How much does the competitiveness of a college matter?

[Rufus T. Firefly]

I've seen studies that indicate that there's almost no correlation between the quality of a school and a person's success later in life. Really. People from Northern Illinois University can rise; people from Harvard can fail.

Our daughter will head off to school in a couple of years, and is applying almost exclusively to "elite" schools. I don't think she'll get farther in life going to my alma mater (an Ivy) instead of her mother's (a huge state school); but I think her college experience itself will be better. What she makes of that experience is up to her.

[Wycoff]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
GPA matters less, what research you have done, the letters of recommendation, what school you are from, and your GRE scores matter more (this is because some schools you have to struggle for a B, others pretty much everyone gets As...)

Jon Miller
(the above is true for Physics and Math at least)

It's more or less true for Law School as well (switch GRE with LSAT). GPA does matter, but its considered in the context of the school. A 4.0 from Harvard (known for grade inflation) isn't as impressive as a 4.0 from W&M (known for grade deflation). Grad admissions offices know which schools inflate grades and which ones don't.

[DaShi]

The name of your means a lot to many employers. But who wants to work for them anyway? I'll educate you johncmcleod!

[Jon Miller]

in physics, there is some shift but it is still meaningful

generally top 10 undergrads go to top 10 grad schools
and top 10 PhDs go to post docs at top 10 schools
and most people who get entry level professorships at top 10 schools have a history at top 10 schools

of course, the top 10 change a bit depending on what field you are in (but Harvard and MIT are pretty much always there)

and top 10 schools generally lose a lot of entry professors, and generally 'steal' a lot of older, highly successful physicists

but still, it matters

Jon Miller

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly
I've seen studies that indicate that there's almost no correlation between the quality of a school and a person's success later in life. Really. People from Northern Illinois University can rise; people from Harvard can fail.

Connections are important, and going to an Ivy will be much better for that than a state uni.

[Jon Miller]

better to say that connections can be important....

you can be successful and both, and a failure at both, but a few opportunities might be easier at a top 10 school (note I didn't say Ivy)

Jon Miller

[aneeshm]

I'm going to appear for the standard run of engineering entrance examinations in the next few months ( the IIT-JEE , the BITS entrance test , the AIEEE , the Kernataka and Maharashtra PETs , and Manipal's entrance test ) . It is rather competetive when you want to get into the top few colleges ( 3,00,000 people appear for the test , whereas only roughly 4000 make it in the case of the IITs ) .



At least over here in India , it matters a lot . If you have a Bachelor's from an IIT , and an MBA from an IIM , then you can get a starting salary of 2 lakh a month - which is very , very high for India . And the network of contacts you build up in an IIT is half the reason that the IITs are so coveted .

[JohnT]

Originally posted by johncmcleod
I have no idea what I'm going to do for a profession, but those are my interests, and I think I'll probably teach in those areas. I don't want some office job, I can't think of any professions that I'd like. But I really like learning and thinking about those things, and from the advice I've gotten, I'm planning on finding what I am passionate about, studying that, and hoping the rest will fall into place. I'm just not sure if I made the right decision in my college process, because when I chose where I'd apply and try to go to, I chose with competitiveness as my main factor, and within the competitive colleges I looked for specific ones that fit. (I'm pretty sure Colgate and Holy Cross are in the top 50 or 60, because they made the Barron's guide of competitive college and it has that many in it). In retrospect, maybe cost should have been my main factor. What do you think?

Dude, if you're going to go to school in order to teach, why go to Ivy-league wanna-be's? Why spend that much money for so little reward?

Yes, cost should've been your main factor - you should determine which field you want to go into, find out the median income, and spend about 1-3 years worth of future income getting the education to go in that field:

The actual cost of educating a student at Amherst is greater than $69,000 a year.

http://www.amherst.edu/~finaid/firstyear/faq.html

You are going to spend $300,000 on a career that has median earnings of $41,000? You do realize that's 7.5 years of merely paying off the principle, don't you?

