Isn’t Walsh’s mission supposed to be public service? There are significant numbers of graduates who go into private industry?
If there are so many high-flying France people, why does GU have such a small endowment?

I graduated from Georgetown SFS. I got to have some really great college experiences because of Georgetown's location and prestige in DC, but I don't know if it was worth the money. I was lucky because my parents fully paid for college, but I don't know if it's worth $300k. Maybe to people for whom that amount is chump change, but maybe not for the typical UMC family. The quality of teaching was great, but I don't think it was worth that much more (or was that much better) than any other good school in this area.

Some tangible positives - the name brand, the alumni network, and the recruiting opportunities (in some fields). I didn't participate in finance or consulting recruiting, but all the tippy top firms recruit at Georgetown. There are networking events starting freshman year, and on-campus recruiting at specific target schools is pretty much the only way the big firms hire entry-level candidates. Basically everyone I knew who networked, participated in recruiting, and didn't have a tragic GPA (even non-business majors) got a finance job after graduating. I had classmates who were making well into the six figures 2-3 years out of college, just with their BA degree. Those opportunities aren't really available outside a target school, even at great business schools - I had friends at UMD Smith who were surprised to hear that McKinsey/Bain/BCG hired undergrads, because no one they knew was getting hired. For kids who are set on finance, it's worth it - it's a much, much easier path. Personally, I've also found that the name brand and alumni network have been helpful. Georgetown gets lots of crap on this board, but in real life, people are generally impressed with the name (at least on the East Coast; I can't speak for the West Coast). I graduated with a mediocre GPA, but got a post-college paralegal job at a well-known DC biglaw firm. They never asked for my GPA; I remember clearly because I was nervous that they would. I applied through Georgetown's career office and didn't even submit a cover letter, just a resume - and got the job/interview largely, I assume, because of the name of the school. When I left, I interviewed my potential replacements, and the (few) candidates that they interviewed from UMD and similar schools were absolutely required to submit (and were evaluated on) their grades. I also attended an elite (top 10) law school, which obviously I got into despite the mediocre GPA. I don't know how much Georgetown was a factor in that, but I suspect it was something. And people, at all stages in and post college, generally have given me credit/respect for being smart without knowing much about me besides where I went to undergrad. Also, as a fresh graduate at my firm, several partners who were also Georgetown (undergrad) alums took a special interest in me and provided significant and ongoing professional mentorship because I was also a Georgetown grad. Maybe they would have done the same if I wasn't, I don't know, but I have found alumni connections like those to be valuable. I would assume that all of these things are magnified/even more pronounced at Ivies and schools ranked above Georgetown.

Anonymous wrote:I’m with the poster that they want to continue tradition and have their kids do better. I grew up MC and we are definitely UMC/UP with mild connections. UP by income but not lifestyle. Not enough to buy in or definite jobs but enough to be ahead of the average curve. I want my kids to get the 1% lifestyle. Not over anything, but better than ourselves.

Why?

I think it really depends on what you want out of life and how you expect college to contribute to it. For context, I grew up UMC, went to a well-ranked private, and attended HYPS undergrad and PhD programs.

In the long run, one of the most valuable things I've gotten from those elite names is career flexibility. I've switched careers entirely once, and I've also made significant transitions within the same general career path. Recruiters and hiring managers have more-or-less told me that the schools on my resume are what gave them the confidence to bring me in for an interview (I still had to prove I could do the job).

In terms of college itself, I had an amazing experience with the opportunity to study with the "best of" in multiple fields. I squeezed every last drop of what I could get out of my university, but the reality is that few people at elite schools do that. My siblings both went to our highly-ranked state flagship, and my dad (who was paying full ride for all of us) acknowledged when I graduated that what I got was truly different and special. That experience informs everything I've done since, and I don't think I'd be able to carve the unique career and life trajectory I have had without it.

At the end of the day, though, my siblings and I have similar incomes and UMC lifestyles...so if you were to base it on that alone, it wasn't "worth" it.

I’m with the poster that they want to continue tradition and have their kids do better. I grew up MC and we are definitely UMC/UP with mild connections. UP by income but not lifestyle. Not enough to buy in or definite jobs but enough to be ahead of the average curve. I want my kids to get the 1% lifestyle. Not over anything, but better than ourselves.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No.

What you have here with this scandal & on striver websites like College Confidential -- are rich people who have literally run out of things to spend their money on & unfulfilled busybody striver parents who are living through their kids, respectively.

Plenty of rich, connected, super smart kids at flagship universities and LACs.

I love how striving has become a dirty word these days. The rich and connected can't abide by anyone else trying to do better, so they denigrate them as 'strivers'. Only those who are already rich and connected evidently deserve to be rich and connected.

If you're rich and connected and your kid is at a flagship university or LAC, it's mostly likely because they AREN'T super smart. They're coasting on being rich and connected.

You can disdain elite colleges if you like (although it all comes across as sour grapes mostly), but this is the ultimate elitist and un-American attitude.

