Does prestige REALLY matter?

College Search & Selection
81

<p>
[quote]
I consistently get employees that know the material, can be productive right now, and most important, know how to work. I look for students that worked part time to get through school, again because they know how to work. Do you see a theme here??

[/quote]
Yes, you are only interested in squeezing every last drop of blood out of your employees. I am going to an Ivy prescisely not to have to be enslaved in the kind of sweatshop you run. Hey, maybe I will be your boss in five or six years. If so, be prepared to WORK till you drop.</p>

82

<p>lol This is amusing.</p>

83

<p>Do you get a lot of MIT nd Caltech engineers competing for those jobs?</p>

84

<p>
[quote]
Do you get a lot of MIT nd Caltech engineers competing for those jobs?

[/quote]
Yes, he gets his pick of the thousands who drop out of MIT and Caltech so that they can get a degree from the far superior "Letorneau" university.</p>

85

<p>The real world will be a very cruel shock to some of you. Businesses could care less about your IQ, they want to see the job get done. We reward those that produce, not those that pretend. Virtually all of my engineers enjoy working in my organization because they are rewarded for their individual contribution and promoted accordingly. If you want an unhappy organization, try playing favorites because of alma mater or any other factor other than real work.</p>

<p>By the way, if you read and believe your precious US News rankings you'll find Letourneau is very well respected, along with Rose Hulman and many other small, very good schools. It doesn't really matter however, because they produce real engineers.</p>

<p>Since you are obviously immune to real world experience, I'll leave this thread here.</p>

86

<p>Wow, the rotting stench of arrogance is nearly unbearable in here. </p>

<p>But I'll hold my nose just long enough to toss up something for you to consider. I won't dispute the fact that the average graduate of Harvard, MIT, or Caltech will most likely be more "successful" in their respective fields than that of a second or third tier school (if you define success as salary/position). But is this because of the shiny name on the degree and the superior education provided at these institutions? I'd like to argue, no. </p>

<p>There is, what I witness to be, a crowding phenomenon at the top schools. Everyone seeks validation of their intelligence and abilities - and what better validation is there at this point in our lives than an acceptance to the name-brand colleges? The more brilliant seem to seek this with the most fervor - be it parental pressure, social pressure, pride, whatever. There are thousands of universities in this country yet only a select number of "dream schools". Some times the idea of "fit" is even out of the question because either we have not spent enough time to understand what makes us tick or we simply have no idea what we may want in life. So the top students of the academic pool go after the same few schools.</p>

<p>What we undoubtedly get is cutthroat admissions competition at the "elite" schools, and only the best of the best are baptized into its majestic halls. Naturally, we would have a much higher concentration of the ambitious and super-talented at these schools than, say, at a state school. But the inherent intelligence and motivation of these "cream-of-the-crop" students that earned the fat envelope from Prestigious College X is the same necessary to "succeed" in one's field after graduation. One could argue that because they were successful in gaining admission to such a selective college, they are already on a higher level in terms of potential. Something that would support this claim: in a recent study, it was found that the students who were accepted into Ivy-caliber schools but decided not to go ended up earning the same average salaries as those students who did attend the respective ivy League institutions. </p>

<p>Though there is such as thing as "maximizing" one's potential, do keep that in mind when you are deciding the next four years of your life. :)</p>

87

<p>If we're honest bandit, we'll agree that the type of engineer you're talking about is an indeed well trained one who will do well but probably make 80-120K at his peak. We are not talking about the brilliant MIT/Caltech architect that will be the CTO of a start-up venture capitalists are hungry to fund. They are both engineers by training, but that's where the similarity ends.</p>

<p>Pebbles, this is not at all meant to be arrogant, it is simple truth that it's only fair to explain. I don't appreciate Mensa's attitude, but he is correct that M and C students are on the whole not seeking the same jobs as those graduating from Leturneau.</p>

88

<p>Ok, nothing wrong with Letouneau, which seems to have very nice, capable people. But seriously, if you really have something new to say to the world, do you want to work at a sweatshop like that?</p>

89

<p>Closer to the truth, well said Pebbles :)</p>

90

<p>thanks bandit_TX</p>

91

<p>sweatshop...*** are you talking about mensa160???</p>

92

<p>I love reading these rather smug claims such as "in the 'REAL WORLD' it doesn't matter where you went to school, all that matters is if you are doing a good job."</p>

<p>Well, a couple of points to add.</p>

<p>Of course job performance is the number one criteria in terms of career success, progression, opportunity, overall salary, etc. etc.</p>

<p>But let's ask a simple question here:</p>

<p>If employee A went to all of the "right" / "prestigious" schools (undergrad and graduate), why wouldn't the default assumption be that this person's likelihood of success (in whatever endeavor he/she is pursuing - in the professional world or otherwise) will be very high - particularly given his past record of success?</p>

<p>I think that would be a more than reasonable default assumption to make.</p>

<p>Now, will there be future Ivy graduates who will not amount to much? Of course. Will there be future graduates from so-called 2nd/3rd tier schools who will enjoy tremendous success? Of course.</p>

