<p>I think when they file the DEF 14 they include executive profile and salary, but I don’t know there is any specific requirement to list education. Of course, where you graduate is a significant part of your CV whatever they use it for. As a frequent expert witness I have a CV, and my employer is not too ashamed to list an education without an MIT pedigree. Pretty much the same way they didn’t redact the educational information of those poor souls on the Google Board who attended SUNY, Temple and the University of San Francisco. </p>
<p>Of course, yes, people like to see those Ivy names on the CVs. I don’t think anyone would deny that with a straight face. But that doesn’t mean they always get hired as consultants, and it certainly doesn’t mean they always win the cases they testify in.</p>
<p>I think we’re going in circle with this topic. If one looks at OP question, it merely ask whether the lack of name recognition is worth the full freight at LAC?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This question doesn’t come if a family can afford the $200K without any loans. Then it’s just the question of whether to spend it on LAC or some other place.</p>
<p>This becomes a serious question when some one has to take loans to get this education. At that point the question of College “Good Will” or reputation should be taken into consideration.</p>
<p>It’s a misnomer that in engineering; college name doesn’t last long. It comes handy at all levels and even after decades. Does that mean without a fancy college one can’t achieve big things? No but with the fancy college one can achieve greater success.</p>
<p>POIH, how do we know this is true? If one “achieves big things without a fancy college,” we can never know that the individual’s success would have been greater at a bigger-name school.</p>
<p>frazzled1: That’s a million $ question and I don’t have an absolute answer for it. I can only speak from my experiences and the probability of success of fancy college degree holders.</p>
<p>^^^
Yeah POIH. If you had attended MIT, instead of your 20 patents and 300K salary you’d have 40 and be making 500K. Or whatever it is.</p>
<p>Seriously, of course it probably helps. But how much? Who knows. There are lots of incredible kids who just miss out on these tippy top schools. I’d hate for them to read this thread and assume they are pretty much sunk before they begin. </p>
<p>If I thought that were true I might tend to be more on the side of a certain poster who shall not be mentioned in various debates about elite admissions.</p>
<p>“Do you happen to know many undergraduate schools where the vast and overwhelming majority of grads WILL work for Bain or Morgan Stanley?”</p>
<p>Nope. And that’s just the point. But I wish I could interview those who are working at Bain and Morgan Stanley and find something out about their family incomes and backgrounds. I have my suspicions. Since most of the schools we are talking about pre-select/are pre-selected for folks from such backgrounds, it wouldn’t surprise me to find colleges and universities where the majority of students pay $200k plus for four years (note, I didn’t say “full-freight”) are “overrepresented”.</p>
<p>I do know that Bain likes BYU students - ask Mitt Romney!</p>
<p>I hope you realize how little sense this little paragraph makes! First of all, it all depends on your definition of fancy college! Which one of Stanford or Cal is more fancier … according to your well-researched little black book? Same question for Caltech versus Berkeley. </p>
<p>And is fancy really a qualifier? What about geographical draw? What are the biggest “engineering” sources for future stars at companies such as Exxon or Coca-Cola? Does one lose with a degree from Rice or Georgia Tech or … Emory? </p>
<p>Then we can move to your definition of what it means to “achieve greater success?” How does one measure that for an engineering graduate? Isn’t that a profession that used --or still is-- quite impacted after reaching middle management? Isn’t it profession that required one to attend a business school to crack the upper echelons where the engineer can finally join the clubs of the well-educated in the … liberal arts? Isn’t engineering a profession that is always in danger to be outsourced, especially when one’s ratio of productivity to cost becomes far less less positive?</p>
<p>Last but not least, should you not consider that the question related to an undergraduate degree and that most measurements of “great success” correlates (add your typical correlation/causation clause here) a lot more with the … graduate degrees?</p>
Coca Cola loves Emory and Tech grads Lots of Coke dollars at Tech and Emory. Think Goizueta school of Business and all the Woodruff facilities (Health science center library, PE center, etc) at Emory, and the Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering at Tech</p>
<p>Silicon Valley has been mentioned. Besides Google, though huge and influential, there are a heckuva lot of other companies here with a lot of white collar professionals.
Speaking now of a slightly older demographic, I am aware of lots of MITers, and Cal, Stanford, San Jose State, Penn State grads, overseas degrees, but I don’t know a single person from Williams or Middlebury - LACs…virtually unknown here…Cornell is another name that has come up a lot in my experience.</p>
<p>So back to LACs - St. Olaf’s ranks FIRST in the nation among LACs (well ahead of Williams, Swarthmore, Amherst, etc.) in graduates earning doctorates in mathematics, and has the largest music program of any LAC as well. Is it worth $220k?</p>
<p>I always thought Reed (a school we are unaffiliated with but have heard good things about from close friends) had a very high percentage successful palcement in (top) grad schools.</p>
<p>Yep, we also know highly academic students doing very well at St. Olaf’s.</p>
<p>My point - stated on other threads - is that some schools just don’t devote the time and money to their publicity machines. This partly accounts for lesser name recognition among some audiences/in some areas of the country. Then there are the VERY costly marketing efforts undertaken by certain schools…heavily marketing to students to solicit apps, colorful “personalized” attractive materials and so on.</p>
<p>^ She said, “doctorates in mathematics,” not top graduate placement overall (which Williams, Amherst, Swarthmore, and Reed all do exceptionally well in). There is a higher proportion of math majors at St. Olaf than at any of WAS. Williams is really the only one comparable.</p>
<p>I’m not sure of the ranking’s criteria, but ranking first “in graduates earning doctorates in mathematics” says nothing of the quality of the programs they are entering, and I’d be more concerned that St. Olaf beats out Harvey Mudd in Math PhDs than WAS.</p>
<p>St. Olaf is a bit cheaper than the top LACs (they say $48K on their website).</p>
<p>If you had $220K sitting around, you’d know how much it’s worth. If you translate that to income, you’d have to earn whole lot more than that, in the low $300K range. To me, personally, no undergrad education is worth that full sticker price, be it Harvard or whatever school you name.</p>
<p>Our three sons graduated from well known schools and all are very well employed vs many kids we know from lower ranked schools who are either unemployed or underemployed. I think in this economy it helps to have a prestigious name brand school. The alumni connections are very helpful and the degress from these schools in these tough times are making it somewhat easier for kids to get the jobs. Of course it does all depend on the kid and their persistence in finding work.</p>
<p>Did you pay the full sticker price, momma-three? Sure, it’d help to graduate from a brand name school, but I thought the question is, would you pay the full sticker price for it. The majority of kids at selective privates pay way below the advertised costs, be it through need or merit based. And I don’t think that’s the OP’s oq.</p>
<p>“I’m not sure of the ranking’s criteria, but ranking first “in graduates earning doctorates in mathematics” says nothing of the quality of the programs they are entering, and I’d be more concerned that St. Olaf beats out Harvey Mudd in Math PhDs than WAS.”</p>
<p>St. Olaf beats Harvey Mudd. It says that graduate programs think highly of St. Olaf students, their preparation, and their ability to contribute to the field in the future. Perhaps you have another measure of quality?</p>
Or whatever it is.</p>
Lots of Coke dollars at Tech and Emory. Think Goizueta school of Business and all the Woodruff facilities (Health science center library, PE center, etc) at Emory, and the Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering at Tech</p>