Why is this board obsessed with prestige?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Undergrad prestige does NOT matter. At all. It’s been empirically proven. Smart kids do well anywhere, whether they’re at UMD or Stanford.

Dale and Kruger. Dale and Kruger. Dale and Kruger!!!

It does matter a lot. I know the research and simply do not buy it. The difference between UMD and Stanford is massive. Frankly the difference between UVA and UMD is massive and I am not a UVA fan. Simply put where you go (and how you do there) matters in terms of opening many pathways. Does that mean that if you go to UMD you have no chance? Of course not but there are less pathways to take you there. A smart kid will do well anywhere but may not have the same options depending on where you go.

It's your right to choose not to believe research. But you will make poor decisions, just like those who don't believe the research on vaccines, the dangers of overindulging in red meat and alcohol, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Undergrad prestige does NOT matter. At all. It’s been empirically proven. Smart kids do well anywhere, whether they’re at UMD or Stanford.

Dale and Kruger. Dale and Kruger. Dale and Kruger!!!

UMD, perhaps, but what about Frostburg State vs. Stanford?

Take a look at where the CEOs of top US companies went.

https://lesshighschoolstress.com/business/

It's the individual that matters, not the college they attended.

Prestige schools are highly OVER-represented in business, law, finance, academia, so the college matters.

If prestige schools are over-represented, it's because they've had first pick of high school students who are already highly accomplished and ridiculously smart, not because those who have succeeded needed the prestige college in order to be successful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think people who can't handle real majors are more obsessed with school name prestige

This is an important point that recognizes the changing needs of employers. Math, science, technology and other STEM majors are now the basis for securing many--maybe most--of the best post-college positions.

The best funded engineering & tech research schools are found at large universities.

Trend is toward specific majors.

This. Only people majoring in soft, useless fluff like History or Philosophy worry about HYP. The smart, competent kids major in CS and are fine going to state schools.

My very smart and competent DC knows that, due to a lack of interest, he would personally be miserable as a CS major or working as an engineer/technician. He is also wise enough to choose a major and profession that likely won't pay as well, but that affords a decent lifestyle AND provide personal enjoyment and fulfillment. I was in a profession that paid VERY well (big law), but was very unhappy. I took a huge pay cut to change careers and couldn't be happier with what I'm doing now - absolutely no regrets.

Yes your kid can not handle real majors

No, my kid is wise enough not to prioritize salary over happiness. He will be fine and very content never owning a luxury brand car. I feel sorry for people whose priority goal is securing the highest paying jon possible no matter what their real interests are.

Smart motivated competent kids major in challenging real majors and minor in something else interests them.

This, times a million.

The only people I know whose kids are majoring in the humanities/social sciences are weak students. Practically every top student at my kids’ high school (not TJ) goes on to major in STEM. Full stop. Science, math, and technology is definitely where the talent is at!!!

[Anonymous]

Well, I’ll give my perspective. The future is only getting worse and wealth disparities are only getting more extreme. Wages have not kept up with the cost of living and inflation. UMC isn’t what it used to be, and even people making HHI in the top 20% feel strapped — that’s why you see so many people on here complain that there HHI of $250k “feels poor.”

I want my kids to be in the 1%. And to do that, the most sure fire way is to go to an Ivy (or Stanford/Duke/MIT), get a high GPA in a quantitative major (so no English majors in our household!), and graduate to make a ton of money in tech or finance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Undergrad prestige does NOT matter. At all. It’s been empirically proven. Smart kids do well anywhere, whether they’re at UMD or Stanford.

Dale and Kruger. Dale and Kruger. Dale and Kruger!!!

UMD, perhaps, but what about Frostburg State vs. Stanford?

Take a look at where the CEOs of top US companies went.

https://lesshighschoolstress.com/business/

It's the individual that matters, not the college they attended.

Prestige schools are highly OVER-represented in business, law, finance, academia, so the college matters.

