Does everyone on here with kids applying to top 50 schools really have the $80K per year to spend?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you want to compare like for like student, Dunn and Kruger is no longer the most recent large scale study (much to the dismay of mediocre schools everywhere).

"Using a new research design that isolates idiosyncratic variation in admissions decisions for waitlisted applicants, we show that attending an Ivy-Plus college instead of the average highly selective public flagship institution increases students’ chances of reaching the top 1% of the earnings distribution by 60%, nearly doubles their chances of attending an elite graduate school, and triples their chances of working at a prestigious firm."

...

"Using this design, we find that being admitted to an Ivy-Plus college increases students’ chances of
achieving upper-tail success on both monetary and non-monetary dimensions. Relative to those rejected
from the waitlist, applicants admitted from the waitlist are significantly more likely to reach the top 1% of the income distribution, attend an elite graduate school, and work at a prestigious firm. In contrast, we find a small and statistically insignificant impact of admission from the waitlist on mean earning ranks and the
probability of reaching the top quartile of the income distribution; the causal impacts of Ivy-Plus colleges are concentrated entirely in reaching the upper tail of the distribution, consistent with the predominance of students from such colleges in positions of leadership that motivated this study"


https://opportunityinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/CollegeAdmissions_Paper.pdf

You can do ok with a degree from a state flagship, but if you want to be really successful, the school matters

The real world is laughing at this.

Work at a F200. 90+% of senior leadership from C-suite down to the MDs and SVPs and VPS did not go to Ivy schools. Many went to utter no name schools. You'd be shocked.

--Double Ivy grad.

THIS^^^^

Partner is a CEO, has been at 3 companies. At all 3 companies, only 1 person at each had an Ivy degree or a T25 degree. Majority went to no name or their state schools, so not even 25-50 ranked. So how did they get to their positions? By hard work, drive and determination. It's what you do with your knowledge and degree and the relationships you build over time in the workforce that enable you to be successful---it's not attending Harvard or Yale.

The example of CEOs and even VPs is pretty pointless. Most people, even most Ivy grads, are not CEOs. More useful is comparing salaries for the same major at various schools.

For example, salary at age 45 for economics major:
Harvard: $181k
Yale: $210k
Amherst: $180k
Ohio State: $79k
Penn State: $99k
UVA: $127k
W&M: $98k

Significant difference between (Ivy or elite SLAC) and (state flagship or good in-state school).

Unlike you, I went to an Ivy and also have a professional degree from another Ivy. I know where my classmates ended up.

These surveys are meaningless. Comparing Harvard to Ohio state is meaningless because the range of student capabilities is apples and oranges. But if you compare the top 5% of Ohio state econ grads to Harvard econ grads, then you get a very different set of numbers.

Some of the best and brightest kids in the country do go to Harvard and the other elite colleges. Which is not surprising. And they will do extremely well. And they will still have done extremely well had they gone to Ohio state.

THIS^^^

You have to compare the "Harvard qualified students" from Ohio State, not the 1200/3.4 UW/1 AP kid at Ohio state. Also, not everyone has a goal of making the most money they possibly can, many choose a job for what they enjoy---so they might take a less prestigious/less paying career path with economics in order to make themselves happy. Also the Ohio state grad is more likely to be living in the midwest/ohio, not NYC or Boston or DC, so salary will be commensurate with location.

My kid is in finance yet has no desire to work Hedge funds or Private Equity. Doesn't mean they are not successful or happy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No company pays their hires different salaries for the exact same job.

Not even close to true. Should be, but is not.

Most companies pay new hires/straight out of college hires the same thing when they start out....Facebook does not pay Harvard grads more than GMU grads for the same job, it just doesn't happen. Now 1-2 years in, yes, there will be pay differences, and those are based on your on the job performance reviews, not where you attended college.

Please, GMU is not the same as Harvard. It's just not. It's not even in the same league as UVA in CS. GMU attracts third-rate students and third-rate faculties statistically. There will always be outliers. On average UVA CS grads will make more than GMU's.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/college-major-top-and-lowest-earning-majors-impact-on-income-pay/

Harvard CS actually pays the most.

What the PP wrote could be true. Facebook may pay the same to Harvard and GMU (and other) CS grads, but a higher percentage of Harvard grads are getting the high paying positions.

