@Much2learn : Wouldn’t 1. require the parent or mentor to suggest that the student challenge themselves at the risk of imperfect grades.
Imperfect grades are a risk, but when you stop taking advanced math, a lot of highly employable majors begin to close rapidly: science, engineering, economics etc. I don’t see that as a big risk because good schools are looking for rigor anyway, and they won’t be fooled by more A’s in easier classes. They will notice the easier math choice.
It’s been a long time since I’ve looked at this thread and haven’t read many of the comments. As I mentioned in my earlier post, I can link to studies that both show attending an elite college has a significant influence on income and studies that show attending an elite college has little influence on income. The results vary depending on how the research is implemented. Without knowing the details of this one, we can only guess.
My guess is a key driving force in the results is effects of selection bias, both by college selection and by student selection. For example, the article mentions that they filter for test scores, major, and parent’s income. Elite colleges generally have holistic admissions and consider numerous other factors. The additional factors can include things like favoring applicants who overcame extremely difficult life situation, gained state or national level recognition in their passion, started a successful business, have special connections, have stellar LORs/essays, etc. I’d expect as a whole these additional factors are correlated with varies measures of positive outcomes beyond college.
There is also a selection bias in the case of students. The vast majority of students do not apply to elite colleges, regardless of test scores, expected major, or parent’s income. The ones who apply are a small subset with different characteristics than the general population. I’d expect students who choose to apply to elite college are also more likely to choose to pursue a higher salary career, regardless of college attended. As I recall, one of the other studies found that applying to an elite college had as large an effect on salary as attending one.
While there are exceptions, employers as a whole also do not place a great emphasis on college reputation. In some surveys of hiring managers, college reputation is reported as the least influential factor of all in employment decisions for new grads. Experience related factors (relevant past jobs, internships, …) is usually ranked as most influential, and college major is also considered especially influential.
Regarding the STEM discussion, it is important to note that STEM includes a wide variety of fields that fit together as a convenient acronym, but have completely different job prospects with a bachelor’s. For example, after nursing, the most common STEM major is biology. In surveys, students who get a BS in biology and pursue no additional degrees typically are on the lower end of salaries, often lower than a wide variety of humanities majors. The Georgetown one found an average starting salary of $31k in biology which was less than education, language majors, ethnic studies, history, sociology, etc. Employment/unemployment rates also vary greatly by major, rather that following the acronym. It’s not uncommon for humanities majors to have lower unemployment rates for new grads than the higher salary fields within STEM because they are more likely to accept a wide variety of positions that have less relevant to their degree.
While it is important to consider job and career prospects when choosing a major, it’s also important to try to find a career that you enjoy and find rewarding, regardless of whether it fits in to the STEM acronym. There are huge number of good options that most kids and parents haven’t even heard of, at the time they are choosing colleges.
I see STEM as a proxy for vigour in OP’s article. Employers reward the ability to handle vigour, especially if that vigour can be quantified.
STEM are not all the same. Ditto with humanities and social sciences. I would never equal botany with high energy physics, history with analytical philosophy, or sociology and econometric. Perhaps this is where further studies are needed?
We can only play the hand we are given. I believe we should play it to the best of our ability though. Can not do math? Then get into an elite and avoid that stuff. That is what I got out of those studies. (My kids did exactly what @bernie12 said- got themselves accepted into an elite business program because they do not have the math aptitude to compete against the physics majors, but too strong for the humanities folks).
I share @TheGFG’s concern. The income gap between the rich and the rest is getting larger all the time. We have to prepare our children for competition, from around the globe, that we have personally never experienced.
