Schools that Feed the Most to Top Employers and Graduate Schools

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My God, so this is what our society does with its brightest. More f*ckin consultants and bankers. Count me out, and my kid. Delighted he will be going somewhere where fewer people do this kind of thing.

Are you a communist?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Companies for “top feeders to tech” seem a bit more arm wavey than some of the others. At least for the engineering list there’s a claim the companies were most pursued by the applicants (per some survey). For tech it’s just this college counseling site’s take on “reputable” tech companies. Results will look different depending on destinations.

Interesting lists, though.

True in the tech world there are many startups that are highly desirable, but let's be honest, the kids at those startups are the same kids at the top of these tech lists anyways

Some would be, but certainly not all, and the order would be different.

But trying to capture start ups would be methodologically more challenging than trying to use, say, the 12 largest software companies. The original list doesn’t attempt even that. It strikes me as more arbitrary than the destinations chosen for the other lists.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My God, so this is what our society does with its brightest. More f*ckin consultants and bankers. Count me out, and my kid. Delighted he will be going somewhere where fewer people do this kind of thing.

Are you a communist?

Consultants and bankers at the top firms have no backbones, they will gladly ruin companies and entire countries for some juicy kickbacks and fees

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Companies for “top feeders to tech” seem a bit more arm wavey than some of the others. At least for the engineering list there’s a claim the companies were most pursued by the applicants (per some survey). For tech it’s just this college counseling site’s take on “reputable” tech companies. Results will look different depending on destinations.

Interesting lists, though.

True in the tech world there are many startups that are highly desirable, but let's be honest, the kids at those startups are the same kids at the top of these tech lists anyways

Some would be, but certainly not all, and the order would be different.

But trying to capture start ups would be methodologically more challenging than trying to use, say, the 12 largest software companies. The original list doesn’t attempt even that. It strikes me as more arbitrary than the destinations chosen for the other lists.

The closest I can see online is this: https://news.crunchbase.com/business/stanford-harvard-mit-funded-startup-founders/. However, it isn't per capita adjusted for undergraduate enrollment.

The top schools where startup founders went to college:

1. Stanford
2. MIT
3. Harvard
4. Berkeley
5. Columbia
6. Cornell
7. Duke
7. USC
9. Carnegie Mellon
9. Penn
9. UT Austin
9. Yale
13. Michigan
14. UIUC
15. UCLA
16. NYU
17. Northwestern
18. Princeton
19. Brown
19. Georgia Tech

If this were per capita, MIT, Columbia, Duke, Carnegie Mellon, Yale, Princeton, and Brown go up, while Berkeley, Cornell, USC, UT Austin, Michigan, UIUC, UCLA, NYU, and Georgia Tech go down

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m so tired of ranking threads.

This isn’t how you pick schools.

I would think this is exactly how you pick a school - how likely am I to get the job (or opportunity to earn a professional degree) I want based on attending this school.

How else do you pick a school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m so tired of ranking threads.

This isn’t how you pick schools.

It is the way to pick a school if one wants the best odds of an elite career with high earnings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m so tired of ranking threads.

This isn’t how you pick schools.

I would think this is exactly how you pick a school - how likely am I to get the job (or opportunity to earn a professional degree) I want based on attending this school.

How else do you pick a school?

Same way most select spouses. You have your dream gal/guy. Then targets. And of course, the fallbacks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of the top private schools don’t offer the depth and breadth of the top publics. There are thousand of enrolled students who have a absolutely no interest in any of these areas mentioned.

Interested in theater, music, gender study?

LOL !

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Companies for “top feeders to tech” seem a bit more arm wavey than some of the others. At least for the engineering list there’s a claim the companies were most pursued by the applicants (per some survey). For tech it’s just this college counseling site’s take on “reputable” tech companies. Results will look different depending on destinations.

Interesting lists, though.

True in the tech world there are many startups that are highly desirable, but let's be honest, the kids at those startups are the same kids at the top of these tech lists anyways

Some would be, but certainly not all, and the order would be different.

But trying to capture start ups would be methodologically more challenging than trying to use, say, the 12 largest software companies. The original list doesn’t attempt even that. It strikes me as more arbitrary than the destinations chosen for the other lists.