Because you cannot compare all Harvard grads to all CS majors at GMU---you have to compare those at GMU who have/had the resume to get admitted to Harvard. And that may only be 5-10%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Full pay does help with admissions. First, full pay kids can more often apply ED because they're not comparing FA packages. Second, most schools are NOT need blind, so $$ factors in at some point. It might be just for the last 10% of the class, but that can make a difference. If you need aid, best to apply ED to a need-blind school.

Yes---schools know who has filled out FAFSA and who hasn't when you apply. They may say they dont, but I can assure you they do. ED is a huge part as well--it signals Fully pay if no fafsa was filed

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm realizing that the top 50 or so schools are all about $80K+ and none of them offer merit aid, outside of maybe CWRU.
The rest have 20-50 full-ride scholarships for their most elite students but that's pretty much it for merit aid.
Then of course there is UVA and W&M which are instate. And UMD which is ranked just above 50.
We've in DC so none of these in-states are particularly relevant.


So all this constant chatter about this or that top50 school----are you all paying the $80K/+year sticker price(s)?

College is around the corner for us and I'm realizing that yes indeed, they're all about that much. Guess I knew that in theory but it's another thing
entirely to think "huh, they're asking $360K for undergrad. Are we really going to pay it?"
Sobering.
Are people really paying it?

OP, what is the question? Is the question what other people have in their bank accounts? Because this question is asked, in one form or another, about each week.

If the question is how to pay for your kid's college, then you look at your bank account, and you decide from there. If you did not save, your kid gets to choose from where you can afford.

Not that difficult to understand.

+1

Pick what you can afford. That number is very different for many people.

Some who make $150K have managed to save $300K+ per kid, others have not. It is all about priorities and what you chose to do with your money. If you started at $100K when you had kids and now make $200K, you could have chosen to funnel the majority of those pay increases and/or daycare payments that stopped as your kid grew up, into college savings. Some do, some don't.
If you chose not to, then you should have your kid search for merit and pick a school you can afford.

The problem is that if you apply for aid, you may not get aid but the person who didn't save but chose to spend their money will get aid. That is the problem that I have with the system, it is designed for those who don't save vs. income. If I accumulate assets they count against me, if I don't accumulate assets then I'm rewarded. Plus, some jobs, professions and entrepreneurs can hide money better than others. I know wealthy people who get aid for private HS.

Well nothing large scale can be perfect. You could choose to not save and hope for more aid for your kids in college. IMO that is not the best thought out plan, but if you want to try it you could have. I'm not going to "not accumulate assets" in hopes I might get some FA at college time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you want to compare like for like student, Dunn and Kruger is no longer the most recent large scale study (much to the dismay of mediocre schools everywhere).

"Using a new research design that isolates idiosyncratic variation in admissions decisions for waitlisted applicants, we show that attending an Ivy-Plus college instead of the average highly selective public flagship institution increases students’ chances of reaching the top 1% of the earnings distribution by 60%, nearly doubles their chances of attending an elite graduate school, and triples their chances of working at a prestigious firm."

...

"Using this design, we find that being admitted to an Ivy-Plus college increases students’ chances of
achieving upper-tail success on both monetary and non-monetary dimensions. Relative to those rejected
from the waitlist, applicants admitted from the waitlist are significantly more likely to reach the top 1% of the income distribution, attend an elite graduate school, and work at a prestigious firm. In contrast, we find a small and statistically insignificant impact of admission from the waitlist on mean earning ranks and the
probability of reaching the top quartile of the income distribution; the causal impacts of Ivy-Plus colleges are concentrated entirely in reaching the upper tail of the distribution, consistent with the predominance of students from such colleges in positions of leadership that motivated this study"


https://opportunityinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/CollegeAdmissions_Paper.pdf

You can do ok with a degree from a state flagship, but if you want to be really successful, the school matters

The real world is laughing at this.

Work at a F200. 90+% of senior leadership from C-suite down to the MDs and SVPs and VPS did not go to Ivy schools. Many went to utter no name schools. You'd be shocked.

--Double Ivy grad.

THIS^^^^

Partner is a CEO, has been at 3 companies. At all 3 companies, only 1 person at each had an Ivy degree or a T25 degree. Majority went to no name or their state schools, so not even 25-50 ranked. So how did they get to their positions? By hard work, drive and determination. It's what you do with your knowledge and degree and the relationships you build over time in the workforce that enable you to be successful---it's not attending Harvard or Yale.