@Data10 : After also being a biology major, I can see why it does not suffice alone (just a bachelors). Most schools do not have modern biology majors. The majors are typically devoid/do not require the same level of engagement with the other STEM subjects, especially math and CS. In addition, many departments do not even require upper-level labs. The future of the life sciences involves the integration of other disciplines and skill-sets and many undergraduate curricula have not evolved to reflect this. And among those who offer some elements that allow that sort of training (my alma mater has kind of gone the route of offering a de factor computational/quantitative biology/neuroscience type of degree and training), few pursue it. I think biology depts still harbor too many “single-trackers”, as in those who are only aiming for health careers, so are not willing to venture off standard tracks (except for adding like a non-STEM major or concentration which appears less risky GPA wise). We have a really good neuroscience department and they honestly appear to be a bit more diverse in terms of those pursuing that major and even many of the pre-healths have a more open mind. In general, they seem to have more affinity for math and physics/ Emory’s NBB core courses and electives are not really “soft” like the major or concentration at some schools in the sense that many courses and a couple of cores teach or assume students understand the physics behind neurophysiology. In general, most electives, even those hosted outside of the department, are more experimentally focused. Compare this to many biology courses at any school which still do not focus on problem solving skills and experimental contexts of the science, but still focus only on intake and output of specific content knowledge. With the right course selection, you can possibly get through a biology degree with developing very few cognitive skills that were not already at least decent in HS. If I didn’t do many more chemistry or quantitatively oriented biology courses, I could have very well been this way.
“The point is that with credential creep and the competition from a global economy making it harder to achieve at the level the very same individuals could have in the past, many people legitimately view an elite school education as a way to win in this environment. It seems they’re not totally wrong, based on the OP.”
This is at the heart of what is driving many parents and students. Most kids used to have a better life than their parents, but that is changing and tipping the other way as the world economy gets more competitive and incomes become more uneven, and wealth is going increasingly to the people at the very top. In the past, elite schools may have been about prestige for the wealthy, but for many families it is now about fighting to keep what your family has.
The question in the OP’s title is a no brainer. Yes, Elite/Ivy school grads do earn more. Ivy league graduates salaries are a lot higher than average college graduates, and are significantly higher than any other conference/league, and it is not close (~$7,000 higher average salary than second highest conference). Still, it is not all about league names and prestige. The next highest are the little known Patriot League in second (a name I have never heard dropped for prestige), the University Athletic Association in third, the Big East in fourth, the ACC in fifth, and the NESCAC in sixth, the PAC twelve in seventh, the Big Ten in eighth. It is also accurate to point out that while the Ivy League is the highest league, you can construct a group of 8 schools that out perform the 8 Ivies, so it is not as if the Ivy League schools outperform all others.
What many parents do not understand is that although a prestigious school is helpful, a students choice of major matters more. If salary matters to you, consider choosing a major that you like and is also in demand and well compensated. It is also important to understand that in some professions there is little premium for a top school, in others it is significant. For example, for engineering majors, the salary premium for attending a top school may not be much for the average student; however, for top student in certain high demand majors, can be significant.
Also, all of what I have said so far is on average. There are many many individuals at directional universities who will earn a lot more money than most students at Ivy League Schools.There are even many college dropouts who will out earn most Ivy League students. Individual capabilities, social skills, ideas, capturing opportunities, and many other factors not considered here have a huge impact.
All of these details mean that while selecting an in-demand major at an elite/Ivy League school are beneficial on average, sweeping generalizations are often incorrect, and are definitely not guaranteed. These factors shift the odds a bit in your favor, but a student’s ability, effort, social skills, and decisions they make are still critical.
And there are so many “hands” combinations that each kid is different and unique. Unfortunately many are not elite schools materials though we parents think our own kids are when they are young. I don’t remember anyone I know who doesn’t think their little one(s) are smart. We all are entitled to that feeling and other feelings. I suspect only cool-headed parents recognize if their kids are STEM types, of salesperson ability, or else and can help them succeed.
"These factors shift the odds a bit in your favor, but a student’s ability, effort, social skills, and decisions they make are still critical. "
Much2Learn- bravo and thanks for this.
I have hired new grads of relatively modest analytical skills (not great at math or any sort of quantitative problem-solving) who have out-performed their 'smarter" colleagues through a combination of hard-work, positive attitude, deep ability to connect with other people, and superb influencing skills. I have also hired brilliant kids who have flushed out in less than a year in their first post-grad work experience- unable to ask for help (which is critical in any job- even as a waitress I learned to ask the guy at the grill to slow things down when I was swamped), unable to connect with people to create an esprit de corps during crunch times, unable to “read the tea leaves”. Unless a kid is being hired to sit in a dark room and think deep thoughts, most jobs involve the ability to work in a group. When I ask “Tell me about a group project you worked on” and a college senior spends ten minutes telling me that everyone else on the team was stupid and that he/she ended up doing all the work themselves- folks, that’s a red flag.
