Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:USC is not for you & your kids. It’s for former child actors & lots of children of foreign royalty, presidents, Hollywood directors, NBA starters, luxury real estate moguls and so on.

It has never been a school for the common person & never will be.

All of the elite schools have rich ALDC kids, and they love to have those.
USCC is a relatively large school for a private. It has very diverse student body.

It has full of intelligent, hardworking, creative, motivated, independent normal kids.
Hence it's highly regarded in the real academic areas like engineering, CS, Marshall Business school, etc. as well as #1 in the world School of Cinematic Art.
My kid is one of those kids there.

So crazy. When I was applying to colleges a generation ago, we
knew it as USC— University of Spoiled Children—an expensive private school for rich kids who were mediocre students and couldn’t get into decent schools like Berkeley or Stanford. A regional university, very similar to NYU. How times have changed.

That is 100% still the case re: USC.

Sandford is top of the top tier.
UCB and UCLA are peers to USC.
If cost is same, more people prefer USC.

No way.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I honestly don't think so it will ever affect the quality of pool of students. Like many have said the demographics at these expensive schools will change but quality would not.

So more international, celebrity & rich kids. specially the ones that want to return back to their home country to join dad's business or son/daughters of Indian actors for example. They will subsidize the fees for very smart kids who qualify for need based aid.

Then there will be families who have sacrificed many many years on vacations, and quality of life to pay for kids education (read lots of MC/UMC families especially Asian immigrants who value education highly)

And then finally, families who go under massive debt to pay for the kids education.

I think what would change, are the employers and grad school admissions POV- kids in mid ranked school will not be penalized. There is growing awareness and acceptance that top kids don't always end up at top ranked schools because of many factors 1) cost and 2) Diversity 3) Competitive majors 4) Just the overall lottery. That doesn't mean these kids are less capable than Ivy league kids

You are living in dream land.

All of these “problems” existed when I was applying to schools in 2002 and employers didn’t care then. They won’t care about your kids either. You’re just surprised because you’re downwardly mobile.

+1 As long as hiring managers care, then the school name matters.

There have always been “donut hole” families. DCUMers are just surprised because their parents weren’t.

The fact is most hiring managers do NOT care. It's only a few areas that really matter (NYC finance and PE). And after the first job, nobody cares. GMU sends kids to FAANG, just like Harvard, Yale, and VaTEch do. A kid with the drive to get into a T20 will excel at any school and likely come out at the top at a non-elite/t20 school and means they will easily be hired by a good company. The notion that it really matters where you attend undergrad is a bit overblown on DCUM. Just look around at your place of employment---how many people do you work with that are T20 grads? Look at the Exec Team, how many are T20 undergrads? Most likely not that many. It's what you do at school and on the job that matters.

I agree. Also, people in the DMV area forget that the school names that are big here are NOT big outside of this area. VT doesn't have the same name recognition as UCLA. In fact, my ILs, who live in AZ, thought that Virginia Tech was a technical trade school and asked what trade my DS was going into when they saw his acceptance announcement. JMU? W&M? W&L? No one who isn't from VA knows those schools or why getting into them is so difficult.

I started my career in recruiting and hiring in CA (NorCal area). I hired just as many developers from MIT, Stanford, and UC-Berkeley as I did from U of DE, Davenport Univ., and Bloomsburg Univ.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I honestly don't think so it will ever affect the quality of pool of students. Like many have said the demographics at these expensive schools will change but quality would not.

So more international, celebrity & rich kids. specially the ones that want to return back to their home country to join dad's business or son/daughters of Indian actors for example. They will subsidize the fees for very smart kids who qualify for need based aid.

Then there will be families who have sacrificed many many years on vacations, and quality of life to pay for kids education (read lots of MC/UMC families especially Asian immigrants who value education highly)

And then finally, families who go under massive debt to pay for the kids education.

I think what would change, are the employers and grad school admissions POV- kids in mid ranked school will not be penalized. There is growing awareness and acceptance that top kids don't always end up at top ranked schools because of many factors 1) cost and 2) Diversity 3) Competitive majors 4) Just the overall lottery. That doesn't mean these kids are less capable than Ivy league kids

You are living in dream land.

