Mythbuster: "It doesn't matter where you do undergrad, only MA-JD-MBA-MD matter"

[Anonymous]

Stop saying this to rationalize an inferior college choice. Research proves this is simply not true.

"...graduates of a Tier 1 college with a grad degree from a Tier 1 to 3 school earns on average $185,695 a year, a Tier 3 to 4 college graduate with a Tier 1 graduate degree earns on average only $133,236."

You Can't Catch Up
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/03/education/edlife/why-you-cant-catch-up.html

[Anonymous]

This is very interesting & I'm sure there is some truth to it. Of course it can only speak to averages & general trends, uses income as the primary measure (not everyone's sole or chief concern), and many of us know exceptions. But interesting contribution to the discussion.

[Anonymous]

What tools is he referring to to catch up? Research, mentors? Why would a student at a "Tier 4" school with a 4.0 need to "catch up?" What does he mean by catch up anyway? This doesn't make any sense.

[Anonymous]

Frankly, the most stunning thing in the study is how much less women earn than men - $158k vs $88 among tier 1 grads -- and how little difference going to a better college makes for women's earnings. While there is clearly discrimination, McKinsey does not pay women MBAs half as much as men. Rather, most of this difference has to be due to choices in the kinds of careers being chosen - pediatrics vs. surgery, big law vs. ADAs - and time out of work to raise children.

[Anonymous]

Do they control for family of origin wealth? I am from an ivy and don't make much more than colleagues from state schools -- but I was lower middle class from rural town, unlike vast majority of ivy classmates that were either from wealthy families or often urban magnet schools (even if their family was not wealthy, their secondary education far outstripped what my county could offer)

In short, the inability to catch up starts much earlier than college.

[Anonymous]

making money isn't everything, you know. But I agree with the PP that inability to catch up starts at birth. Or, really, there is no need to tell us what we already know, which is that the playing field isn't level.

I also made a lot of choices that led to me making less $$ despite my Ivy JD -- like going part time at a nonprofit -- because I value family time more than the extra $$ and prestige.

[Anonymous]

My guess is that they have limited their range to those with advanced degrees. Those professions that use advanced degrees, whether research institutions looking for PhDs, law firms looking for JD/bar, hospitals looking for MDs, etc all do weight applicants and salaries around the prestige of higher education. However, there are many, many jobs out there that don't depend on the institution. There are engineers, programmers, program managers, non-profits, accountants, HR positions, and many more professions where you need an undergraduate college degree, but don't need an advanced degree where the origin of your college degree matters much less. Frankly, there is not a lot of difference between a computer programmer who went to UNC Chapel Hill vs one who went to Carnegie Mellon University. Their programming and organizational skills matter more than their alma mater. Specific specialized knowledge applicable to the job may vary, but candidates will be rated more on their specific backgrounds and skills rather than their alma mater. I very much doubt that the school where the HR benefits specialist went to college will make that much difference in her salary compared to other HR specialists.

[Anonymous]

I am a professor with a PhD. I clearly use my advanced degree. I get asked where I went to undergrad at least as much as where I went to grad. Anecdotal of course, but in my experience a grad degree doesn't erase the relevance of your undergrad experience. It also doesn't erase the relevance of your undergrad network. I have opportunities that result from both places and would say each has been equally important. Not to mention that the top notch research environment for my undergrad really prepared me for grad school in a way that others didnt have.

Now as an admissions officer I prefer applicants with less stellar GPAs from top schools than near 4.0s from less great schools (although big state schools are an exception for locals). I find students from top schools have more drive, better communication skills and higher expectations for themselves than students from less prestigious places.

Just my experience if it is interesting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am a professor with a PhD. I clearly use my advanced degree. I get asked where I went to undergrad at least as much as where I went to grad. Anecdotal of course, but in my experience a grad degree doesn't erase the relevance of your undergrad experience. It also doesn't erase the relevance of your undergrad network. I have opportunities that result from both places and would say each has been equally important. Not to mention that the top notch research environment for my undergrad really prepared me for grad school in a way that others didnt have.

Now as an admissions officer I prefer applicants with less stellar GPAs from top schools than near 4.0s from less great schools (although big state schools are an exception for locals). I find students from top schools have more drive, better communication skills and higher expectations for themselves than students from less prestigious places.