Decision-making- can’t stress that enough. Only your kid can decide to spend Xmas break of junior year partying with their sorority sisters vs. launching a job search for that summer. Only your kid gets to decide whether to take the tough Rhetoric/Writing seminar which will really hone his skills vs. the easy A “writing for business majors”.
“I see STEM as a proxy for vigour in OP’s article. Employers reward the ability to handle vigour, especially if that vigour can be quantified.”
No. That’s the proxy YOU use in your continued lack of acknowledgment of other types of jobs. Remind me again why the VP of corporate relations or account planning or media buying who is looking to fill her department would “value” the chemistry major over the English/journalism/communications major? Because it’s more “vigorous”? Get real.
The continued attempts to “hierarchize” majors are just pathetic. And self-serving. It’s like some of you really need the pats on your backs that yea, you’ve chosen the very hardest major, you are indeed the smartest most worthy person on the block.
Different people have different skills. We need them all. While some of you are pontificating how much harder molecular physics is than psychology, some therapist somewhere is making a real difference transforming people’s lives because he/she has empathic skills you can only dream of while you are sitting there all proud of how Very Special you are that you are good in physics.
Peopke of character value any job that is an honest job with dignity. People of little character feel compelled to put them in ranks and declare their own strengths evidence of superiority. It’s like Napoleon crowning himself emperor.
Not much hiring activity takes place during Xmas break so my Ivy junior will probably be partying with her sorority sisters. However she started her internship search for the next summer simultaneously with starting her sophomore summer internship 3 months ago.
One of the reasons these kids are successful is that they work hard on creating opportunities for themselves.
I counsel MANY college kids who are unaware that companies come to campus in October and November of junior year for summer recruiting- some don’t even have resumes by New Years even though they’ve already missed a bunch of deadlines. My recruiting team is often doing informational interviews all week between Xmas and New Year’s for kids who have specialized interests (speak a few strategic languages, want to know what opportunities exist overseas) or who might be graduating a semester early and want to learn about off-cycle start dates and training programs.
It’s great CCD’s kid is on top of her deadlines but many college kids are clueless as to how the calendars work. As Much2Learn pointed out- decision making.
@blossom -
Hey, I took that “writing for business majors course”, and found it to be very helpful class that should be mandatory for a wide variety of majors.
This has been debated Ad Hominen, and among some people “Elite College”=$$$$ is the assumption they make, and they frame their whole kid’s college experience on that basis it seems. Elite colleges are considered elite because they are extremely competitive, they are admitting kids who come in with high academic achievement, with big test scores, EC’s, and so forth (and also, a lot of them tend to come from well off backgrounds that enhances their ability to play the admissions game). So right then and there you have a self selected group, who are already achievers, who come from backgrounds where the family likely is achievers, and so forth…
Then, too, going to an elite school has a little thing called networking, and it is huge. Because they are elite schools, a lot of companies assume the kids are better and brigher, so they for example look there for interns, which is a path to a good career track. More importantly, elite school graduates tend to look at kids from their own school more favorably (which is human nature, people tend to look more favorably on things they know), and that leads to jobs and internships.
When you get to the next levels down on competitive admissions (ie from crazy, down to merely highly competitive), you have a wider range of students, in terms of background and ability, and if you compare graduates of “anywhere U” to an elite school (let’s say Rice, not to use the well beaten Ivy league), it is going to look better as a whole at Rice when it comes to jobs and salaries because the typical student at Rice is going to be better prepared to get a high level job for the reasons above, some of which have to do with the school, others with who the kid is.
The other thing is sheer numbers, the elite colleges (let’s take the top 100 schools as a hypothetical) are a small proportion of the total college population. Let’s say those 100 schools admit 2000 students a year, so they graduate 200k kids a year, whereas hypothetically let’s say the rest of the college graduate population of the next tier down (I am leaving out a lot of schools with this, the online schools, the community colleges, etc), and let’s say there are 500 schools in the next tier graduating 1m kids, the wage dilation factor is going to be a lot greater for the second tier schools, sheer numbers guarantee a wider distribution of incomes, and the range of students in the second tier being greater means outcomes are going to vary more.
