Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DS is at brown and says it’s practically useless if you aren’t interested in consulting. Every time he’s gone to the career office, they’ve obsessed over finance and given him little prep towards a career in his interests (environmental science, sustainability), so he’s stopped going.

Professors and department gatherings are helpful, etc. Is he a first year?

This is the key part of networking for internships, career, recs, research, everything

I have students at two different ivies, both in the top 10, a junior and a sophomore. Junior's longterm BF is a senior at Duke. All three schools have career services that all three have used to varying degrees for internships and career advice. One of these students is prelaw so the law advising professors as well as individual professors have been the go-to. One of the students got their internships through professor connections and also got a different internship experience through the school for the early part of one summer: that was through the school. One of these students has attended multiple CV workshops, where professors attend and advise for summer internship applications.
All three of these students ask older students at their school for advice, meet with grad students, have lunch or coffee with profs, students, etc to gather ideas and advice. Two of the three have done on campus research with professors and that has led to publication for one and a likely publication soon for the other. These connections have proved to be jumping off points for building connections that have led to summer intern/jobs. All three investigate non- school sponsored internships on their own and apply widely. One of the three is starting the Rhodes process: faculty made the suggestion and there is a full Rhodes team. All three schools have on campus recruiting that their friends have used for summer jobs, but it does not really apply at the moment to the one targeting phd nor the one targeting law school. Friends at the schools have used them and seniors do get jobs from them based on data published. All three schools have career center data that show the average starting salaries, the companies that hire, the law school matriculation data, phD placement programs, on and on. So far, all three schools have lived up to the hype, especially the willingness of professors to help, but the students go after every opportunity: they do not expect to be handed an internship or job or acceptance to grad school.

Anonymous wrote:DS is at brown and says it’s practically useless if you aren’t interested in consulting. Every time he’s gone to the career office, they’ve obsessed over finance and given him little prep towards a career in his interests (environmental science, sustainability), so he’s stopped going.

That’s because they know eventually he will regret the vow of poverty for that career. I do.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mentioned talking with professors earlier (I think). It was not my intention to suggest professors find students employment. The onus is on the student. I wonder if an unintended consequence to viewing education using a consumer perspective contributes to learned passivity.

College costs $90k/year now and many are creeping towards $100k. It simply is reasonable that students expect some sort of job by the end. Fun and pure education with no emphasis on career placement is at odds with institutional goals of championing diversity and supporting underprivileged students. I think this is an obvious failure by many top schools, who previously relied on their students’ parents to get them jobs and an easier economy.
Education is great, but students will have to go out into the real world, and academia does not pay well enough nor does it intend on hiring more than it already does.

It is baffling to me that anyone would argue a $400k education should not have a decent roadmap to a career.

Not all colleges cost that much. You think because you paid more, your kid should be handed a job? Get over yourself and let your kid figure out how the actual real world works for the first time in their life.

Anonymous wrote:Northeastern has a required course in applying for internships, co-ops, networking, interview skills, resume writing, etc.

I'm not sure why other schools don't do this.

It's barely anything. After that you are on your own. In the past 2 years, many kids apply to 300+ coops and find nothing. The school doesn't really help you more than that small course

Also, many colleges have that (without a coop program). My kid is at a research focused T40, and every major has a sophomore 1 credit course like that that's required. It's not unique to NEU

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have had kids at 2 colleges. Both seemed to have just communicated with potential employers through Handshake. Not much other involvement from career services except a resume review.

Same.

Same here-- DS at UW MAdison and I was thinking that if he had gone instead to a LAC or an Ivy he would receive better services.

I honestly fantasized that if he had gone to, for example, Colgate, he could just make an appointment at the career center and the good folks there would present several options for internships-- like an array of lovely chocolates that he could choose from. I figured the private schools would be much better than public schools at this-- but sounds like that's not necessarily true.

Anonymous wrote:I just don’t agree with most of the parents here. DH and I know nothing about recruiting for tech, nor would we be of any help for our son. MIT has given him many career opportunities and basically thrown internships at his feet. His education hasn’t suffered one bit from also having career-advancing resources. That’s sort of the point of college for non academics.

