're not getting an interview at McKinsey or Goldman. It's dumb and outdated but that's how they roll. Pedigree degrees are important in those fields.

In STEM fields, it doesn't matter that much. MIT, Stanford, Rice and Cornell probably open a few more doors. But for the most part, publics like UIUC, Michigan, Maryland, Purdue, Georgia Tech, Texas A&M and others do a much better job than the Ivies. An Ohio State or Wisconsin degree in engineering will be taken more seriously than one from Yale or Brown.

The benefit of going to a top name school is the networking. Harvard engineering might suck, but that's a very good network for a young grad to plug into. But a lot depends on the state you live in. In states like California, Michigan, or Virginia, it's almost always better to go to the state flagship schools. If you live in Oklahoma and you're ambitious it's probably best to leave the sate.

It is NOT about the school, it is about the network. You attend the University of Georgia and you know someone who is a member of the Augusta Country Club, where the Masters is annually held, you will have a much better opportunity than someone who attended Harvard but without connections. It all comes down to networking and who you know.

This is exactly right.

I went to a top 25 SLAC with a really strong network, plus a strong network of family friends and a strong high school network and never particularly excelled but I’ve found myself in a good setup with work/life balance and high salary. Plenty of people who went to better schools who would be envious. Plenty of people who went to worse schools than me have better set ups.

Schools don’t matter. Networks and individuals do.

I agree with you that networks and individuals are what matters, but I think that schools matter as well, especially for first gen, low income kids who do not have a network and don't have access to a country club. For them, an elite college becomes that very first network and it exposes them to kids from UMC and 1% families.

Like a low income kids are socializing with the rich kids? They are spending 20 hours a week work study, don’t have cars, and don’t have the money to go out, drinking or ski weekends. I will say that if you are a hot girl, there are options.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From your experience, do graduates of Top 25 universities and Top 10 liberal arts colleges get more interviews, interesting jobs, or money? I’m talking only about the UNDERGRADUATE degree.

I understand that anyone who goes to an Ivy MBA, law, or medical school will do well, but that’s really about the professional school, not undergraduate.

I’m trying to understand if it’s worth paying lots of money to go to a prestigious private school over a very selective state school for UNDERGRAD.

Has going to an elite school helped me in getting job interviews? Probably, especially when I was a senior and 2-3 years out of school. Also, I would classify Michigan, UVA, Chapel Hill, Berkeley as elite schools. Definitely would not pay for a private school if I could get in state tuition at one of these publics. I have encountered a lot of these grads (particularly from Berkeley and Michigan) in my workplaces, during interviews, etc.

Also, obviously elite colleges have very good campus recruiting and alumni networks. The campus recruiting is super helpful to seniors. If an alum reaches out to me to network, I am always willing to provide a referral to my company. That being said, I also provide referrals to those who reach out, but have not attended my alma mater.

You might find that particular teams/companies tilt toward hiring students from elite colleges. Might be purposeful. Might be unconscious bias.

That being said, school matters somewhat less than you might think, particularly as you accumulate experience relevant to your field. Work experience trumps school. So, if you have eight years of work experience and are looking to work in a product management role, but have never worked in product management or adjacent functions (design, business operations) you are not going to get an interview. Your school won’t save you. There are also some nuances with respect to having worked at more marquee companies versus smaller more unknown companies depending on the industry. This may also play a role in the screening process. And once again, your school won’t have much pull here if the hiring team is looking to hire someone from more established companies and you have mainly worked at unknown names.

Also, once you make it to the interview process your school really doesn’t matter. If you bomb the interview or lack chemistry with the team, you’re not getting the job. Your school will not save you.

Your interview performance is generally the biggest determinant of pay particularly as an experienced hire. In my industry if you do very well in the interview generally you have leeway to go over the base salary band, get extra sign on, get extra RSUs, etc. New grad roles that hire in cohorts are generally in the same comp band with little leeway to move.

Michigan and UNC have to take a certain number of in state kids. So, you a mix of academic level with OOS having far higher academic credentials.

Yet you’re saying those publics are elite and you’d treat graduates accordingly for hiring? Doesn’t seem logical to me because you won’t know who was the academic out of state superstar and who was another in state person.

[Anonymous]

You should hire from the top half of any college.

The lower half of a Harvard class will not be better than the top half of most other schools. This is discussed by Malcolm Gladwell in case you want to google the talk.

Judging based on school’s brand is a bit silly. But maybe firms like to have schools with good branding listed in the corporate bios?

I’ve never hired based on school and focus on skills and culture fit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You should hire from the top half of any college.

The lower half of a Harvard class will not be better than the top half of most other schools. This is discussed by Malcolm Gladwell in case you want to google the talk.

Judging based on school’s brand is a bit silly. But maybe firms like to have schools with good branding listed in the corporate bios?

I’ve never hired based on school and focus on skills and culture fit.

So if the lower half of Harvard is as good as the top half of most other schools, then are you saying that the top half of Harvard kids are in a league of their own?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You should hire from the top half of any college.

The lower half of a Harvard class will not be better than the top half of most other schools. This is discussed by Malcolm Gladwell in case you want to google the talk.

Judging based on school’s brand is a bit silly. But maybe firms like to have schools with good branding listed in the corporate bios?

I’ve never hired based on school and focus on skills and culture fit.

So if the lower half of Harvard is as good as the top half of most other schools, then are you saying that the top half of Harvard kids are in a league of their own?

Well, that has been my experience in hiring - the top kids from HYP and other elite schools are truly exceptional. Outside of that group, if let's say you are at a State school and competing for jobs with elite college grads, you better be at the top 5% at the State U to compete with the 3.6 GPA Harvard kid.