The real test? Compare the top students at elite colleges with kids with similar stats who went ‘downstream’, maybe because they got a full scholarship, and then come back and chart salaries over a career, and see what happens, rather than initial salaries. For one thing, the ‘elite school effect’ (also called the “ivy effect”) diminishes past the first job, in most professions outside some investment banking firms and the like, going to an elite school diminishes over time, because the ability on the job becomes more and more important, and top performers are top performers, pure and simple. I would expect any perceived wage gap to diminish over time, some elite college graduates will become ordinary workers, more than a few of those from the ‘other’ schools will blossom and become major league players, and it is only over a spread of time that this can be shown. Even if with the ‘lesser’ schools you take the kids who weren’t good enough to get into an elite program, over time you will find many of them blossom.
Getting into an elite school gains you advantages, there is no doubt, but as a mystical source of a moola-laden future that only goes so far. I would argue the advantage comes much earlier in life, that a kid who gets to understand life early, who developes the kind of things that lead to success (willingness to take risks, which might hurt elite college graduates since many of them spent their lives growing up avoiding risk), work ethic, curiousity, the willingness to experiment and think about things differently, the ability to get along with others, and also having an idea of what they are passionate about. Take a look at the swath of successful people in this country, those who have founded new companies, those who have achieved levels in other areas, and while you will find a lot of graduates of elite schools, you also will find those whose college careers you might consider “mundane” and the like. There is an old joke that the elite college grad often reports to the guy who went to state U and majored in partying at his frat, and while that can be debated as a rule of thumb (it isn’t), it has truth in it that success is a lot of things, and the guy who went to state U and partied might well be a genius who creates something new, and his genius might be outside the classroom, in leadership, networking, and with a passion for example.
My take is
Rigor=good
Mortis=bad
As an aside, wouldn’t physical education and related majors be the most vigorous ones out there? Not a lot of vigor required for CS, for instance (I mean, you get to exercise your fingers, but I’m not sure what else . . . .)
"Not a lot of vigor required for CS, for instance (I mean, you get to exercise your fingers, but I’m not sure what else . . . .) " - A bit of brain exercise would be useful, or maybe NOT, just type whatever…
I still think it depends on the location. Rarely parents around here where I live, talk about admission to Elite college, they talk about the money, the Merit scholarships, everybody is after them. It appears also, that most kids who acquired the marketable skills at college, do just fine. However , it is not the case at either of the coasts. Nope, they absolutely want those Elite places that do not offer Merit money. So, be it, who really cares, who goes where? Whatever makes them happy…some will pay for it and others will not…the only reservation that I have after looking back is that some might realize that they dug the hole and they do not understand the reason for it any longer. We all make mistakes and we all pay for them, nothing new here.
It makes sense elite kids are going to make more money overall. they are the ones who are offered the good jobs on Wallstreet. Tend to become doctors, or go to elite law schools and get jobs with elite firms.
To me the real question will they end up more fully satisfied with their lives than the non elite? Lets say you are Joe ordinary and get a job that turns into a decent career. A decent steady, middle to upper middle class income. A decent home in a decent neighborhood with decent schools.
Compare that to the life of a medical doctor or an elite firm lawyer . . . both of whom live high stress, long hour day lives. What do they have other than high stress lives the ordinary man does not have?. They both own houses . . .the ordinary man lives in a smaller house with less possessions . . i.e. a more simple life. They both go on cruises . . . the elite man on his own yacht. The ordinary man may take his small sailboat out for a spin on the local lake, or may take an overseas cruise. They both have what they need, only the elite man tends to have far more of what he doesn’t need.
Is one life really more superior to the other? Again, I think it is far more dependent on who you marry, and whether you are part of a loving family than anything else. Was Donald Trump really happy with any of his gold-digging wives? Heck, he could barely hug his current wife at his convention.
I think that’s a GREAT question. IMO, one of the things that we lose sight of when we place undue emphasis on ROI of a college education is the importance of college when it comes to living life as well as making a living. My hope for my daughter is that her college education will be more than a preprofessional training course. I’m delighted that she’s as excited about her philosophy and religion classes as she is about those in physics and math.
@guyfromflorida Way too many over-generalizations in your post.
People are people, for goodness sake. Some with high stress jobs will thrive on it. Others will crash and burn. Money means different things to people.
For me, I happily paid for 2 elite educations because I believe an education is an investment in self. I couldn’t care less if my kids never made one penny more than what they would have made at our state school. It’s so not the point.
^ To an extent, being able to choose between these two paths is a luxury, however.