The closest I can see online is this: https://news.crunchbase.com/business/stanford-harvard-mit-funded-startup-founders/. However, it isn't per capita adjusted for undergraduate enrollment.

The top schools where startup founders went to college:

1. Stanford
2. MIT
3. Harvard
4. Berkeley
5. Columbia
6. Cornell
7. Duke
7. USC
9. Carnegie Mellon
9. Penn
9. UT Austin
9. Yale
13. Michigan
14. UIUC
15. UCLA
16. NYU
17. Northwestern
18. Princeton
19. Brown
19. Georgia Tech

If this were per capita, MIT, Columbia, Duke, Carnegie Mellon, Yale, Princeton, and Brown go up, while Berkeley, Cornell, USC, UT Austin, Michigan, UIUC, UCLA, NYU, and Georgia Tech go down

Staying in the DMV isn't a bad idea on the tech/founder side either, especially looking at the future growth here. Maryland in particular has invested a lot into CS recently. Sergey Brin (Google) and Brendan Iribe (Oculus, sold to FB) are impressive founder headliners too.

Amazon and Google, among others, have also invested in growth in this area and are committed to increasing hiring here so local internship and job opportunities should grow (though not quite like Stanford where you can walk to Palantir or Amazon buildings in Palo Alto and go one train stop for Google).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Staying in the DMV isn't a bad idea on the tech/founder side either, especially looking at the future growth here. Maryland in particular has invested a lot into CS recently. Sergey Brin (Google) and Brendan Iribe (Oculus, sold to FB) are impressive founder headliners too.

Amazon and Google, among others, have also invested in growth in this area and are committed to increasing hiring here so local internship and job opportunities should grow (though not quite like Stanford where you can walk to Palantir or Amazon buildings in Palo Alto and go one train stop for Google).

Other founders from Maryland CS worth mentioning though they are very low profile: Timothy Sweeney (Epic Games), Anthony Casalena (Squarespace).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The way Columbia pops up everywhere shows #18 is a joke, not based on reality.

NYU and Columbia both benefit from being in NYC and both have good professional schools.

No one ever believed that either one was top tier though.

The stats speak for themselves. The Columbia outcomes are pretty much what you would expect from an ivy. There's very little difference among ivy pluses.

Not really. Columbia is underperforming the other ivies. Its rank as #18 is deserved IMO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The way Columbia pops up everywhere shows #18 is a joke, not based on reality.

NYU and Columbia both benefit from being in NYC and both have good professional schools.

No one ever believed that either one was top tier though.

The stats speak for themselves. The Columbia outcomes are pretty much what you would expect from an ivy. There's very little difference among ivy pluses.

#18 is good.
Harvard is #18 in Forbes.

Not really. Columbia is underperforming the other ivies. Its rank as #18 is deserved IMO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The way Columbia pops up everywhere shows #18 is a joke, not based on reality.

NYU and Columbia both benefit from being in NYC and both have good professional schools.

No one ever believed that either one was top tier though.

The stats speak for themselves. The Columbia outcomes are pretty much what you would expect from an ivy. There's very little difference among ivy pluses.

Not really. Columbia is underperforming the other ivies. Its rank as #18 is deserved IMO.

Harvard is #18 in Forbes - so #18 is good.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The way Columbia pops up everywhere shows #18 is a joke, not based on reality.

NYU and Columbia both benefit from being in NYC and both have good professional schools.

No one ever believed that either one was top tier though.

The stats speak for themselves. The Columbia outcomes are pretty much what you would expect from an ivy. There's very little difference among ivy pluses.

Not really. Columbia is underperforming the other ivies. Its rank as #18 is deserved IMO.

Where is it underperforming? It's basically top 10 in every elite employment and professional school category. The only weak spot is for business school, and it more than makes up for that with its excellence in tech employment

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m so tired of ranking threads.

This isn’t how you pick schools.

I would think this is exactly how you pick a school - how likely am I to get the job (or opportunity to earn a professional degree) I want based on attending this school.

How else do you pick a school?

Except outside of tech, a lot of this has more to do with the connections kids had going into the school rather than the opportunities they got from it. I would say look for social mobility--what schools take kids from the social class you're in and move them up. Otherwise it's just the kids whose parents have connections went to elite schools and got elite jobs.