All of these “problems” existed when I was applying to schools in 2002 and employers didn’t care then. They won’t care about your kids either. You’re just surprised because you’re downwardly mobile.

+1 As long as hiring managers care, then the school name matters.

There have always been “donut hole” families. DCUMers are just surprised because their parents weren’t.

The fact is most hiring managers do NOT care. It's only a few areas that really matter (NYC finance and PE). And after the first job, nobody cares. GMU sends kids to FAANG, just like Harvard, Yale, and VaTEch do. A kid with the drive to get into a T20 will excel at any school and likely come out at the top at a non-elite/t20 school and means they will easily be hired by a good company. The notion that it really matters where you attend undergrad is a bit overblown on DCUM. Just look around at your place of employment---how many people do you work with that are T20 grads? Look at the Exec Team, how many are T20 undergrads? Most likely not that many. It's what you do at school and on the job that matters.

I agree. Also, people in the DMV area forget that the school names that are big here are NOT big outside of this area. VT doesn't have the same name recognition as UCLA. In fact, my ILs, who live in AZ, thought that Virginia Tech was a technical trade school and asked what trade my DS was going into when they saw his acceptance announcement. JMU? W&M? W&L? No one who isn't from VA knows those schools or why getting into them is so difficult.

I started my career in recruiting and hiring in CA (NorCal area). I hired just as many developers from MIT, Stanford, and UC-Berkeley as I did from U of DE, Davenport Univ., and Bloomsburg Univ.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I honestly don't think so it will ever affect the quality of pool of students. Like many have said the demographics at these expensive schools will change but quality would not.

So more international, celebrity & rich kids. specially the ones that want to return back to their home country to join dad's business or son/daughters of Indian actors for example. They will subsidize the fees for very smart kids who qualify for need based aid.

Then there will be families who have sacrificed many many years on vacations, and quality of life to pay for kids education (read lots of MC/UMC families especially Asian immigrants who value education highly)

And then finally, families who go under massive debt to pay for the kids education.

I think what would change, are the employers and grad school admissions POV- kids in mid ranked school will not be penalized. There is growing awareness and acceptance that top kids don't always end up at top ranked schools because of many factors 1) cost and 2) Diversity 3) Competitive majors 4) Just the overall lottery. That doesn't mean these kids are less capable than Ivy league kids

You are living in dream land.

All of these “problems” existed when I was applying to schools in 2002 and employers didn’t care then. They won’t care about your kids either. You’re just surprised because you’re downwardly mobile.

+1 As long as hiring managers care, then the school name matters.

There have always been “donut hole” families. DCUMers are just surprised because their parents weren’t.

The fact is most hiring managers do NOT care. It's only a few areas that really matter (NYC finance and PE). And after the first job, nobody cares. GMU sends kids to FAANG, just like Harvard, Yale, and VaTEch do. A kid with the drive to get into a T20 will excel at any school and likely come out at the top at a non-elite/t20 school and means they will easily be hired by a good company. The notion that it really matters where you attend undergrad is a bit overblown on DCUM. Just look around at your place of employment---how many people do you work with that are T20 grads? Look at the Exec Team, how many are T20 undergrads? Most likely not that many. It's what you do at school and on the job that matters.

This is what we call survivor bias.

I went to a big 10 school and me and my peers struggled like hell to land good jobs out of school. I thought I landed well because at least I had a white collar job (at a tiny mom & pop company) when many of my peers were working in restaurants and coffee jobs. I applied broadly to F500 type companies and didn’t even get rejection letters.

In 2008?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:USC is not for you & your kids. It’s for former child actors & lots of children of foreign royalty, presidents, Hollywood directors, NBA starters, luxury real estate moguls and so on.

It has never been a school for the common person & never will be.

All of the elite schools have rich ALDC kids, and they love to have those.
USCC is a relatively large school for a private. It has very diverse student body.

It has full of intelligent, hardworking, creative, motivated, independent normal kids.
Hence it's highly regarded in the real academic areas like engineering, CS, Marshall Business school, etc. as well as #1 in the world School of Cinematic Art.
My kid is one of those kids there.