The example of CEOs and even VPs is pretty pointless. Most people, even most Ivy grads, are not CEOs. More useful is comparing salaries for the same major at various schools.

For example, salary at age 45 for economics major:
Harvard: $181k
Yale: $210k
Amherst: $180k
Ohio State: $79k
Penn State: $99k
UVA: $127k
W&M: $98k

Significant difference between (Ivy or elite SLAC) and (state flagship or good in-state school).

Unlike you, I went to an Ivy and also have a professional degree from another Ivy. I know where my classmates ended up.

These surveys are meaningless. Comparing Harvard to Ohio state is meaningless because the range of student capabilities is apples and oranges. But if you compare the top 5% of Ohio state econ grads to Harvard econ grads, then you get a very different set of numbers.

Some of the best and brightest kids in the country do go to Harvard and the other elite colleges. Which is not surprising. And they will do extremely well. And they will still have done extremely well had they gone to Ohio state.

THIS^^^

You have to compare the "Harvard qualified students" from Ohio State, not the 1200/3.4 UW/1 AP kid at Ohio state. Also, not everyone has a goal of making the most money they possibly can, many choose a job for what they enjoy---so they might take a less prestigious/less paying career path with economics in order to make themselves happy. Also the Ohio state grad is more likely to be living in the midwest/ohio, not NYC or Boston or DC, so salary will be commensurate with location.

The comment is stupid and useless unless you have actual data on "Harvard qualified students at Ohio State".

[Anonymous]

There are about 30 colleges that meet all financial need without loans. They tend to be the really good ones. The average family income in the US is about $70,000. If your kid from an average income household gets into Princeton or Rice or MIT or Amherst, it'll be affordable.

The people that are screwed are the donut hole families, which is much of the DMV. Private colleges are going to top $100,000 per year in the next couple of years. Two kids. $800,000.

That's ridiculous.

Would expect the competition for slots in the top schools that meet need to hyper-intensify in the years ahead. Suspect a lot of SLACs below the top 20 are going to have a hard time. Who is willing to pay that kind of money for Wabash College? State flagships are going to be much more competitive going forward as even the upper middle class are priced out of alternatives.

With the exception of the 1 percent, money is going to dictate a lot of college choices going forward.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are about 30 colleges that meet all financial need without loans. They tend to be the really good ones. The average family income in the US is about $70,000. If your kid from an average income household gets into Princeton or Rice or MIT or Amherst, it'll be affordable.

The people that are screwed are the donut hole families, which is much of the DMV. Private colleges are going to top $100,000 per year in the next couple of years. Two kids. $800,000.

That's ridiculous.

Would expect the competition for slots in the top schools that meet need to hyper-intensify in the years ahead. Suspect a lot of SLACs below the top 20 are going to have a hard time. Who is willing to pay that kind of money for Wabash College? State flagships are going to be much more competitive going forward as even the upper middle class are priced out of alternatives.

With the exception of the 1 percent, money is going to dictate a lot of college choices going forward.

I think we've started on that road already. Look at the SAT stats for some of the state flagships. The students who are submitting the scores have very high stats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you want to compare like for like student, Dunn and Kruger is no longer the most recent large scale study (much to the dismay of mediocre schools everywhere).

"Using a new research design that isolates idiosyncratic variation in admissions decisions for waitlisted applicants, we show that attending an Ivy-Plus college instead of the average highly selective public flagship institution increases students’ chances of reaching the top 1% of the earnings distribution by 60%, nearly doubles their chances of attending an elite graduate school, and triples their chances of working at a prestigious firm."

...

"Using this design, we find that being admitted to an Ivy-Plus college increases students’ chances of
achieving upper-tail success on both monetary and non-monetary dimensions. Relative to those rejected
from the waitlist, applicants admitted from the waitlist are significantly more likely to reach the top 1% of the income distribution, attend an elite graduate school, and work at a prestigious firm. In contrast, we find a small and statistically insignificant impact of admission from the waitlist on mean earning ranks and the
probability of reaching the top quartile of the income distribution; the causal impacts of Ivy-Plus colleges are concentrated entirely in reaching the upper tail of the distribution, consistent with the predominance of students from such colleges in positions of leadership that motivated this study"


https://opportunityinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/CollegeAdmissions_Paper.pdf

You can do ok with a degree from a state flagship, but if you want to be really successful, the school matters

The real world is laughing at this.