If prestige schools are over-represented, it's because they've had first pick of high school students who are already highly accomplished and ridiculously smart, not because those who have succeeded needed the prestige college in order to be successful.

Its because grad schools and popular employers have thousands of resumes from students who have all excelled as under grads and the easiest cut to make is the quality of the school. The only exception is law school where GPA + LSAT matter more than the school, but graduates from prestigious law schools are massively over represented in big law and federal judgeships (Harvard and Yale have 8 seats on the Supreme Court between them)

[Anonymous]

The people who don’t think a good school matters are the ROI/tech folks. They think that a high-paying job is the litmus test for a successful college experience. People who aim go to highly-selective school value more than a big salary. Sure, they want that, but are first and foremost interested in the educational experience and the quality of the student peer group. Students at the best schools “know” they will make bank, if they want to, thus it’s not the focus of their education, but a result of it. Firms who hire kids from the best schools want smart, interesting, socially adept kids who have demonstrated leadership, teamwork, and persistence. A kid with an English, history, or Econ degree who might also be a college/club athlete will do just as well or better than a CS major at state U.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think people who can't handle real majors are more obsessed with school name prestige

This is an important point that recognizes the changing needs of employers. Math, science, technology and other STEM majors are now the basis for securing many--maybe most--of the best post-college positions.

The best funded engineering & tech research schools are found at large universities.

Trend is toward specific majors.

This. Only people majoring in soft, useless fluff like History or Philosophy worry about HYP. The smart, competent kids major in CS and are fine going to state schools.

My very smart and competent DC knows that, due to a lack of interest, he would personally be miserable as a CS major or working as an engineer/technician. He is also wise enough to choose a major and profession that likely won't pay as well, but that affords a decent lifestyle AND provide personal enjoyment and fulfillment. I was in a profession that paid VERY well (big law), but was very unhappy. I took a huge pay cut to change careers and couldn't be happier with what I'm doing now - absolutely no regrets.

Yes your kid can not handle real majors

No, my kid is wise enough not to prioritize salary over happiness. He will be fine and very content never owning a luxury brand car. I feel sorry for people whose priority goal is securing the highest paying jon possible no matter what their real interests are.

Smart motivated competent kids major in challenging real majors and minor in something else interests them.

This, times a million.

The only people I know whose kids are majoring in the humanities/social sciences are weak students. Practically every top student at my kids’ high school (not TJ) goes on to major in STEM. Full stop. Science, math, and technology is definitely where the talent is at!!!

So all of those history, philosophy and psych majors at HYPS are losers who were only accepted to keep the professors in those disciplines employed?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think people who can't handle real majors are more obsessed with school name prestige

This is an important point that recognizes the changing needs of employers. Math, science, technology and other STEM majors are now the basis for securing many--maybe most--of the best post-college positions.

The best funded engineering & tech research schools are found at large universities.

Trend is toward specific majors.

This. Only people majoring in soft, useless fluff like History or Philosophy worry about HYP. The smart, competent kids major in CS and are fine going to state schools.

My very smart and competent DC knows that, due to a lack of interest, he would personally be miserable as a CS major or working as an engineer/technician. He is also wise enough to choose a major and profession that likely won't pay as well, but that affords a decent lifestyle AND provide personal enjoyment and fulfillment. I was in a profession that paid VERY well (big law), but was very unhappy. I took a huge pay cut to change careers and couldn't be happier with what I'm doing now - absolutely no regrets.

Yes your kid can not handle real majors

No, my kid is wise enough not to prioritize salary over happiness. He will be fine and very content never owning a luxury brand car. I feel sorry for people whose priority goal is securing the highest paying jon possible no matter what their real interests are.

Smart motivated competent kids major in challenging real majors and minor in something else interests them.

This, times a million.

The only people I know whose kids are majoring in the humanities/social sciences are weak students. Practically every top student at my kids’ high school (not TJ) goes on to major in STEM. Full stop. Science, math, and technology is definitely where the talent is at!!!

