<p>
</p>
<p>Well, I guess this applies to all but HYPSMC. I know someone from Notre Dame who know works as a bank clerk. A good friend of mine who graduated from Dartmouth couldn’t get a job that he really wanted. He has good grades, according to him. He didn’t get into any med school in the US either. He’s been out of jobs for more than 2 years before he finally got into a med school in a 3rd world country.</p>
<p>Which is why I don’t think that the notion that Berkeley may have a terrible career office is truly the answer. As I said, I don’t think that Berkeley’s career office is significantly worse than that of most large state schools, nor is it necessarily worse than that of many highly regarded private schools. </p>
<p>The far more likely reason is the point I’ve been making throughout this thread: most students - particularly in the liberal arts majors that comprise the vast majority of college students, but including even some engineering and other preprofessional majors - will not take jobs that tightly correspond to their major. Who really cares if you graduated from a top-ranked English program if you’re just going to end up (literally) pulling lumber or managing an Abercrombie & Fitch? I know a former engineer who decided to switch to becoming a real estate agent during the housing boom and made far more money than he would have made if he had stayed as an engineer…and he’s not giving any of that money back even though the real estate markets have collapsed. Who cares if you graduated from a top-ranked engineering program if you’re just going to be slinging real estate? </p>
<p>That is why I argue that the university package proper - including the prestige of the general brand name, along with networking and other career opportunities - are actually more important than the strength of any individual program. For example, much of the success of the aforementioned engineer-turned-real-estate-agent was from sales to fellow alumni, by which his school connections gave him an opening. </p>
<p>Let’s face it: 5-10 years after you graduate, nobody is really going to care exactly which classes you took as an undergraduate. Heck, you yourself may not remember even the names of all of the classes you took, forget about what specifically you learned in those classes. They’re also not going to care about how strong your overall major was. But the general university brand name and alumni network will continue to maintain value.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Agreed. </p>
<p>… but then again, I believe that, in general, Berkeley grads perform better relative to most elite schools, whether public or private. I believe that, in general, Berkeley grads perform better than some of the those lower-ranked Ivies and other elite privates. Therefore, if we see some Berkeley grads not performing well career-wise, we would also be seeing some Brown grads or Columbia grads or Duke grads, etc, not performing just as well, career-wise.</p>
<p>@katliamom – LOL! My late mom was the embodiment of Eastern provincialism – more specifically, Greater Boston provincialism. When my husband and I moved to Natchitoches, Louisiana, in the early '80s, my mom was convinced that we were lost in a cultural wasteland. “But do you get Channel 2?” she asked anxiously (referring to the Boston TV channel that’s home to WGBH). I replied that we did have a 2 on our TV dial. (I didn’t mention that it was the channel for the 700 Club, LOL.) “Oh good,” she said, relieved, “you get Channel 2.” (We did have a public-TV channel in Louisiana, of course. It just didn’t happen to be WGBH, and it wasn’t on Channel 2.)</p>
<p>“Liberal arts colleges are the primary source for future law school and medical school students, as well as graduate school in the respective fields.”</p>
<p>Thank you, @Monydad. That was my impression, too. My older son is looking at majoring in history at an LAC, precisely with a view toward going to law school afterward. </p>
<p>“Many of the highest-capability students who pursue liberal arts educations do so with a plan that presupposes more advanced subsequent training and education down the road.”</p>
<p>Yes, that’s how our son is approaching it. </p>
<p>Recently I asked him if he would consider going into teaching, since NC has a program that covers full cost of attendance at any UNC-system school if you agree to teach in the NC public schools for four years after graduation. </p>
<p>He responded disdainfully that he had no interest in a low-paying profession like teaching. He wanted law school,period.</p>
<p>LOL, I guess I know now where GenY’s priorities lie.</p>
<p>@pwoods, very thoughtful and perceptive post. (I am late to this thread…I am referring to the post about Ivy admissions vis-a-vis economically disadvantaged kids.)</p>
<p>“For whatever push it may give you at the start of your career, where you went to school stops mattering once you are out there and making your way…”</p>
<p>As a 30-plus-year veteran of the workforce, I have certainly found this to be true. At a certain point, one’s employer doesn’t even <em>know</em> where one went to school. (Not unless he or she constantly re-reviews his/her employees’ resumes, which I can safely guarantee does not happen.)</p>
<p>Most employers care about how well one does one’s job. Period.</p>
<p>My personal experience is in disagreement with the “whatever school doesn’t matter once you’re out” theory. As HYP grad here in a major midwest city for past 25 years, I’ve been frequently introduced by my bosses as “and here’s our HYP grad, very smart…” It hasn’t significantly “helped” me careerwise (I’m not in law or finance) but it has opened doors, established credibility, and early in my career, caused some coworkers’ reactive competitive anxiety. No one cares about my BS w/highest honors from reputable midwest university. But everyone seems to think I’m “smart” because of that HYP degree.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The problem is that there are many jobs where it is extremely difficult to tell who is actually doing a good job and who isn’t, and many employers who don’t seem particularly interested in finding out. Dilbert may be a caricature, but it is based on real-life observations by Scott Adams on his baroque work experience in banking and a telecom firm, where plenty of incompetent and unproductive workers not only never lost their job, but many were even promoted over workers who were actually productive. </p>