Work at a F200. 90+% of senior leadership from C-suite down to the MDs and SVPs and VPS did not go to Ivy schools. Many went to utter no name schools. You'd be shocked.

--Double Ivy grad.

THIS^^^^

Partner is a CEO, has been at 3 companies. At all 3 companies, only 1 person at each had an Ivy degree or a T25 degree. Majority went to no name or their state schools, so not even 25-50 ranked. So how did they get to their positions? By hard work, drive and determination. It's what you do with your knowledge and degree and the relationships you build over time in the workforce that enable you to be successful---it's not attending Harvard or Yale.

The example of CEOs and even VPs is pretty pointless. Most people, even most Ivy grads, are not CEOs. More useful is comparing salaries for the same major at various schools.

For example, salary at age 45 for economics major:
Harvard: $181k
Yale: $210k
Amherst: $180k
Ohio State: $79k
Penn State: $99k
UVA: $127k
W&M: $98k

Significant difference between (Ivy or elite SLAC) and (state flagship or good in-state school).

Unlike you, I went to an Ivy and also have a professional degree from another Ivy. I know where my classmates ended up.

These surveys are meaningless. Comparing Harvard to Ohio state is meaningless because the range of student capabilities is apples and oranges. But if you compare the top 5% of Ohio state econ grads to Harvard econ grads, then you get a very different set of numbers.

Some of the best and brightest kids in the country do go to Harvard and the other elite colleges. Which is not surprising. And they will do extremely well. And they will still have done extremely well had they gone to Ohio state.

THIS^^^

You have to compare the "Harvard qualified students" from Ohio State, not the 1200/3.4 UW/1 AP kid at Ohio state. Also, not everyone has a goal of making the most money they possibly can, many choose a job for what they enjoy---so they might take a less prestigious/less paying career path with economics in order to make themselves happy. Also the Ohio state grad is more likely to be living in the midwest/ohio, not NYC or Boston or DC, so salary will be commensurate with location.

The comment is stupid and useless unless you have actual data on "Harvard qualified students at Ohio State".

There was a recent study that compared outcomes from students accepted off of waitlists vs. similarly scored students not accepted from waitlists. Unsurprisingly, the school mattered

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are about 30 colleges that meet all financial need without loans. They tend to be the really good ones. The average family income in the US is about $70,000. If your kid from an average income household gets into Princeton or Rice or MIT or Amherst, it'll be affordable.

The people that are screwed are the donut hole families, which is much of the DMV. Private colleges are going to top $100,000 per year in the next couple of years. Two kids. $800,000.

That's ridiculous.

Would expect the competition for slots in the top schools that meet need to hyper-intensify in the years ahead. Suspect a lot of SLACs below the top 20 are going to have a hard time. Who is willing to pay that kind of money for Wabash College? State flagships are going to be much more competitive going forward as even the upper middle class are priced out of alternatives.

With the exception of the 1 percent, money is going to dictate a lot of college choices going forward.

Only in education does GW cost more than Georgetown (or Harvard or Yale) and still have a surplus of demand

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you want to compare like for like student, Dunn and Kruger is no longer the most recent large scale study (much to the dismay of mediocre schools everywhere).

"Using a new research design that isolates idiosyncratic variation in admissions decisions for waitlisted applicants, we show that attending an Ivy-Plus college instead of the average highly selective public flagship institution increases students’ chances of reaching the top 1% of the earnings distribution by 60%, nearly doubles their chances of attending an elite graduate school, and triples their chances of working at a prestigious firm."

...

"Using this design, we find that being admitted to an Ivy-Plus college increases students’ chances of
achieving upper-tail success on both monetary and non-monetary dimensions. Relative to those rejected
from the waitlist, applicants admitted from the waitlist are significantly more likely to reach the top 1% of the income distribution, attend an elite graduate school, and work at a prestigious firm. In contrast, we find a small and statistically insignificant impact of admission from the waitlist on mean earning ranks and the
probability of reaching the top quartile of the income distribution; the causal impacts of Ivy-Plus colleges are concentrated entirely in reaching the upper tail of the distribution, consistent with the predominance of students from such colleges in positions of leadership that motivated this study"


https://opportunityinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/CollegeAdmissions_Paper.pdf

You can do ok with a degree from a state flagship, but if you want to be really successful, the school matters

The real world is laughing at this.