So crazy. When I was applying to colleges a generation ago, we
knew it as USC— University of Spoiled Children—an expensive private school for rich kids who were mediocre students and couldn’t get into decent schools like Berkeley or Stanford. A regional university, very similar to NYU. How times have changed.

That is 100% still the case re: USC.

Sandford is top of the top tier.
UCB and UCLA are peers to USC.
If cost is same, more people prefer USC.

No way.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:USC is not for you & your kids. It’s for former child actors & lots of children of foreign royalty, presidents, Hollywood directors, NBA starters, luxury real estate moguls and so on.

It has never been a school for the common person & never will be.

All of the elite schools have rich ALDC kids, and they love to have those.
USCC is a relatively large school for a private. It has very diverse student body.

It has full of intelligent, hardworking, creative, motivated, independent normal kids.
Hence it's highly regarded in the real academic areas like engineering, CS, Marshall Business school, etc. as well as #1 in the world School of Cinematic Art.
My kid is one of those kids there.

So crazy. When I was applying to colleges a generation ago, we
knew it as USC— University of Spoiled Children—an expensive private school for rich kids who were mediocre students and couldn’t get into decent schools like Berkeley or Stanford. A regional university, very similar to NYU. How times have changed.

That is 100% still the case re: USC.

Sandford is top of the top tier.
UCB and UCLA are peers to USC.
If cost is same, more people prefer USC.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I honestly don't think so it will ever affect the quality of pool of students. Like many have said the demographics at these expensive schools will change but quality would not.

So more international, celebrity & rich kids. specially the ones that want to return back to their home country to join dad's business or son/daughters of Indian actors for example. They will subsidize the fees for very smart kids who qualify for need based aid.

Then there will be families who have sacrificed many many years on vacations, and quality of life to pay for kids education (read lots of MC/UMC families especially Asian immigrants who value education highly)

And then finally, families who go under massive debt to pay for the kids education.

I think what would change, are the employers and grad school admissions POV- kids in mid ranked school will not be penalized. There is growing awareness and acceptance that top kids don't always end up at top ranked schools because of many factors 1) cost and 2) Diversity 3) Competitive majors 4) Just the overall lottery. That doesn't mean these kids are less capable than Ivy league kids

You are living in dream land.

All of these “problems” existed when I was applying to schools in 2002 and employers didn’t care then. They won’t care about your kids either. You’re just surprised because you’re downwardly mobile.

+1 As long as hiring managers care, then the school name matters.

There have always been “donut hole” families. DCUMers are just surprised because their parents weren’t.

The fact is most hiring managers do NOT care. It's only a few areas that really matter (NYC finance and PE). And after the first job, nobody cares. GMU sends kids to FAANG, just like Harvard, Yale, and VaTEch do. A kid with the drive to get into a T20 will excel at any school and likely come out at the top at a non-elite/t20 school and means they will easily be hired by a good company. The notion that it really matters where you attend undergrad is a bit overblown on DCUM. Just look around at your place of employment---how many people do you work with that are T20 grads? Look at the Exec Team, how many are T20 undergrads? Most likely not that many. It's what you do at school and on the job that matters.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:USC is not for you & your kids. It’s for former child actors & lots of children of foreign royalty, presidents, Hollywood directors, NBA starters, luxury real estate moguls and so on.

It has never been a school for the common person & never will be.

All of the elite schools have rich ALDC kids, and they love to have those.
USCC is a relatively large school for a private. It has very diverse student body.

It has full of intelligent, hardworking, creative, motivated, independent normal kids.
Hence it's highly regarded in the real academic areas like engineering, CS, Marshall Business school, etc. as well as #1 in the world School of Cinematic Art.
My kid is one of those kids there.

So crazy. When I was applying to colleges a generation ago, we
knew it as USC— University of Spoiled Children—an expensive private school for rich kids who were mediocre students and couldn’t get into decent schools like Berkeley or Stanford. A regional university, very similar to NYU. How times have changed.

That is 100% still the case re: USC.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I honestly don't think so it will ever affect the quality of pool of students. Like many have said the demographics at these expensive schools will change but quality would not.