So all of those history, philosophy and psych majors at HYPS are losers who were only accepted to keep the professors in those disciplines employed?

Literally yes. The soft majors at HYPS are filled with athletes/donor kids/other hooked kids. The super smart unhooked kids universally go to STEM. ]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think people who can't handle real majors are more obsessed with school name prestige

This is an important point that recognizes the changing needs of employers. Math, science, technology and other STEM majors are now the basis for securing many--maybe most--of the best post-college positions.

The best funded engineering & tech research schools are found at large universities.

Trend is toward specific majors.

This. Only people majoring in soft, useless fluff like History or Philosophy worry about HYP. The smart, competent kids major in CS and are fine going to state schools.

My very smart and competent DC knows that, due to a lack of interest, he would personally be miserable as a CS major or working as an engineer/technician. He is also wise enough to choose a major and profession that likely won't pay as well, but that affords a decent lifestyle AND provide personal enjoyment and fulfillment. I was in a profession that paid VERY well (big law), but was very unhappy. I took a huge pay cut to change careers and couldn't be happier with what I'm doing now - absolutely no regrets.

Yes your kid can not handle real majors

No, my kid is wise enough not to prioritize salary over happiness. He will be fine and very content never owning a luxury brand car. I feel sorry for people whose priority goal is securing the highest paying jon possible no matter what their real interests are.

Smart motivated competent kids major in challenging real majors and minor in something else interests them.

This, times a million.

The only people I know whose kids are majoring in the humanities/social sciences are weak students. Practically every top student at my kids’ high school (not TJ) goes on to major in STEM. Full stop. Science, math, and technology is definitely where the talent is at!!!

So all of those history, philosophy and psych majors at HYPS are losers who were only accepted to keep the professors in those disciplines employed?

my kid is a classics major. Reading and writing ancient Greek and Latin is definitely not easy. Now, if you ask what it's good for I couldn't tell ya

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The people who don’t think a good school matters are the ROI/tech folks. They think that a high-paying job is the litmus test for a successful college experience. People who aim go to highly-selective school value more than a big salary. Sure, they want that, but are first and foremost interested in the educational experience and the quality of the student peer group. Students at the best schools “know” they will make bank, if they want to, thus it’s not the focus of their education, but a result of it. Firms who hire kids from the best schools want smart, interesting, socially adept kids who have demonstrated leadership, teamwork, and persistence. A kid with an English, history, or Econ degree who might also be a college/club athlete will do just as well or better than a CS major at state U.

Uh huh. Totally. That’s why a History major at Harvard has the same earnings as a CS major from UMD.

NOT. Check the college scorecard yourself. You sound insufferable, PP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Undergrad prestige does NOT matter. At all. It’s been empirically proven. Smart kids do well anywhere, whether they’re at UMD or Stanford.

Dale and Kruger. Dale and Kruger. Dale and Kruger!!!

UMD, perhaps, but what about Frostburg State vs. Stanford?

Take a look at where the CEOs of top US companies went.

https://lesshighschoolstress.com/business/

It's the individual that matters, not the college they attended.

Prestige schools are highly OVER-represented in business, law, finance, academia, so the college matters.

If prestige schools are over-represented, it's because they've had first pick of high school students who are already highly accomplished and ridiculously smart, not because those who have succeeded needed the prestige college in order to be successful.

Its because grad schools and popular employers have thousands of resumes from students who have all excelled as under grads and the easiest cut to make is the quality of the school. The only exception is law school where GPA + LSAT matter more than the school, but graduates from prestigious law schools are massively over represented in big law and federal judgeships (Harvard and Yale have 8 seats on the Supreme Court between them)

Supreme Court justices are appointed, not hired.

