Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Quality of the peer group is vastly different vs. non T20 IMO.

With holistic admissions and current preferences for athletes, first gen and pell grant eligible, this is not true, Lots if kids at T50 or even T75 who have stats for T20 but didn’t get in due to the aforementioned preferences, were hurt by average ecs, or college’s desire for geographical diversity.

The quality of the kid might be more similar.

But what firms are actually hiring from there? And what percentage of their starting first year analyst class is coming from a T75? I’d argue very few.

At the end of the day that’s what matters. All of the other stuff on this website is nonsense.

Well, that only matters for the sliver of the class interested in private equity or investment banking, so really not that relevant for most.

And most for PE need an MBA, and yes, then it DOES matter where you go. Most PE firms hire from 1 or 2 specific MBA programs (depends largely upon where the top partners got their MBAs). But undergrad, it doesn't matter

You would have us believe that the odds of admission to top MBA programs are the same from all undergraduate institutions?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A common factor of elite schools in the T20 other than the Publics is the really low student to faculty ratio ( of 6 to 7), on par with the Top LACs or even better (MIT is 3). The Publics like UCLA, UCB are at 19.

This. Its not the T20 itself it is the size and intellectual quality of courses etc. william and Mary provides essentially the same environment as a T25 private. You cant go just on rank.

As a parent of a Berkeley student, the quality and rigor of CS and math course are just amazing. The classes have prepared him incredibly well for interviews. He has two offers for summer internships - one from a large tech company and one from a quant fund paying 40k for 2.5 months. His friends have internships at Tesla, Amazon and Google but all of them have been working hard preparing for interviews. There are a lot of research opportunities but the kid has to seek those. What matters is not the college but the kid. Sure it's difficult from a big school but the competition is not less fierce at private schools either.

If you’re status obsessed, yes. If you’re a regular person, no.

Anonymous wrote:Here we go again. Yo people are insane.

These are real insane jobless moms of DCUM.

For a lot of early jobs, going T20 matters a lot. Companies recruit from select schools. I think the key is knowing your kid, their abilities and their aspirations. Not everyone is cut out for IB, Consulting, or highly competitive work environments. If your kid does not want any of that, go anywhere else.

Anonymous wrote:It matters a lot for business and finance jobs. If you want to go into investment banking, wealth management/PE, or business consulting it's A LOT easier from a T10/20 school. These firms don't have resources to recruit from all campuses so they only go to the top ones.

And a lot of other jobs right out of college.

Anonymous wrote:It matters a lot for business and finance jobs. If you want to go into investment banking, wealth management/PE, or business consulting it's A LOT easier from a T10/20 school. These firms don't have resources to recruit from all campuses so they only go to the top ones.

It matters for first jobs in many sectors….

Anonymous wrote:A common factor of elite schools in the T20 other than the Publics is the really low student to faculty ratio ( of 6 to 7), on par with the Top LACs or even better (MIT is 3). The Publics like UCLA, UCB are at 19.

This. Its not the T20 itself it is the size and intellectual quality of courses etc. william and Mary provides essentially the same environment as a T25 private. You cant go just on rank.

It matters a lot for business and finance jobs. If you want to go into investment banking, wealth management/PE, or business consulting it's A LOT easier from a T10/20 school. These firms don't have resources to recruit from all campuses so they only go to the top ones.

Some of the most impressive people I’ve met are the first gen and/or low income folks from T10. Sure, they may have struggled a bit to catch up during freshmen year, but they are personally impressive and have a spark that is extraordinary. Do the admissions offices always get it right with the first gen and/or low income folks, no, but most of the time they do.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Quality of the peer group is vastly different vs. non T20 IMO.

With holistic admissions and current preferences for athletes, first gen and pell grant eligible, this is not true, Lots if kids at T50 or even T75 who have stats for T20 but didn’t get in due to the aforementioned preferences, were hurt by average ecs, or college’s desire for geographical diversity.

The quality of the kid might be more similar.

But what firms are actually hiring from there? And what percentage of their starting first year analyst class is coming from a T75? I’d argue very few.

At the end of the day that’s what matters. All of the other stuff on this website is nonsense.

Well, that only matters for the sliver of the class interested in private equity or investment banking, so really not that relevant for most.

And most for PE need an MBA, and yes, then it DOES matter where you go. Most PE firms hire from 1 or 2 specific MBA programs (depends largely upon where the top partners got their MBAs). But undergrad, it doesn't matter

Anonymous wrote:Here we go again. Yo people are insane.

NP. But this question gets asked again and again on this board. I can't figure out if it is someone who's status oriented or someone with an agenda against T20s or just a bored kid entertaining themselves by watching moms spin out over this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do elite schools actually matter? Besides prestige and connections, what are the pros?

I have heard from parents of MIT kids of them getting summer research internship and earning 50K over 3 months which pretty much covers the difference between in-state and out of state tuition (MIT does not give any merit based scholarship since it is pretty much the whole school; only need based scholarship). After graduation I have seen them earning twice more than my salary after 20 years of exp in IT. Lot of T20 school kids end up starting their own startups as well with their classmates. There is a reason why students and parents (like us) crave for top schools.

How do you know it’s the institution and not the kid?

They don't. 99% of the time, it's the kid. Those internships are in Boston, so yes most tech internships in a VHCOL area are paying well. Key is the jobs paying them so well are 9/10 also hiring kids from State U and paying them the same thing. There is also a good chance some are making their own connections just from their family/friends (rich kids) and would have similar jobs no matter where they did undergrad. So many factors you haven't accounted for

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:graduating from IVY's matter if you want government policy job.

Not really, grad school will matter more.

not where I work :) political advisors and etc are only hiring IVY grads ... even summer interns.

Weird, because I also worked for and with the federal government and literally no one (besides me) has graduated from a T10 or Ivy. I’d bet my house that my experience is more common.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:graduating from IVY's matter if you want government policy job.

Not really, grad school will matter more.

not where I work :) political advisors and etc are only hiring IVY grads ... even summer interns.