Work at a F200. 90+% of senior leadership from C-suite down to the MDs and SVPs and VPS did not go to Ivy schools. Many went to utter no name schools. You'd be shocked.

--Double Ivy grad.

THIS^^^^

Partner is a CEO, has been at 3 companies. At all 3 companies, only 1 person at each had an Ivy degree or a T25 degree. Majority went to no name or their state schools, so not even 25-50 ranked. So how did they get to their positions? By hard work, drive and determination. It's what you do with your knowledge and degree and the relationships you build over time in the workforce that enable you to be successful---it's not attending Harvard or Yale.

The example of CEOs and even VPs is pretty pointless. Most people, even most Ivy grads, are not CEOs. More useful is comparing salaries for the same major at various schools.

For example, salary at age 45 for economics major:
Harvard: $181k
Yale: $210k
Amherst: $180k
Ohio State: $79k
Penn State: $99k
UVA: $127k
W&M: $98k

Significant difference between (Ivy or elite SLAC) and (state flagship or good in-state school).

Unlike you, I went to an Ivy and also have a professional degree from another Ivy. I know where my classmates ended up.

These surveys are meaningless. Comparing Harvard to Ohio state is meaningless because the range of student capabilities is apples and oranges. But if you compare the top 5% of Ohio state econ grads to Harvard econ grads, then you get a very different set of numbers.

Some of the best and brightest kids in the country do go to Harvard and the other elite colleges. Which is not surprising. And they will do extremely well. And they will still have done extremely well had they gone to Ohio state.

THIS^^^

You have to compare the "Harvard qualified students" from Ohio State, not the 1200/3.4 UW/1 AP kid at Ohio state. Also, not everyone has a goal of making the most money they possibly can, many choose a job for what they enjoy---so they might take a less prestigious/less paying career path with economics in order to make themselves happy. Also the Ohio state grad is more likely to be living in the midwest/ohio, not NYC or Boston or DC, so salary will be commensurate with location.

The comment is stupid and useless unless you have actual data on "Harvard qualified students at Ohio State".

There was a recent study that compared outcomes from students accepted off of waitlists vs. similarly scored students not accepted from waitlists. Unsurprisingly, the school mattered

Actually it said the school mattered for the kids who ended up in the .1%. (Not 1%). IOW, for finance, it matters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you want to compare like for like student, Dunn and Kruger is no longer the most recent large scale study (much to the dismay of mediocre schools everywhere).

"Using a new research design that isolates idiosyncratic variation in admissions decisions for waitlisted applicants, we show that attending an Ivy-Plus college instead of the average highly selective public flagship institution increases students’ chances of reaching the top 1% of the earnings distribution by 60%, nearly doubles their chances of attending an elite graduate school, and triples their chances of working at a prestigious firm."

...

"Using this design, we find that being admitted to an Ivy-Plus college increases students’ chances of
achieving upper-tail success on both monetary and non-monetary dimensions. Relative to those rejected
from the waitlist, applicants admitted from the waitlist are significantly more likely to reach the top 1% of the income distribution, attend an elite graduate school, and work at a prestigious firm. In contrast, we find a small and statistically insignificant impact of admission from the waitlist on mean earning ranks and the
probability of reaching the top quartile of the income distribution; the causal impacts of Ivy-Plus colleges are concentrated entirely in reaching the upper tail of the distribution, consistent with the predominance of students from such colleges in positions of leadership that motivated this study"


https://opportunityinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/CollegeAdmissions_Paper.pdf

You can do ok with a degree from a state flagship, but if you want to be really successful, the school matters

The real world is laughing at this.

Work at a F200. 90+% of senior leadership from C-suite down to the MDs and SVPs and VPS did not go to Ivy schools. Many went to utter no name schools. You'd be shocked.

--Double Ivy grad.

