FYI - the reason UCLA is not listed in CA Top Accounting Schools is because they don’t offer a true accounting major, it’s Business Economics. But I can assure you that PwC LA recruits heavily from UCLA. Carry on…
Lot of Big 4 talk on this thread. Let’s not forget the Big 4 does a lot more than accounting / audit. Their consulting practices (advisory and management consulting) are their major growth engines these days. They recruit for many different positions out of undergrad today. What you’ll find is they may recruit for audit out of a very large pool of schools, but they get much more narrow when recruiting for other positions.
CMU was noted as an exception in the article. Also, Stanford is literally in the Bay Area. MIT is not. MIT affords plenty of opportunities for the most elite Bay Area opps.
Not sure what point you’re making. I gave a data point about Silicon Valley jobs with a link to an article. I only referenced MIT, because of a previous poster mentioned MIT. My only point was that name brand matters, which is what the OP asked about. And MIT is a big-time name brand along side other well-known well-respected brand names.
But, when speaking of undergraduate or graduate population sizes of each university, what I don’t know is how many students there are in each CS, Math and/or Engineering program, eliminating the rest of the undergraduate population. How many CS, Math or Engineering students are there at each institution. I’d assume that schools like CMU, Cal Tech, MIT, GA Tech, etc. have a higher proportion of those 3 majors than a large public university like Cal, UT, etc.
@rickle1: I agree, but audit/assurance remains the backbone of the industry including the Big 4.
Advisory & consulting may be the largest growth areas, but they are not the largest practice areas.
Advisory & consulting practice areas were affected by the Enron scandal which led to the fall of Arthur Anderson. So they need to be rebuilt/built up as practice areas–especially now in this friendly M&A regulatory environment & due to rapidly changing technology.
Re: Post #58. The talent drain is often good for business. Some Big 4 locations hold receptions/events for former Big 4 employees who have transitioned to other non-accounting firm companies in an effort to build relationships & with potential clients or to maintain relationships with current or ongoing clients.
Also, not sure that I agree that the best talent leaves. Maybe ambition & politics play a significant part–especially when more money is offered.
RE: Post #60: Still unreasonable to maintain that PwC LA & San Francisco only interview at USC & UCLA–although I cannot comment on percentage of interns made up of USC & UCLA students, 90% seems somewhat extreme.
@ucbalumnus post #59.
It is a state by state decision as to what courses are required to sit for the CPA exam (4 parts)… Practically speaking, it would be smart to continue with graduate work in accounting, taxes & finance in order to better master CPA exam material & in order to build a better resume.
Many enroll in one year masters programs in tax or accounting, some pursue MBA with a relevant concentration & some complete a second undergraduate major. Community college courses often satisfy the additional 30 hour education requirement. Best to check with the state CPA board.
Some of the larger regional employers and agencies publish their career fair schedules or on-campus recruiting calendars. I know Lincoln Labs does this, since somebody brought up MIT (somebody always does). APL does this also. It might be useful to see where those types of companies visit and recruit. Even if the calendars are not always up to date, they tend to go to the same colleges year after year.
“If employers like your resume, then interviews start becoming especially important, rather than class rank. Interviews can be a full day event for new grads at tech companies… sometimes more than one day.”
Right, we have to distinguish between what’s important in getting an interview, and what’s important in getting the job. For the job, it’s clearly the interview, at least in high tech. It’s strenuous as you pointed out and they’re looking for fit as well as competence. Rarely will that decision come down to anything related to prestige of college. The decision on whom to interview could depend on prestige but more often it will be on which colleges have the reputation within the company of producing highly competent employees who work well with others.
^ Right. So if certain schools make it easier to get the interview, you can make the argument that they would be better places to attend (if that fits your career goals) and therefore it DOES matter where you go to school.
This is much ado about nothing
Yes. Super selective schools have excellent resources and achievement in job placement. So do a number of other schools.
And with millions of quality employees needed in these sectors the super selective schools can not possibly fill them all.
Does it matter where you go to school? Sure. For a lot reasons unrelated to where you end up working.
And I think it a bit funny that so many times the use of “pre professional” vibe as a pejorative compared to the pure experience of the “life of the mind” goes out the window when deciding where to go to shcool arguments are based on the job prospects out of college.
Some students want a broad education leading to some further specialty. Some want to be highly employable. Some beleive they need a degree of some sort to be competitive in life.
All of these groups can be satisfied at hundreds of fine universities and college across the USA.
“^ Right. So if certain schools make it easier to get the interview, you can make the argument that they would be better places to attend (if that fits your career goals) and therefore it DOES matter where you go to school.”
When people say it matters where you go to school, they immediately jump to “oh that means you have to attend elite or highly selective schools”. That’s not the case in general in silicon valley high tech, or maybe high tech in general. The better places to attend would be public flagships, local publics (SJSU, ASU), as I think data10 has mentioned, along with a few privates - Stanford, CMU, MIT, Santa Clara, USC, maybe Cornell.
