I’ve been very conflicted as of late. This fall I will begin applying to colleges. The thing is, I have a fair shot at getting into the California State universities that I am applying to. But I’ve also been considering community college. I’ve worked very hard this year and the last to make a good GPA, and I’ve always wanted the real college experience so to end up at a CC really feels wrong. But, if I ended up at a CC I would have a shot at a transfer to somewhere like UCLA, which would look better on a resume than any state college. Would an employer favor a UCLA graduate over say a Fullerton state graduate? I plan to go into marketing if that makes any difference.
It depends on the employer. Some employers are highly school-prestige-conscious, while others are not.
It also depends on the field. School matters much less for engineering than for something like law.
As a general statement, no. Except for certain fields (investment banking comes to mind) employers don’t care what college you attended as long as it’s accredited. And the vast majority of law schools only care about GPA and LSAT.
It is perfectly fine for you to contact the Career Center at each place on your list, and ask where people with your major find jobs, and which companies visit that campus specifically to recruit new employees.
No. And you don’t want to work for the ones that do. Besides, good employees would rather be measured by their efforts as opposed to where they came from.
Taking high tech or finance as an example it can matter a great deal. There are of course exceptions, but many of the top national firms interview exclusively at a small number of universities. For these firms UCLA is likely to be on the interview list whereas Fullerton will not. GPA matters for many of these firms so a degree from UCLA with a “low” GPA is unlikely to suffice for a first-round interview.
Just a little quibble - getting into law school is one thing. Actually getting a job as a lawyer is another. It’s the latter where your school matters. (Or so I’m told. I’m not a lawyer.)
http://employmentsummary.abaquestionnaire.org/
And I believe the OP was asking about undergrad schools.
Why wouldn’t you go to a CSU and then switch to UCLA? Then, that gives you the option of loving a school and staying there and getting your degree over going to a CC where you have to leave after 2 years.
People need to get over academic elitism. It is NOT hard to get into college. It is, however, hard to get into say an Ivy.
I’ve seen so many students grow up not caring a bit about what they learn and are so focused on going to the best college, to be with the best people, and to secure the best job. Yes, I get it we all want our kids to be successful. However, going to a name brand school is not Willy Wonka’s golden ticket to a lifetime of chocolate.
I’ve had my W’s firm turn down Stanford, Harvard, and UPenn grads because they felt students from schools you’d never even heard of or “lower prestige” schools like Wake Forest and Case Western Reserve get hired because they worked hard and were better for the job.
People may want to give you absolute answers here about which school is better, you may want to be told absolutes, but the world is not a black-and-white place. ucla doesn’t offer an undergrad marketing degree, several CSU campuses do. So any “advantage” the prestigious UC name gives you may be more than offset by the lack of actual training in what you want to do. Does this mean one school is better than the other? Depends on who is hiring and what they are looking for. Some companies may figure a bright kid can learn to do anything and hire a History major from a top university for a marketing position (although they winnow thru a bunch of kids at that school to find the ones they will hire), others may look for demonstrated skill in marketing, others may hire a mix of students (some with marketing background, some not).
One thing for sure is that you need to take ownership of getting your career rolling, nobody is going to do this for you. Just taking classes, whether at ucla or a cal-state, is not enough. Companies are going to want to see you do well in them, naturally, but they want to see you take part in clubs and activities and show leadership. A real key to standing out when you finish college is having internships. A kid that has a local internship the summer after sophomore year and uses that experience to land an internship the next summer at a top firm like Proctor & Gamble is going to be in demand no matter the name of the college on her diploma. You need to make this a goal from day one, looking in your clubs to see what older students are doing to land internships, attending career fairs and workshops and working with a career counselor, getting to know some profs.
All else equal, it is safer to go to the most prestigious school you get into. As has already been stated, some employers will not care where you went but others will…so why not choose the option that gives you better professional opportunities? There will be highly desirable recruiters who look for students at UCLA who do not recruit at a Cal State.
Sure they do (care about where you graduate from) Especially for your first job. But, your odds of going to a CC for 2 years then transferring into UCLA are pretty slim. Many students have that objective but, few actually get the classes done and earn the required GPA, etc to be selected for UCLA admission. About 3/4 of transfer applicants are rejected every year - many of them took more than 2 years at their CC. The same can be said of UCB and UCSD. Other UCs use the TAG program which changes your odds significantly, though many students still require more than 2 years at their CC.
If you want the 4 year college experience, head to one of the more residential CSUs. If you work at it, you’ll graduate in 4 years with a credible degree and promising job prospects. SDSU, Sonoma, CP SLO and Chico are all very residential, will give you the experience you are looking for and and a degree you can be proud of. If you take advantage of internships, etc, you’ll be an attractive candidate for most top employers.
As you mature in your career, where your degree is from (and what it was in) become far less relevant to hiring managers than what you accomplished for your last employer.
Graduation rates at community colleges are abysmal. Sure, you might end up at a UC; but, statistically you’re more likely not to finish at all. You also might end up transferring to a CSU anyway, in which case you’re right back where you started.
Go with the bird in the hand. CSU all the way.
The low graduation or transfer rates from CCs likely have a lot to do with the fact that many are there because they are academically unable to be admitted to a four year school. While some such may turn around and do well at CC and then transfer (and CCs exist in part to give such students another chance at low cost), the odds are not as good as for students with better academic qualifications. An academically well qualified student who could have been (or was) admitted to a four year school but chose CC for some non-academic reason (perhaps cost or family/work needs) likely has a much better chance of graduation or transfer than a typical CC student.
OP appears to be just finishing junior year in high school, so s/he can certainly apply to various four year schools while also considering starting at CC. There is no need to decide now.
A lot of people who take classes at California community colleges have no intention of pursuing a 2-year degree. They’ll occasionally take a class for interest or to fill in a gap in their education.
Contingent on the type of employer. It’s still the interview. Maybe an IBM prefers Ivies, Mit, CIT.
No question part time and ill-prepared students weigh on CC success metrics. Sadly though, that average sets the campus tone and expectations. Many kids are counseled into taking 3 or 4 classes their first semester, to get used to the college workload - not a recipe for a rapid transfer.
It is also true that many CCs are very crowded and even bright, motivated students have a tough time getting all their requirements knocked out in 2 years. This is not true for all Cal CCs but, many.
Also, each school sets their own pre-reqs for transfer, so a chemical engineering applicant needs different classes for UCLA, UCD and CP SLO and CSULB. For competitive programs they are hard requirements, meaning you must take them - no matter what your GPA and unit total are. So, if you want to be a competitive applicant for all of those schools, you need to do some redundant course work.
My son just wrapped up his 2nd year of college (Chico State) Several of his close friends stayed in town and attend our local CC. Of the 8 or so I see from time to time, none are prepared to transfer to a 4 year school. Just one applied to transfer but was rejected, despite a solid GPA because he hadn’t completed the required classes. Meanwhile, my son is headed into Jr year with well over 60 units, excited about taking on upper division courses - having lived in a dorm, pledged a frat and had the ‘college experience’ the OP seems to want. His friends that also went straight to 4 year schools report similar progress.
A bright, motivated, well counseled student who picks a target school early and doesn’t change majors can make the jump in 2 years. Thousands do it each year. Doing it in 2 years isn’t the norm and isn’t easy. You will find yourself swimming against the current.
Choose the path that’s best for you - just be sure you understand the implications of your choice.
This whole notion is goofy. Consider that each year there are 20,000-30,000 graduates of Ivy league and other top colleges and about 3 million other graduates. It’s pretty clear that even if they somehow got all the absolute best jobs, there are still quite a few to go around.