<p>I bet at some point the essays do too. Except for a handful of true literary gems each year that relate compelling life stories (similar in frequency to truly astonishing world-class ECs), I’m thinking the large ocean of merely excellent essays that top schools regularly get kind of all merge into a blur. </p>
<p>Once all the true geniuses have all been put in the Accept pile and they start filling out the rest of their incoming class from the crowd of the merely outstanding, I don’t know how HYPSM, et al make their choices.</p>
<p>Certainly, it is nice to have the choice of a high-paying job. It must be good for alumni giving. I would agree with YaleGradandDad, their success in finding jobs at these firms speaks well of the liberal arts model. Still, if a college is doing a great job of motivating & preparing students in the liberal arts and sciences, one might expect more of them to choose careers in academia, publishing, government, urban planning, secondary education, or science research.</p>
<p>I’m generally a pro-Ivy League guy, but I do wish that it weren’t the case that so many Ivy grads chase Wall Street careers. Every year Dartmouth has a graduating senior or two finish with a perfect 4.0 GPA and get named as valedictorian(s). This year was a little unusual because four graduates all achieved that honor. All four of them are liberal arts (Economics) majors, and sadly all four of them have accepted Wall Street finance jobs.</p>
<p>Yes, and if wishes were horses, beggars would ride.</p>
<p>But a very large proportion of the students at any highly selective college - Ivy or otherwise - grew up as children of privilege, with upper-middle-class or better parents, and accustomed to all the very best of everything. Is it really so surprising that so many of them opt for the high-paying careers?</p>
<p>^^No, it’s not surprising, but it is disappointing. One would hope that there would be more idealism and innovative thinking coming out of our best universities. Maybe that’s why some of the more entrepreneurial types (Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, etc.) drop out.</p>
<p>And it’s ironic that so many people who put the Ivies and other top-tier universities on a pedestal are being taught by professors who received their undergraduate degrees at LACs or “lesser” public or private universities. I guess I’d rather have my child go elsewhere for his undergrad and then go on to get a PhD and teach history than major in history at an Ivy and wind up a hedge fund manager.</p>
<p>No, lack of idealism and innovative thinking at Harvard is not why they dropped out. A better and simpler explanation is that, in both cases, with their start-up businesses getting underway the opportunity costs of spending their time in class instead of concentrating on establishing and growing their businesses were way too high. In other words they chose to strike while the iron was hot.</p>
<p>Bill himself put it this way:</p>
<p>"I loved college. It was so exciting to have conversations with lots of really smart people my age and to learn from great professors. But in December of 1974, when my friend Paul Allen showed me the issue of Popular Electronics that had the Altair 8800 on the cover, we knew it was the beginning of a major change. The Altair was the first minicomputer kit that came with Intel’s 8080 microprocessor chip.</p>
<p>For a while, Paul and I had been talking about how that chip would make computers affordable for the average person someday. We had the idea that this would create huge opportunities to write really interesting software that lots of people would buy. Once the Altair 8800 came out, we wanted to be among first to start a business to write software for this new generation of computers. We were afraid if we waited, someone else would beat us to it."</p>
<p>At the end of it, you’re still going to be making the same money as everyone else. Ivy League schools generally don’t have any better programs, it’s just the name. The prestige is more of a personal status thing.</p>
<p>According to data on payscale.com, the average mid-career earnings for graduates of all reported colleges is $73K. The average mid-career earnings for graduates of the 8 Ivy League colleges is $110K.</p>
<p>Starting salaries? The average for graduates of all reported colleges is $42K. The average for graduates of the 8 Ivy League colleges is $53K. </p>
<p>So, the Ivy graduates earn 126% of the average at the start and 151% of the average by mid-career. The average Harvard graduate earns about $36K/year more by mid-career than the average UMass-Amherst graduate. Compare that to the cost difference (about $30K/year more for a year at Harvard at full rates).</p>
<p>Because the question is not, “Graduates of what college, on average, earn the most?” It is, “For a ** given student **, will going to an über-selective college enhance lifetime earnings?” And the answer, based on multiple juried research studies, is, “It depends, but for most career paths, probably not, and certainly not nearly as much as the conventional wisdom claims.” (Referenced studies cited in Pascarella and Terenzini, 468-470)</p>
<p>Can you refute it? With evidence? Yes or no?</p>
<p>Actually, the myth that these colleges make huge differences in earnings is more like the Bible. Believed fervently by a lot of people, with no scientific evidence to support it.</p>
<p>I’d love to - can you refer me to one that has equivalent hard data about the educational or career effects of colleges, by name or by category? </p>
<p>And actually I have - “Academically Adrift,” reporting on a post-Pascarella and Terenzini study. Guess what? The findings and the conclusions confirm the earlier studies. For those convincable by scholarly, juried, replicated research, it’s pretty clear that going to a higher prestige college gains you nothing but prestige. For those not, there’s always the Bible - aka USNWR’s “America’s Best Colleges.” Your choice.</p>
<p>I think this is a no-win discussion. As I (and others) have stated previously, people who want to believe the Ivies offer some tangible advantage are generally those who have made the investment of time and money to make themselves or their kids “Ivy-ready.” I don’t think citing and reciting either the P&T study OR the USNWR rankings is going to change many minds here. And the salary thing is self-fulfilling–of course universities that churn out a disproportionate number of graduates who take lucrative jobs in finance will have higher starting or lifetime salaries, just as MBA grads tend to make more money than PhDs in anthropology.</p>
<p>This again. annasdad, you tell us so often that where our children go to college is unimportant in terms of future outcomes that I wonder why Roger Dooley doesn’t just sticky the P & T study at the top of every forum and tell us all to go home. Perhaps because many of us still want to consider notions such as fit, graduation rates, merit scholarships, academic peers, departmental strengths, etc., for our own individual children. Perhaps even prestige is a legitimate concern for some. People are hierarchical creatures and I doubt the P & T study will do much to negate that. </p>
<p>Those few adult posters who consider USNews “the Bible” are uninformed and probably new to the process. Most of us here want to consider the information gathered by US News and other sources (including personal anecdotes from CC parents, and possibly the P & T study, as it seems inescapable in many threads) in helping our kids find the colleges they’ll be happy, maybe even thrilled, to attend. Where they go to college may not matter to P & T, but it matters to us.</p>
<p>Sally, it’s not “a P&T study.” It’s a compilation of multiple, scholarly, replicated studies reported (mostly) in juried journals.
But your main point is well taken. People invested in the mythology that prestige and selectivity matter are unlikely to be convinced, no matter how compelling the evidence. Myths are powerful things.</p>
<p>What I have said - backed up with solid evidence - is that “after taking account of the characteristics of the students enrolled, the differences along which American colleges are typically categorized, ranked and studied, such as type of control, size, and selectivity are simply not linked with important changes in student learning, change, or development.” (P&T 641) </p>
<p>There are differences between colleges that have been shown to make a difference, and I’ve previously listed them. Unfortunately, which colleges excel in these characteristics is not readily available information. </p>
<p>See the difference? </p>
<p>Straw man up - straw man down. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And there’s nothing wrong with that. As PizzaGirl said, prestigious colleges are luxury goods, and for those with the disposable income to spend on. luxury goods, why not? Just don’t delude yourself (or others) that you’re buying anything except prestige. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Sorry, but every time someone talks about “tiers” or “top 20”, etc., they’re referring to the Gospel According to Morse. Where else do you think those categories come from? They didn’t exist pre-USNWR.</p>