Another area where what college you went to might matter is during request for proposals (RFPs). In my industry, we frequently do formal proposals where the proposed services team’s bio is listed for all key team members. Among other things, the colleges and degrees attained is listed and clients do review these very closely. The bottom line is that it all matters, it’s really just a matter of to what degree does it matter?
Lastly, you hear it all the time on CC that certain colleges have a great “alumi association and network” that can help with internships and jobs. For example, USC’s film school has an amazing alumni network in the film and entertainment industry with great connections. By definition, if one alumni is helping another alumni with a common connection to college X, then what school the alumni went to did matter. Right?
Let me put it this way, going to a more prestigious, highly ranked college is never going to hurt you and may actually help in certain situations. Seems pretty self-evident to me…
There are numerous exceptions. For example, suppose all your family is in Texas, and you’d like to stay with them and work in the general area after graduating. A good public in Texas is likely to have more Texas-based recruiting, a stronger alumni network, and related special opportunities at Texas based companies than HYPSM. If the student’s family is in the typical income level of HYPS students, then it is likely to be less expensive as well. Suppose the student is hoping to work at a top SV tech company after graduating. S and Berkeley are going to offer similar benefits not found at HY.
Suppose the student is an athlete who wants to go as far as he can in his sport. Other Div I colleges are likely to offer special benefits in the sport not found in HYP’s Ivy League conference. Suppose a professor/college/company/… offers a special opportunity that is only available to a few students in the class/major each year. It is likely to be easier to be among those few students at a less selective college than at HYPSM. The same often applies to LORs. Or maybe the kid is simply the type who functions best as big fish. Or maybe he’d like to save money for med/law school, where undergraduate school name/prestige had minimal impact in admissions. Or maybe HYP… does not offer the major/concentration he’d like to study and/or is weaker in that field than alternatives.
I could list countless more exceptions, but the point is the best college depends on the particular student and his related goals. Choosing the prestigious, highly ranked college will better help accomplish goals for some students, but that same choice will hurt other students compared to alternatives.
Taking that to an extreme you could form a argument (and correct one at that) that a good community college is your best best with your particular constraints.
The question is : Does it matter where you go to college? and the answer is yes.
Even in the all-Texas-all-the-time example, there will be a hierarchy of universities some with much better offerings for a particular major than others (Hook 'em Horns). So even in that example - where you go matters. If geography and cost are not factors, the majority of top students will gravitate to a handful of elite admissions schools. And, in their circumstance, they should.
Geography and cost are certainly relevant considerations when choosing a college, but those are far from the only 2 considerations when choosing a college. Tthere are also many other relevant factprs besides just those 2 + prestige/selectivity, some of which were mentioned in my earlier post. It’s a common perception on this forum that the vast majority of top students apply to a small fraction of highly selective admission HYPSM… type colleges, but this isn’t the case. Only a minority of “top students” apply to such colleges, and the reasons for not applying go far beyond just geography and cost.
It would be interesting if there were some stats on this. I’ve known/know many high stat students and they’ve all had at least one application (and usually many more) go to a high prestige school. Maybe many more are opting not to apply to such schools. If so, it’s a win-win. 
There’s really no way to know. Life’s outcome is an accumulation of lifetime decisions. You’ll never know what would have been had you gone to school X over Y. Who you met along the way, who would influence your decisions, etc. Simple example: met my wife in college. Had I (or she) attended another university, we likely would not have met and our lives would certainly be different.
So that as a backdrop, where would you be if you attended a different school and how much impact would that school have on your life? Again no way to know. But by definition, it matters where you go to school. That’s not good or bad. It just matters as in it will shape a certain path based on your experiences.
With that in mind, we take the approach that it makes sense to go to the best school you can afford. Very simple. You can define best anyway you like. Best academics, best fit, best Greek system, best location, Best Career Services, Best for your major, combination of all those things, etc. You have to make decisions based on something. With whatever algebra you use to arrive at best, why would you ever go to anything other than the best that you can afford?
That may be a CC and it may be Harvard or anything in between, but it most certainly matters.
“With that in mind, we take the approach that it makes sense to go to the best school you can afford. Very simple.”
But is it that simple? Let’s say you can “afford” to be full pay at a top private and still have enough money to retire. But you have a choice of a top public (say UCB/UCLA) at in state rates vs attending that top private. It may not be the absolute “best” but it’s certainly competitive and much cheaper. Or going further, they win a competitive full ride at a slightly less prestigious school.
What could your kid do differently if you gave them the extra $150K you’d save by taking the instate option? Or $250K+ from the full ride? Get on the housing ladder sooner? Take a risky job with a startup instead of a safe job with a big company? Go to law or business or medical school without taking on debt? There’s lots you can do to be more successful in the long run with that much money.
I think people confuse the question “does what college you attend matter” with “can you be successful in life not going to a certain college”.
I believe the answer is yes to both.