<p>But here is the thing. As an Ivy grad (under and graduate) I am kind of tired of "apologizing" for the acknowledgement that graduates of "prestigious" schools enjoy. Call me arrogant if you want, but I think it is justified. Fact is, I worked my tail off studying during prep school, undergrad and grad school. When others were enjoying their weekends or taking the path of least resistance, I was trying to challenge / better myself in any number of different ways (academic, EC, sports or otherwise).</p>

<p>There were of course costs / prices along the way, but net/net the benefits of my achievements vastly outweigh these considerations. </p>

<p>I have been extremely successful in my career and have just started a family (which is incidentally how I stumbled on this website - I am already close to putting away enough for my child's college AND graduate tuition - even factoring in extremely conservative rates on future return on investment. He is only 3 years old.)</p>

<p>The point? I had to work my A$$ off to get to the position I currently enjoy. My Ivy credentials did give me a certain boost, but it wasn't EVERYTHING. Those things didn't GIVE me my career. It's like anything in life - you get what you put into it - you have to earn it. </p>

<p>So doesn't this post contradict the importance of having an Ivy degree? Absolutely not. There is a reason employers spend a relatively large proportion of their recruiting time at the "prestigious" schools - these graduates are more likely to succeed than fail - they are more likely to have the combination of requisite intelligence and motivation than not have it.</p>

<p>Does that mean that students from other schools can't "make it"? Of course not. But that's not the point of this thread.</p>

<p>"Does prestige REALLY matter?"</p>

<p>I think it does. It never hurt me... and just like everything else I do in life - I do it 100% - at every step of my career, I've leveraged / maximized the vast and powerful network I have access to as a result of attending the "right" schools. It will certainly be a powerful resource that I can tap whenever I need in the future, and that is a comforting thought.</p>

93

<p>Ivy_Grad, I agree... but many students here are impressionable and have a distorted vision of reality at this stage in their lives. If we answer blunty, without laying out the scene, we will harm their self-image and further distort their view of life. Prestige does in fact matter. But leaving it at that, your average CC student will take it to mean that if they don't make it into an Ivy or into Stanford or MIT, they are done for. It is important to make it clear that any of the top 20-30 private research universities, any of the top 20-30 LACs and any of the top 10-15 State schools will provide students a "prestigious" degree.</p>

94

<p>Alexander, I respect your posts. But are you advocating lying here? I think 18 year olds need to understand the truth. There are enough opinions on any topic here to constitute balance. Should a kid really be made to think going to a top school doesn't matter to preserve self esteem? My fear is that when reality hits at 22, the fallout will be disasterous.</p>

<p>So we'll have a bunch of kids at Alleghany thinking they have an equal shot at Harvard business school? And what about the younger high school kids reading here who still have a choice to make re how hard to work? Does not telling the full truth ever make sense?</p>

95

<p>N. Gregory Mankiw, a MIT Econ professor, did a study comparing the salaries of people who were accepted to Ivy Leagues and State Schools (each student was accepted to both) and found that regardless of choice, success was about the same.</p>

96

<p>Addendum to BC's post--the accepted students had similar scores and grades etc.</p>

97

<p>What I think is prestige and brand names can get you to the door, but you have to get yourself through. </p>

<p><em>supporting BC's post</em> I don't remember if there's a same one, but there was one done with students who got accepted into Ivy League, did not go to Ivy Leagues, and had the same success rate as those who did go. </p>

<p>Haha, Mensa. Just because you go to an Ivy League doesn't mean you'll be a CEO in no time. With an attitude like that I wouldn't be surprised if you ended up in a REAL sweatshop.</p>

98

<p>people who go to Ivy typically end up wealthier just because of the type of person that they are</p>

<p>the point is, if you were only qualified to go to a junior college but then somehow by mistake attended an Ivy, you wouldnt necessarily become rich</p>

99

<p>Right barrons. Same scores, grades, etc... And they also compensated for race, sex, etc... so don't cry bias.</p>

100

<p>Zagat, I would never advocate lying. But I think we need to keep something clear. </p>

<p>1) There is a very poor balance on thos forum between the many people who pretend that the "best" is limited to a handful of schools, and those few of us who advocate a balanced and reasonable approach to the topic. Industry and academe feel that there are many universities that are excellent, and their opinons matter far more than our collective opinions. Even if it is the vocal minority who lurk in these corners who are right, it is industry and academe that hold the student's futures in their hands...not anyone they will meet in this boards.</p>

<p>2) I clearly stated that prestige matters. I have done so on numerous occasions. But to say that schools like UNC-Chapel Hill or Tufts or Macalester aren't prestigious would be a lie. My issue is not with saying that prestige means nothing...but rather, that prestige is limited to a dozen or so schools when in realsty there are dozens of prestigious schools out there.</p>

<p>3) Telling students that going to an Ivy League is the key to success and some sort of guarantee is just as bad as telling students prestige does not matter...and the fallout from such a letdown could be equally as disastrous.</p>