<p>According to an article in today's NY Times, it is clearly worth it for students from disadvantaged backgrounds, but not necessarily for others. According to a comparison of students who were admittted to elite schools and students with the same credentails (test scores and gpas) who could've gone to elite schools but for financial or other reasons chose more pedestrian schools, there is no difference, for example, in career earnings. In other words, it's the student not the school, unless you are a poor kid from a disadvantaged background. The better off student with top stats prior to college will succeed about the same whether they go U of Penn of Penn State; Princeton or Rutgers. It doesn't matter in the long run.</p>
<p>Sounds like the NYT is rehashing some fairly old findings.</p>
<p>You have to ask what “worth it” means. The mission of elite universities has nothing directly to do with average alumni earnings. They exist to create and transmit knowledge. That’s the product, not careers.</p>
<p>I agree. This is not news.</p>