Definitely not how I interpret it. I always thought "striver" in the context you're describing denoted someone who doesn't WANT to be rich by starting a company or making investments or whatever, but wants to be SEEN as rich by ... actual rich (old money / classy / DCUM's newest euphemism) people. So dressing in a certain way, trying to speak a certain way, but NOT actually having the assets to back it up. Big hat, no cattle and all that.

Anonymous wrote:If you have to ask the question OP...then you've already missed the boat. Move on to UMD or the likes.

+ 1000 PP started a whole thread to justify themselves that RICH people were stupid. The point of the thread is not why are people cheating and donating millions of $$$ (who somehow amassed more money and prestige than me) to get their kids into to college? The real question... and then we have losers posting about bragging rights???? Exactly who are these .01% bragging to about their kid going to college? All the kids are going to college with the exception of those in some kind of rehab.

If you have to ask the question OP...then you've already missed the boat. Move on to UMD or the likes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like maybe they are for low income and maybe middle class people but what about everyone else?

Studies show the best indicator of a child’s future socioeconomic status is their parents own economic class.

So why are all these rich people risking jail time and public humiliation and shaming for something that won’t even help their kids that much?

And beyond those people, why are “regular” UMC types who can’t afford to bribe or donate their way in putting so much pressure on their kids to jump through the hoops and get the best grades, test scores, extracurriculars, etc. for a less than 10% chance of getting in and making it feel “worth it”?

In this new Gilded Age of ever-rising income inequality, people feel desperate to do everything they can to give their kids access to upper middle class opportunities.

It feeds on itself. Yet the guy who becomes a plumber and starts a business makes more money and has a job you cannot move to India or China.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Simple: Elite people want to stay elite. One way to ensure that is to educate your kids. It is not about being "rich" or bragging rights. It's about survival over and maintaining/growing principal from one generation to the next. People are also concerned about future generations, their opportunities and education. Without a doubt you can make a nice salary going to any college. That is not the hope of most ivey parents... then you should do merit aid or a state flagship.

Is this really true that this is the only way though?

My H and I live in a flyover state and will make around 800k this year. We live pretty nicely. Either of us went to an elite school. Based on our experience, we don’t think we need to be pressuring our kids into the Ivy League to “survive.”

Shrug.

Flyover.....

There are those who want their kids to go to an elite college for bragging rights or for a head start to greater wealth. For them, it is no different than getting in to the right country club. They might be a slim majority at the Ivies.

Then there are others whose children aspire to be public intellectuals, researchers, scientists, and academics. To them, the point is to learn how to produce great ideas and elite colleges surround them with classmates, faculty, and resources to achieve those goals. In addition, there are only a handful of fully funded grad programs that get most of their new PhDs hired for tenure track jobs and nearly all of their grad students come from other elite colleges and SLACs.

Anonymous wrote:No.

What you have here with this scandal & on striver websites like College Confidential -- are rich people who have literally run out of things to spend their money on & unfulfilled busybody striver parents who are living through their kids, respectively.

Plenty of rich, connected, super smart kids at flagship universities and LACs.

I love how striving has become a dirty word these days. The rich and connected can't abide by anyone else trying to do better, so they denigrate them as 'strivers'. Only those who are already rich and connected evidently deserve to be rich and connected.

If you're rich and connected and your kid is at a flagship university or LAC, it's mostly likely because they AREN'T super smart. They're coasting on being rich and connected.

You can disdain elite colleges if you like (although it all comes across as sour grapes mostly), but this is the ultimate elitist and un-American attitude.

No.

What you have here with this scandal & on striver websites like College Confidential -- are rich people who have literally run out of things to spend their money on & unfulfilled busybody striver parents who are living through their kids, respectively.

Plenty of rich, connected, super smart kids at flagship universities and LACs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like maybe they are for low income and maybe middle class people but what about everyone else?

Studies show the best indicator of a child’s future socioeconomic status is their parents own economic class.

So why are all these rich people risking jail time and public humiliation and shaming for something that won’t even help their kids that much?

And beyond those people, why are “regular” UMC types who can’t afford to bribe or donate their way in putting so much pressure on their kids to jump through the hoops and get the best grades, test scores, extracurriculars, etc. for a less than 10% chance of getting in and making it feel “worth it”?

Because the parents need to be able to brag about where their kids go to college. They will feel ashamed to tell their Big Law/CEO/Hollywood friends that their kids are going to a school that it not perceived as one of the best. It's 100% parent ego.

Very sad, but true.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"My H and I live in a flyover state and will make around 800k this year. We live pretty nicely. Either of us went to an elite school. Based on our experience, we don’t think we need to be pressuring our kids into the Ivy League to “survive.”

I have a HS buddy like you. He has always loved to be a big fish in a small pond.

One of his kids ended up in the service, nothing wrong with that, but my buddy can't understand why DC won't move on to college.

His DC loves being a big fish in his company and rapidly advancing and will soon have nearly 200 guys looking up to him.

Most people who push their kids into the Ivy League are small fish in the best pond people.

Huh? This makes no sense.

PP swims in the grammar-is-for-chumps pond.