+1, I don’t keep a tight leash on my child and will not be directing them through their career journey. A college with a decent ROI is one of the best ways I can help them, but their school should have decent programs and services with the cost of college these days.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mentioned talking with professors earlier (I think). It was not my intention to suggest professors find students employment. The onus is on the student. I wonder if an unintended consequence to viewing education using a consumer perspective contributes to learned passivity.

College costs $90k/year now and many are creeping towards $100k. It simply is reasonable that students expect some sort of job by the end. Fun and pure education with no emphasis on career placement is at odds with institutional goals of championing diversity and supporting underprivileged students. I think this is an obvious failure by many top schools, who previously relied on their students’ parents to get them jobs and an easier economy.
Education is great, but students will have to go out into the real world, and academia does not pay well enough nor does it intend on hiring more than it already does.

It is baffling to me that anyone would argue a $400k education should not have a decent roadmap to a career.

I don’t generally disagree about the cost and mission. I wonder if the cultural discourse using a consumer paradigm reflected in the PP unintentionally leads to learned passivity. Reading this thread led to the question.

Anonymous wrote:I have had kids at 2 colleges. Both seemed to have just communicated with potential employers through Handshake. Not much other involvement from career services except a resume review.

Same.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mentioned talking with professors earlier (I think). It was not my intention to suggest professors find students employment. The onus is on the student. I wonder if an unintended consequence to viewing education using a consumer perspective contributes to learned passivity.

College costs $90k/year now and many are creeping towards $100k. It simply is reasonable that students expect some sort of job by the end. Fun and pure education with no emphasis on career placement is at odds with institutional goals of championing diversity and supporting underprivileged students. I think this is an obvious failure by many top schools, who previously relied on their students’ parents to get them jobs and an easier economy.
Education is great, but students will have to go out into the real world, and academia does not pay well enough nor does it intend on hiring more than it already does.

It is baffling to me that anyone would argue a $400k education should not have a decent roadmap to a career.

+ 1

I just don’t agree with most of the parents here. DH and I know nothing about recruiting for tech, nor would we be of any help for our son. MIT has given him many career opportunities and basically thrown internships at his feet. His education hasn’t suffered one bit from also having career-advancing resources. That’s sort of the point of college for non academics.

Anonymous wrote:I mentioned talking with professors earlier (I think). It was not my intention to suggest professors find students employment. The onus is on the student. I wonder if an unintended consequence to viewing education using a consumer perspective contributes to learned passivity.

College costs $90k/year now and many are creeping towards $100k. It simply is reasonable that students expect some sort of job by the end. Fun and pure education with no emphasis on career placement is at odds with institutional goals of championing diversity and supporting underprivileged students. I think this is an obvious failure by many top schools, who previously relied on their students’ parents to get them jobs and an easier economy.
Education is great, but students will have to go out into the real world, and academia does not pay well enough nor does it intend on hiring more than it already does.

It is baffling to me that anyone would argue a $400k education should not have a decent roadmap to a career.

I mentioned talking with professors earlier (I think). It was not my intention to suggest professors find students employment. The onus is on the student. I wonder if an unintended consequence to viewing education using a consumer perspective contributes to learned passivity.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I haven't read through this entire thread, but I understand OP's complaint. Seems the higher ranked the school, the more contempt it has for kids that actually want jobs after graduation vs. continuing on in Academia or other graduate school programs.

I recall I think on a Clemson tour that a student was commenting on some classes they offer where you actually work with companies to solve their actual problems (under the guidance of the professor).

The tour guide mentioned that the professor told the kids the reason the class exists is that they hope/expect participating companies to hire kids for jobs/internships which they often do.

Just a difference in the attitude of the school and what it thinks its mission is.

This isn’t special. Harvey Mudd was one of the first programs to create this style class and it’s called Clinic.

Nobody said it was special, but it's not super common at top schools either...most Ivy professors don't believe one of their main functions (or really their function at all) is to get their students jobs.

I have had kids at 2 colleges. Both seemed to have just communicated with potential employers through Handshake. Not much other involvement from career services except a resume review.