<p>Let’s face it - at many (probably most) firms, the most rewards are doled out not to the most productive workers, but rather to the best office politicians. Office politics is often times affected by university affiliation and associated networking. For example, the reason why Steve Ballmer was hired as the President and later CEO of Microsoft is because he was Bill Gates’s old poker-playing buddy at Currier House. Other people didn’t even get the chance to compete for that job. </p>
<p>There are also jobs where the university brand is inherent to how well you’re doing the job, as the brand becomes a marketing tool with which to access clients. For example, here’s an ophthalmologist who is not-so-subtly pushing his Harvard medical degree on his website homepage. In fact, his homepage doesn’t even mention where he completed his residency and fellowship - you have to go to more specific pages to find that information - but does mention where he went to medical school. </p>
<p>[San</a> Francisco LASIK Surgery, San Jose LASIK Surgeon: Custom Wavefront](<a href=“http://www.scotthyver.com/]San”>http://www.scotthyver.com/)</p>
<p>Here’s a malpractice lawyer (read: ambulance chaser) who also holds a medical degree, and doesn’t neglect to mention that his law degree is from Harvard. According to his website, if you hire him, “Your case will be reviewed by a Harvard trained attorney who is also a Board Certified Physician. Guaranteed”, but conveniently not the alternate message: “Your case will be reviewed by an attorney who is also a UCSD-trained Physician.” Let’s face it, the UCSD brand is not exactly as marketable as the Harvard brand. </p>
<p>[Clearwater</a> Medical Malpractice Attorney | Lawyers for Medical Negligence St. Petersburg](<a href=“http://www.timedlaw.com/]Clearwater”>http://www.timedlaw.com/)</p>
<p>Now, granted, one may argue that only stupid people would fall for such marketing tricks as relying on the Harvard brand to determine where you should have eye surgery or hire as a malpractice attorney. True. On the other hand, let’s face it, there are plenty of stupid people out there. And their money is just as green as anybody else’s. Plenty of products are successful not because of top quality but because of clever marketing.</p>
<p>sakky–you make good points, but in my industry (apparel / fashion advertising), believe me, underperformers stick out like sore thumbs. We’ve had RISD-trained designers who had to be let go because they weren’t doing the work. In an industry that’s deadline-driven and quick-turnaround, you have to deliver, and that’s a matter of drive, talent, and hard work, not “where you went to school.”</p>
<p>(We’re plenty Dilbertian, too, but I guess the operative term here is “deadline-driven.” ;-))</p>
<p>So, I guess it just depends on the industry. Some are more on-the-ground / in-the-trenches meritocratic than others.</p>
<p>“Let’s face it - at many (probably most) firms, the most rewards are doled out not to the most productive workers, but rather to the best office politicians.”</p>
<p>Well, that’s certainly true, but you don’t have to be Ivy-trained in order to be a real schmoozer. In the immortal words of Ethel Merman in <em>Annie Get Your Gun,</em> for some folks it’s just a matter of “doin’ what comes naturally.” :D</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Off topic, but the vast majority of attorneys may not make a whole lot more than a union teacher. Sure, those from the top of the law school class at the top law schools start at $160k, but many lawyers start ~$60k – it’s a bi-modal thing – if they can even find a legal job, and after they’ve incurred $200k in debt. Your S might want to do some further research.</p>
<p>Back to regular programming. :)</p>
<p>@bluebayou–not off-topic at all…in fact, an excellent point and very germane (for us, at least).</p>
<p>Yes, I’ve heard of the lawyer glut and its unfortunate consequences.</p>
<p>Here in NC, alas, teacher salaries are the pits, but that’s certainly not true everywhere.</p>
<p>I actually think DS would make a great teacher.</p>
<p>Here in our midwest suburban school district, a 50-year-old elementary/middle school teacher can easily earn $110,000+/year, plus benefits and pension, with an ordinary state school degree. A significant number do. A 50-year old high school teacher can easily exceed $150,000, plus benefits and pension, with same state school degree. And they do. Entry-level teachers don’t earn as much as a Ivy League-degree entry-level attorney, but they also don’t have the Ivy graduate degree, the 80-hour week, or 24/7 job expectations.</p>
<p>Our suburb just hired a new village manager at $150,000, a $60,000 salary increase from his previous position as assistant village manager at another suburb. Nuts. But apparently this was the predetermined salary range for a village manager for a suburban town of 14,000. Nuts again. </p>
<p>For non-Ivy attorneys, well my sister’s non-“white shoe” but big midwest city firm starts “local school” attorneys at $45,000, which isn’t that much higher than a starting teacher’s salary of $40,000. These attorneys are within the DePaul, Loyola, IIT, and Marshall law school grads starting salary range. And there are plenty of unemployed and underemployed attorneys here now.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, with my HYP graduate degree, I still haven’t broken the $150,000 mark.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I would have actually used the advertising industry as a prime example to support my point. True, I agree that you have to meet deadlines, but who’s to say that you’re actually meeting those deadlines with high-quality (as opposed to shoddy) work? Far more importantly, what does it even mean for advertising work to be high-quality in the first place? The only metric that ultimately matters from an advertising standpoint is whether a particular campaign ultimately increases sales. Yet the relation between sales and the creative content of any particular campaign is indirect and difficult to determine. A gorgeously designed and flawless magazine spread might draw no additional customers, whereas a simplistic and error-ridden might draw plenty. </p>