I know people will be up in arms, but Ivy grads don’t want to work for F200 companies outside of tech. They want to work at hedge funds, PE funds, VC funds, start their own companies, etc. if my kid wanted to work their way up the ranks of Wal Mart, I would absolutely advise them against an Ivy. If they want to work at Blackstone or Sequoia then yes it helps a ton.

And this my friends is why the parent pressure never stops. Most Ivy grads don’t not end up in PE or VC or KKR or sequoia. They end up in a law firm, or a NFP, or Pfizer, or being SAHMs. The largest employer for Harvard grads is Teach for America. Think of your friends who went to an Ivy League school. Now think of how many of them are partners at Blackstone. Gimme a break. Give your kids a break. They’ll be fine even if they don’t end up in finance, good grief.

Except I’m pissed if I spent that money for them to work they way to be middle management at Walmart…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you want to compare like for like student, Dunn and Kruger is no longer the most recent large scale study (much to the dismay of mediocre schools everywhere).

"Using a new research design that isolates idiosyncratic variation in admissions decisions for waitlisted applicants, we show that attending an Ivy-Plus college instead of the average highly selective public flagship institution increases students’ chances of reaching the top 1% of the earnings distribution by 60%, nearly doubles their chances of attending an elite graduate school, and triples their chances of working at a prestigious firm."

...

"Using this design, we find that being admitted to an Ivy-Plus college increases students’ chances of
achieving upper-tail success on both monetary and non-monetary dimensions. Relative to those rejected
from the waitlist, applicants admitted from the waitlist are significantly more likely to reach the top 1% of the income distribution, attend an elite graduate school, and work at a prestigious firm. In contrast, we find a small and statistically insignificant impact of admission from the waitlist on mean earning ranks and the
probability of reaching the top quartile of the income distribution; the causal impacts of Ivy-Plus colleges are concentrated entirely in reaching the upper tail of the distribution, consistent with the predominance of students from such colleges in positions of leadership that motivated this study"


https://opportunityinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/CollegeAdmissions_Paper.pdf

You can do ok with a degree from a state flagship, but if you want to be really successful, the school matters

The real world is laughing at this.

Work at a F200. 90+% of senior leadership from C-suite down to the MDs and SVPs and VPS did not go to Ivy schools. Many went to utter no name schools. You'd be shocked.

--Double Ivy grad.

THIS^^^^

Partner is a CEO, has been at 3 companies. At all 3 companies, only 1 person at each had an Ivy degree or a T25 degree. Majority went to no name or their state schools, so not even 25-50 ranked. So how did they get to their positions? By hard work, drive and determination. It's what you do with your knowledge and degree and the relationships you build over time in the workforce that enable you to be successful---it's not attending Harvard or Yale.

The example of CEOs and even VPs is pretty pointless. Most people, even most Ivy grads, are not CEOs. More useful is comparing salaries for the same major at various schools.

For example, salary at age 45 for economics major:
Harvard: $181k
Yale: $210k
Amherst: $180k
Ohio State: $79k
Penn State: $99k
UVA: $127k
W&M: $98k

Significant difference between (Ivy or elite SLAC) and (state flagship or good in-state school).

Unlike you, I went to an Ivy and also have a professional degree from another Ivy. I know where my classmates ended up.

These surveys are meaningless. Comparing Harvard to Ohio state is meaningless because the range of student capabilities is apples and oranges. But if you compare the top 5% of Ohio state econ grads to Harvard econ grads, then you get a very different set of numbers.

Some of the best and brightest kids in the country do go to Harvard and the other elite colleges. Which is not surprising. And they will do extremely well. And they will still have done extremely well had they gone to Ohio state.

THIS^^^

You have to compare the "Harvard qualified students" from Ohio State, not the 1200/3.4 UW/1 AP kid at Ohio state. Also, not everyone has a goal of making the most money they possibly can, many choose a job for what they enjoy---so they might take a less prestigious/less paying career path with economics in order to make themselves happy. Also the Ohio state grad is more likely to be living in the midwest/ohio, not NYC or Boston or DC, so salary will be commensurate with location.

The comment is stupid and useless unless you have actual data on "Harvard qualified students at Ohio State".

There was a recent study that compared outcomes from students accepted off of waitlists vs. similarly scored students not accepted from waitlists. Unsurprisingly, the school mattered

Actually it said the school mattered for the kids who ended up in the .1%. (Not 1%). IOW, for finance, it matters.