So more international, celebrity & rich kids. specially the ones that want to return back to their home country to join dad's business or son/daughters of Indian actors for example. They will subsidize the fees for very smart kids who qualify for need based aid.

Then there will be families who have sacrificed many many years on vacations, and quality of life to pay for kids education (read lots of MC/UMC families especially Asian immigrants who value education highly)

And then finally, families who go under massive debt to pay for the kids education.

I think what would change, are the employers and grad school admissions POV- kids in mid ranked school will not be penalized. There is growing awareness and acceptance that top kids don't always end up at top ranked schools because of many factors 1) cost and 2) Diversity 3) Competitive majors 4) Just the overall lottery. That doesn't mean these kids are less capable than Ivy league kids

You are living in dream land.

All of these “problems” existed when I was applying to schools in 2002 and employers didn’t care then. They won’t care about your kids either. You’re just surprised because you’re downwardly mobile.

+1 As long as hiring managers care, then the school name matters.

There have always been “donut hole” families. DCUMers are just surprised because their parents weren’t.

The fact is most hiring managers do NOT care. It's only a few areas that really matter (NYC finance and PE). And after the first job, nobody cares. GMU sends kids to FAANG, just like Harvard, Yale, and VaTEch do. A kid with the drive to get into a T20 will excel at any school and likely come out at the top at a non-elite/t20 school and means they will easily be hired by a good company. The notion that it really matters where you attend undergrad is a bit overblown on DCUM. Just look around at your place of employment---how many people do you work with that are T20 grads? Look at the Exec Team, how many are T20 undergrads? Most likely not that many. It's what you do at school and on the job that matters.

This is what we call survivor bias.

I went to a big 10 school and me and my peers struggled like hell to land good jobs out of school. I thought I landed well because at least I had a white collar job (at a tiny mom & pop company) when many of my peers were working in restaurants and coffee jobs. I applied broadly to F500 type companies and didn’t even get rejection letters.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I honestly don't think so it will ever affect the quality of pool of students. Like many have said the demographics at these expensive schools will change but quality would not.

So more international, celebrity & rich kids. specially the ones that want to return back to their home country to join dad's business or son/daughters of Indian actors for example. They will subsidize the fees for very smart kids who qualify for need based aid.

Then there will be families who have sacrificed many many years on vacations, and quality of life to pay for kids education (read lots of MC/UMC families especially Asian immigrants who value education highly)

And then finally, families who go under massive debt to pay for the kids education.

I think what would change, are the employers and grad school admissions POV- kids in mid ranked school will not be penalized. There is growing awareness and acceptance that top kids don't always end up at top ranked schools because of many factors 1) cost and 2) Diversity 3) Competitive majors 4) Just the overall lottery. That doesn't mean these kids are less capable than Ivy league kids

You are living in dream land.

All of these “problems” existed when I was applying to schools in 2002 and employers didn’t care then. They won’t care about your kids either. You’re just surprised because you’re downwardly mobile.

+1 As long as hiring managers care, then the school name matters.

There have always been “donut hole” families. DCUMers are just surprised because their parents weren’t.

The fact is most hiring managers do NOT care. It's only a few areas that really matter (NYC finance and PE). And after the first job, nobody cares. GMU sends kids to FAANG, just like Harvard, Yale, and VaTEch do. A kid with the drive to get into a T20 will excel at any school and likely come out at the top at a non-elite/t20 school and means they will easily be hired by a good company. The notion that it really matters where you attend undergrad is a bit overblown on DCUM. Just look around at your place of employment---how many people do you work with that are T20 grads? Look at the Exec Team, how many are T20 undergrads? Most likely not that many. It's what you do at school and on the job that matters.

This is what we call survivor bias.

I went to a big 10 school and me and my peers struggled like hell to land good jobs out of school. I thought I landed well because at least I had a white collar job (at a tiny mom & pop company) when many of my peers were working in restaurants and coffee jobs. I applied broadly to F500 type companies and didn’t even get rejection letters.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I honestly don't think so it will ever affect the quality of pool of students. Like many have said the demographics at these expensive schools will change but quality would not.