And we're not talking about law schools anyway. Kruger and Dale looked at undergrad only, and the results can only speak to that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The people who don’t think a good school matters are the ROI/tech folks. They think that a high-paying job is the litmus test for a successful college experience. People who aim go to highly-selective school value more than a big salary. Sure, they want that, but are first and foremost interested in the educational experience and the quality of the student peer group. Students at the best schools “know” they will make bank, if they want to, thus it’s not the focus of their education, but a result of it. Firms who hire kids from the best schools want smart, interesting, socially adept kids who have demonstrated leadership, teamwork, and persistence. A kid with an English, history, or Econ degree who might also be a college/club athlete will do just as well or better than a CS major at state U.

LOL no those schools are full of ALDC previlleged kids, and those kids major in easy stuff.
(i.e. recently 43% of Harvard White kids are ALDC)

You actually find those kids in a tier lower schools like T20-50.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Undergrad prestige does NOT matter. At all. It’s been empirically proven. Smart kids do well anywhere, whether they’re at UMD or Stanford.

Dale and Kruger. Dale and Kruger. Dale and Kruger!!!

It does matter a lot. I know the research and simply do not buy it. The difference between UMD and Stanford is massive. Frankly the difference between UVA and UMD is massive and I am not a UVA fan. Simply put where you go (and how you do there) matters in terms of opening many pathways. Does that mean that if you go to UMD you have no chance? Of course not but there are less pathways to take you there. A smart kid will do well anywhere but may not have the same options depending on where you go.

What do you mean the difference between UVA and UMD is massive? For what? UMD's STEM programs are universally ranked higher than UVA and very well respected. And for the record, I attended neither school so have no dog in this fight.

Sure you can find a major where one school is better. But in general UVA will get you places UMD can't. I would argue that is true in STEM as well but happy to agree with you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Undergrad prestige does NOT matter. At all. It’s been empirically proven. Smart kids do well anywhere, whether they’re at UMD or Stanford.

Dale and Kruger. Dale and Kruger. Dale and Kruger!!!

It does matter a lot. I know the research and simply do not buy it. The difference between UMD and Stanford is massive. Frankly the difference between UVA and UMD is massive and I am not a UVA fan. Simply put where you go (and how you do there) matters in terms of opening many pathways. Does that mean that if you go to UMD you have no chance? Of course not but there are less pathways to take you there. A smart kid will do well anywhere but may not have the same options depending on where you go.

What do you mean the difference between UVA and UMD is massive? For what? UMD's STEM programs are universally ranked higher than UVA and very well respected. And for the record, I attended neither school so have no dog in this fight.

I think PP is a UVA hater and tryng to mock UVA.

Nope --- meant what I said.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Undergrad prestige does NOT matter. At all. It’s been empirically proven. Smart kids do well anywhere, whether they’re at UMD or Stanford.

Dale and Kruger. Dale and Kruger. Dale and Kruger!!!

UMD, perhaps, but what about Frostburg State vs. Stanford?

Take a look at where the CEOs of top US companies went.

https://lesshighschoolstress.com/business/

It's the individual that matters, not the college they attended.

Prestige schools are highly OVER-represented in business, law, finance, academia, so the college matters.

If prestige schools are over-represented, it's because they've had first pick of high school students who are already highly accomplished and ridiculously smart, not because those who have succeeded needed the prestige college in order to be successful.

Its because grad schools and popular employers have thousands of resumes from students who have all excelled as under grads and the easiest cut to make is the quality of the school. The only exception is law school where GPA + LSAT matter more than the school, but graduates from prestigious law schools are massively over represented in big law and federal judgeships (Harvard and Yale have 8 seats on the Supreme Court between them)

Supreme Court justices are appointed, not hired.

And we're not talking about law schools anyway. Kruger and Dale looked at undergrad only, and the results can only speak to that.

And the experiences that put them in a position to be appointed largely go to graduates of a very small handful of schools (Harvard and Yale undergraduate degrees also constitute a majority of the court). The same is true on wall street, in consulting, and even in big tech.