<p>This problem is particularly acute in the case of luxury goods where most advertising campaigns are rarely designed to spur sales directly and immediately, but rather to build overall brand ‘image’ to ultimately one day result in increased sales - but which serves only to attenuate the link between any one campaign and sales even further. If Prada runs a new campaign in Vogue, does that actually boost the Prada brand and generate greater additional future sales? How do you measure that reliably? After all, we will never know what would have happened if Prada had decided not to run that campaign. </p>
<p>John Wanamaker once famously proclaimed that half of all advertising expenditures is wasted, the problem being that nobody knows which half it is. And since nobody can reliably measure how any particular marketing campaign is going to affect future sales, which therefore means that nobody can ever reliably distinguish between who’s truly a great marketer and who isn’t, that’s when schmoozing and office politicking start coming into play. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, but schmoozing happens far more readily when you already share a bond with the schmoozee…such as a common university affiliation. For example, whether we like it or not, it is no secret that a disproportionate percentage of top business positions - particularly in the glamorous industries such as investment banking, private equity, hedge funds, and strategy consulting - are held by alumni of Harvard. Hence, if you want to Harvard yourself, you can quickly break the ice by starting a conversation with them by reminiscing about the old days at the Yard. </p>
<p>Furthermore, Harvard has an extensive and powerful alumni association with unprecedented worldwide reach. Practically every major city in the world has a Harvard Alumni Club that runs social events with which you can schmooze with other, often times, highly powerful people. Alumni of other schools are (almost) never invited to these events, so they don’t even have the chance to schmooze.</p>
<p>As a case in point, I know of a guy in Hong Kong who just got a far better job than his prior one, based on connections he made at the Harvard Club of Hong Kong. If he had not gone to Harvard himself, he would not have been a club member and so would never have met the people who ultimately helped him obtain the job he wanted. Very few other schools have alumni club chapters in Hong Kong. {It should also be said that this is a white guy who speaks no Chinese. How else was a guy like that going to make connections in the Hong Kong business society?} </p>
<p>To paraphrase Woody Allen, 99% of life is just showing up. But many important social events don’t allow just anybody to show up. Furthermore, the vast majority of available jobs are never publicly posted, but are obtainable only through networking and schmoozing. If you don’t have the right social connections, you will never even know about those jobs.</p>
<p>LOL, sakky, great post.</p>
<p>I totally agree with you about image advertising, which is why I’m no longer in that area. But direct response, as you know, is a very different kettle of fish. Measurable sales are the name of the game. I’m in eCommerce, an off-shoot of direct response, and we are very results-oriented. We’re the non-glamorous workhorses of the industry, so (IMHO) we have a lower BS quotient.</p>
<p>But your points are well taken. </p>
<p>I wonder, though, whether LinkedIn hasn’t leveled the playing field somewhat? I get recruited off of LinkedIn all the time. (I’m too old and too settled to relocate – but someone at the start of his/her career would be a prime candidate for such recruitment.)</p>
<p>@higgins–thank you!! Very informative post indeed.</p>
<p>Who knows which are best schools, nationwide, for studying poetry and the writing of poetry?</p>
<p>thanks,</p>
<p>estura</p>
<p>Erstwhile friend / classmate / roommate of mine transferred to Brown for that. Google her – Jean Randich. She’s an off-Broadway director now.</p>
<p>@sakky:</p>
<p>i think you make a lot of good points that probably explain why many great students attend ivies and other unis that are overall very prestigious. but i think that there are probably also a great many who don’t. here is my logic:</p>
<p>i think that what you wrote holds true for many liberal arts and business-type majors.
however, at high-caliber unis in particular, my strong impression is that there is a much larger percentage of premed and engineering students than at lower-tier colleges. a great many are aspiring doctors, lawyers, and engineers. although i can’t say how your undergrad institution affects your chances at various law schools, i can say with great confidence that, for medical schools, it matters very little and that, for engineering, it’s not at all about the university prestige, it’s about the STEM dept. engineering programs at most institutions that are household names aren’t even arguably among the best engineering schools in the country (as perceived by engineers). furthermore, the ones that really stand out in the field are obscure to many outsiders (Harvey Mudd, Georgia Institute of Tech, U Illinois). for a lot of people, HYPS is the only thing that really gets them going. the fact that HYPS is even a widely recognized acronym here on CC and that these unis are all grouped together in the same set as if they are in a league of their own is a testament to the absurd heights people raise them to).</p>
<p>so, basically, i think it is likely that a ton of exceptional high school students are going to be dead set on the doctor or engineering route and, for the former, where you attend uni matters very little and, for the latter, overall prestige is not at all closely correlated with the strength of your program.</p>