So more international, celebrity & rich kids. specially the ones that want to return back to their home country to join dad's business or son/daughters of Indian actors for example. They will subsidize the fees for very smart kids who qualify for need based aid.

Then there will be families who have sacrificed many many years on vacations, and quality of life to pay for kids education (read lots of MC/UMC families especially Asian immigrants who value education highly)

And then finally, families who go under massive debt to pay for the kids education.

I think what would change, are the employers and grad school admissions POV- kids in mid ranked school will not be penalized. There is growing awareness and acceptance that top kids don't always end up at top ranked schools because of many factors 1) cost and 2) Diversity 3) Competitive majors 4) Just the overall lottery. That doesn't mean these kids are less capable than Ivy league kids

You are living in dream land.

All of these “problems” existed when I was applying to schools in 2002 and employers didn’t care then. They won’t care about your kids either. You’re just surprised because you’re downwardly mobile.

+1 As long as hiring managers care, then the school name matters.

There have always been “donut hole” families. DCUMers are just surprised because their parents weren’t.

The fact is most hiring managers do NOT care. It's only a few areas that really matter (NYC finance and PE). And after the first job, nobody cares. GMU sends kids to FAANG, just like Harvard, Yale, and VaTEch do. A kid with the drive to get into a T20 will excel at any school and likely come out at the top at a non-elite/t20 school and means they will easily be hired by a good company. The notion that it really matters where you attend undergrad is a bit overblown on DCUM. Just look around at your place of employment---how many people do you work with that are T20 grads? Look at the Exec Team, how many are T20 undergrads? Most likely not that many. It's what you do at school and on the job that matters.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I honestly don't think so it will ever affect the quality of pool of students. Like many have said the demographics at these expensive schools will change but quality would not.

So more international, celebrity & rich kids. specially the ones that want to return back to their home country to join dad's business or son/daughters of Indian actors for example. They will subsidize the fees for very smart kids who qualify for need based aid.

Then there will be families who have sacrificed many many years on vacations, and quality of life to pay for kids education (read lots of MC/UMC families especially Asian immigrants who value education highly)

And then finally, families who go under massive debt to pay for the kids education.

I think what would change, are the employers and grad school admissions POV- kids in mid ranked school will not be penalized. There is growing awareness and acceptance that top kids don't always end up at top ranked schools because of many factors 1) cost and 2) Diversity 3) Competitive majors 4) Just the overall lottery. That doesn't mean these kids are less capable than Ivy league kids

You are living in dream land.

All of these “problems” existed when I was applying to schools in 2002 and employers didn’t care then. They won’t care about your kids either. You’re just surprised because you’re downwardly mobile.

+1 As long as hiring managers care, then the school name matters.

There have always been “donut hole” families. DCUMers are just surprised because their parents weren’t.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At a lot of these expensive city schools like UCLA OOS, USC, NYU etc what you’re really paying for is getting a foothold in that city if you want to settle in it post graduation.

I mean… you’re also just paying to live in a VCOL city. The school only controls tuition, not all the things that go into COA.

Tuition is based on cost of labor, building maintenance, salaries, shuttle bus costs etc

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I honestly don't think so it will ever affect the quality of pool of students. Like many have said the demographics at these expensive schools will change but quality would not.

So more international, celebrity & rich kids. specially the ones that want to return back to their home country to join dad's business or son/daughters of Indian actors for example. They will subsidize the fees for very smart kids who qualify for need based aid.

Then there will be families who have sacrificed many many years on vacations, and quality of life to pay for kids education (read lots of MC/UMC families especially Asian immigrants who value education highly)

And then finally, families who go under massive debt to pay for the kids education.

I think what would change, are the employers and grad school admissions POV- kids in mid ranked school will not be penalized. There is growing awareness and acceptance that top kids don't always end up at top ranked schools because of many factors 1) cost and 2) Diversity 3) Competitive majors 4) Just the overall lottery. That doesn't mean these kids are less capable than Ivy league kids

You are living in dream land.

All of these “problems” existed when I was applying to schools in 2002 and employers didn’t care then. They won’t care about your kids either. You’re just surprised because you’re downwardly mobile.

+1 As long as hiring managers care, then the school name matters.