It mattered for premiere employers. The examples from the appendix were FAANG, NY Times, Mayo Clinic, and McKinsey

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you want to compare like for like student, Dunn and Kruger is no longer the most recent large scale study (much to the dismay of mediocre schools everywhere).

"Using a new research design that isolates idiosyncratic variation in admissions decisions for waitlisted applicants, we show that attending an Ivy-Plus college instead of the average highly selective public flagship institution increases students’ chances of reaching the top 1% of the earnings distribution by 60%, nearly doubles their chances of attending an elite graduate school, and triples their chances of working at a prestigious firm."

...

"Using this design, we find that being admitted to an Ivy-Plus college increases students’ chances of
achieving upper-tail success on both monetary and non-monetary dimensions. Relative to those rejected
from the waitlist, applicants admitted from the waitlist are significantly more likely to reach the top 1% of the income distribution, attend an elite graduate school, and work at a prestigious firm. In contrast, we find a small and statistically insignificant impact of admission from the waitlist on mean earning ranks and the
probability of reaching the top quartile of the income distribution; the causal impacts of Ivy-Plus colleges are concentrated entirely in reaching the upper tail of the distribution, consistent with the predominance of students from such colleges in positions of leadership that motivated this study"


https://opportunityinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/CollegeAdmissions_Paper.pdf

You can do ok with a degree from a state flagship, but if you want to be really successful, the school matters

The real world is laughing at this.

Work at a F200. 90+% of senior leadership from C-suite down to the MDs and SVPs and VPS did not go to Ivy schools. Many went to utter no name schools. You'd be shocked.

--Double Ivy grad.

I know people will be up in arms, but Ivy grads don’t want to work for F200 companies outside of tech. They want to work at hedge funds, PE funds, VC funds, start their own companies, etc. if my kid wanted to work their way up the ranks of Wal Mart, I would absolutely advise them against an Ivy. If they want to work at Blackstone or Sequoia then yes it helps a ton.

And this my friends is why the parent pressure never stops. Most Ivy grads don’t not end up in PE or VC or KKR or sequoia. They end up in a law firm, or a NFP, or Pfizer, or being SAHMs. The largest employer for Harvard grads is Teach for America. Think of your friends who went to an Ivy League school. Now think of how many of them are partners at Blackstone. Gimme a break. Give your kids a break. They’ll be fine even if they don’t end up in finance, good grief.

Except I’m pissed if I spent that money for them to work they way to be middle management at Walmart…

Ditto

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are about 30 colleges that meet all financial need without loans. They tend to be the really good ones. The average family income in the US is about $70,000. If your kid from an average income household gets into Princeton or Rice or MIT or Amherst, it'll be affordable.

The people that are screwed are the donut hole families, which is much of the DMV. Private colleges are going to top $100,000 per year in the next couple of years. Two kids. $800,000.

That's ridiculous.

Would expect the competition for slots in the top schools that meet need to hyper-intensify in the years ahead. Suspect a lot of SLACs below the top 20 are going to have a hard time. Who is willing to pay that kind of money for Wabash College? State flagships are going to be much more competitive going forward as even the upper middle class are priced out of alternatives.

With the exception of the 1 percent, money is going to dictate a lot of college choices going forward.

Only in education does GW cost more than Georgetown (or Harvard or Yale) and still have a surplus of demand

GW happens to be heavy on the international students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People are so, soooo dumb.

Draining their entire life savings to pay for college.

Morons.

Send your damn kid to the community college for 2 years then transfer to a state school with living from home arrangements for the last 2 years.

You idiots wipe out your entire savings so your stupid kids can have the 'college experience' and get the same damn basic education your state and community colleges offer. A BS degree matters so sooooooooo little over the longrun. Just get the cheapest one possible. I can't believe there are still millions of really stupid people out there willing to pay over $100k for a useless BS degree.

Community college is for academic failures to gain a 2nd chance. Kids will good grades are already getting into the state colleges first time round.

NP— absolutely wrong. I graduated in top 5% of my class and scored in top 5% of SAT, but would have needed to take out loans to attend college so instead I attended community college as I could easily work part time to pay for school while living at home.

After getting AA degree I started 3rd year of college at UC Berkeley. This was common in California in the 80s and seems common still.