Just my experience if it is interesting.

Sorry,a couple of corrections. It's hard to type well on a phone when you can't see the message. First, my undergrad prepared me for grad school in a way that other schools *might not* have. And I am not an admissions officer, but an admissions committee member. Professors select their own students for PhD programs without professional admissions staff at my school and in all cases I am aware of.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am a professor with a PhD. I clearly use my advanced degree. I get asked where I went to undergrad at least as much as where I went to grad. Anecdotal of course, but in my experience a grad degree doesn't erase the relevance of your undergrad experience. It also doesn't erase the relevance of your undergrad network. I have opportunities that result from both places and would say each has been equally important. Not to mention that the top notch research environment for my undergrad really prepared me for grad school in a way that others didnt have.

Now as an admissions officer I prefer applicants with less stellar GPAs from top schools than near 4.0s from less great schools (although big state schools are an exception for locals). I find students from top schools have more drive, better communication skills and higher expectations for themselves than students from less prestigious places.

Just my experience if it is interesting.

No wonder admission process is all f-ed up.

[Anonymous]

Here is how I read the research:

1. If you have a choice of a Tier 1 school vs a Tier 2/3 school with merit aid, it does not make sense to go to a Tier 1 school.

2. If you think your life is going to be "better" if you make $186k/yr vs. $135K/yr you have more problems than an elite graduate degree can solve.

[Anonymous]

LOL, this is the "tier 4" poster from a recent thread about how sports at D2 and D3 schools are a scam.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am a professor with a PhD. I clearly use my advanced degree. I get asked where I went to undergrad at least as much as where I went to grad. Anecdotal of course, but in my experience a grad degree doesn't erase the relevance of your undergrad experience. It also doesn't erase the relevance of your undergrad network. I have opportunities that result from both places and would say each has been equally important. Not to mention that the top notch research environment for my undergrad really prepared me for grad school in a way that others didnt have.

Now as an admissions officer I prefer applicants with less stellar GPAs from top schools than near 4.0s from less great schools (although big state schools are an exception for locals). I find students from top schools have more drive, better communication skills and higher expectations for themselves than students from less prestigious places.

Just my experience if it is interesting.

If this isn't code for "I prefer candidates who speak the way I do and have a shared upper class background," I don't know what is.

You like people who are like you. The ones you can joke with about summers at the Cape, and which dining club they chose to join.

G-d help the smart, driven, kid who doesn't share your shibboleths.

[Anonymous]

I went to a Tier 4 college, and my DH went to a top-5 undergraduate school. We both went to Tier 1 law schools (top 5).

I guess I'm an exception to this research, but I have a great job and make more money than my DH (who is an attorney for the federal government).

Also, all of my friends from HS went to Tier 4 colleges, and they all seem to be doing really well financially. In face, the top execs at my company all went to state colleges, and they seem to be doing quite well for themselves.

And if women are voluntarily going part-time for kids, then it makes sense that they earn less. (I did that myself, and was grateful to be able to go part time for several years while my kids were young.) (Forgive me if they controlled for that.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My guess is that they have limited their range to those with advanced degrees. Those professions that use advanced degrees, whether research institutions looking for PhDs, law firms looking for JD/bar, hospitals looking for MDs, etc all do weight applicants and salaries around the prestige of higher education. However, there are many, many jobs out there that don't depend on the institution. There are engineers, programmers, program managers, non-profits, accountants, HR positions, and many more professions where you need an undergraduate college degree, but don't need an advanced degree where the origin of your college degree matters much less. Frankly, there is not a lot of difference between a computer programmer who went to UNC Chapel Hill vs one who went to Carnegie Mellon University. Their programming and organizational skills matter more than their alma mater. Specific specialized knowledge applicable to the job may vary, but candidates will be rated more on their specific backgrounds and skills rather than their alma mater. I very much doubt that the school where the HR benefits specialist went to college will make that much difference in her salary compared to other HR specialists.

I did not find this to be true. I mean, many of us state school-fancy JD people went to the best law firms right out of our fancy law schools. I didn't have a hard time finding a job in the high-paying areas, I just transitioned to something more family-friendly when I had kids. I always got stellar reviews and was "partner track" until I chose to do something different. Most of my female friends at the firm also left when they had children, double Ivy or not.