Median annual earnings of kindergarten, elementary, middle, and secondary school teachers ranged from $41,400 to $45,920 in May 2004; the lowest 10 percent earned $26,730 to $31,180; the top 10 percent earned $66,240 to $71,370. Median earnings for preschool teachers were $20,980.

http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos069.htm

When people talk about "crushing student debt" it's because they made foolish decisions like this.

[Jon Miller]

yeah, that is true... I didn't think about what you wanted to be

teachers make squat

JM

[JohnT]

Another thing you'll want to consider is where you want to live. If you plan on staying in Idaho, go to a local school like Boise State (just $4,000/year! http://admissions.boisestate.edu/tuition.shtml )- the contacts you will get there among top-Idahoans will make up for the lack of "Amherst"-level pedigree. If you want to live in LA, try to get into UCLA or Pepperdine or USC.

[JohnT]

Now, as to the overall question of whether "pedigree" matters:

Yes. But only to a point.

At Harvard, you'll have access to Nobel Prize winners, movers and shakers in the American government, future and current CEO's, lectures by foreign dignitaries, etc. The experience offered there (and at like schools) is far richer than what I received at the University of Georgia, which itself was far richer than what was offered at West Georgia College, which was better than Gwinnett (county) Tech.

Then there's networking - it is not a coincidence that a large-proportion of the nations "elite" come from a handful of schools scattered across the nation, mostly focused in the NE or California: Harvard, Stanford, Berkely, Yale, Princeton, Penn, MIT, Cal Tech, the military academies, your school name here ( ). The last three Presidents (and Ford, too) were Yalies, Carter went to Annapolis, Kennedy (and both Roosevelts) went to Harvard, Eisenhower went to West Point, etc.

But not all - Nixon, Reagan, Johnson, and Truman went to "no-name" or state colleges.

Same thing with businessmen - the top schools are heavily representated in the corps of CEO's, CFO's, COO's, etc of the nations top companies... but many of them aren't, as well.

What you don't find, except in the arts and sports, are people at the top of their fields who aren't educated formally in one way or another, usually with post-secondary work. Not anymore you don't.

So, having the pedigree helps, but it's not needed to either break into the top, or become a teacher.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger


Connections are important, and going to an Ivy will be much better for that than a state uni.

Spoken like someone in Asia

Ivy-league connections are way, way, way overrated, generally by folks who don't have them. In my experience, the connections that matter are not established in college; they're the connections you and your family already have (or don't). The notion of a nobody getting admitted to an elite school and suddly having connections is the stuff of bad novels, not life.

[Jon Miller]

yeah, I just know physics, I don't know about other areas..

in physics, who your advisor was.. and who you did your postdocs with, are very important things....

JM
(and it is true that an undergrad at a top school helps you get into a top school, they know what they want afterall)

[JohnT]

Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly


Spoken like someone in Asia

Ivy-league connections are way, way, way overrated, generally by folks who don't have them. In my experience, the connections that matter are not established in college; they're the connections you and your family already have (or don't). The notion of a nobody getting admitted to an elite school and suddly having connections is the stuff of bad novels, not life.

I disagree.

It's not just the connections, it's the access to them combined with the willingness of the student to exploit that access, that matters as well. If you want a career at McKinsey Consulting, you'd better go to Harvard/Yale, because that's where all the McKinsey recruiters are at.

However, the connections alone won't do a thing for ya, true. A lazy student at Harvard will get a far worse education than a dedicated overachiever at Michigan State.

[Agathon]

It depends on how much you personally care about what it can get you.

If you're one of those people who wants to be really rich or "successful", then it probably matters a lot.

On the other hand, if you basically don't give a **** about all that **** and just want to learn about interesting stuff, any respectable college will suffice.

IMHO the people who want the former are insane. It seems a one way ticket to not enjoying your life.