<p>The Harvard stats alone don't reveal anything conclusive. They need to be contrasted with stats from other schools for them to mean much. Anybody have the sex stats for the U of Mississippi handy?</p>
<p>A fourth of the harvard males in that class - 12-13% could do the 9 partners thing easy.</p>
<p>And how many of you guys over 23 haven't had sex more than 10 times in a month?</p>
<p>That's about once every three days? Married couples I know do that...</p>
<p>
[quote]
Read between the lines please. How many % of Harvard students continue to higher education (PhD)? Published figure indicated roughly 15%. This, coincidentally, matched with the 16% without salary.
If they are not going for PhD, why are they taking so long? This is 5 years after school ended.
Furthermore, salary isn't stipend. No one calls stipend salary.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You're wrong about stipend and salary. Everyone I know on stipend considers it a salary. And if the people I know are just weird (a possibility), then, well, these PhD students don't have a salary, which boosts that category a bit. </p>
<p>Let's look at some other higher education possibilities besides a PhD here:</p>
<p>1 year as a lab tech + 4 years in med school (a very common setup): No salary except for that first year.</p>
<p>4 years med school + 1 year into residency: Mean salary at that point well under $50K.</p>
<p>3 years working + 2 years in business school: No salary in business school.</p>
<p>2 years in Peace Corps or TFA + 3 years in law school: No salary in law school.</p>
<p>None of these would be rare combinations.</p>
<p>And then there are joint JD/MBA programs, joint JD/MS programs, joint MS/MBA programs, and other combos that could lead to having little or no salary five years out.</p>
<p>This, of course, doesn't account for the various respectable careers that rarely pay over $50K/year to people 5 years out. And people with young children who have decided to be temporary or permanent stay-at-home parents.</p>
<p>What would be a more interesting stat, for aspiring i-bankers, is what percentage of Harvard's (or any other school's) students who <em>want</em> a career as an i-banker, get a job as an i-banker.</p>
<p>^^^jessiehl has made several excellent points. </p>
<p>Many of these people on C.C. just don't get it. Many people who go to the elite schools are not doing it to get rich. They are going to get a well-rounded education and to (finally) be among their intellectual peers.</p>
<p>Right. The relevant question is: how many people wanted to get rich, and failed to do so? The info in this article doesn't give much of a clue (and some of those people probably had high net worth when then enrolled at Harvard).</p>
<p>Sorry everyone, maybe I was just mislead by the survey, but it says:</p>
<p>"(Thirty-seven percent make under $50,000 and 16 percent have no salary, but grad school can most likely be blamed for that.) "</p>
<p>The survey makes it sounds as though the large amount of graduates making under 50,000 is a result of graduate school; probably students on stipend or working part time to pay for school.</p>
<p>37 + 16 = 53%.</p>
<p>I was just using the survey for information, I have absolutely no outside knowledge on this subject.</p>
<p>
All of these do not warrant 53% of Harvard students, and that is my point to your original assumption.
[quote=vicariousparent] Many of these people on C.C. just don't get it. Many people who go to the elite schools are not doing it to get rich. They are going to get a well-rounded education and to (finally) be among their intellectual peers.
Then they should just go to Swarthmore, this is Harvard.</p>
<p>Also, not everyone goes to Harvard to get rich... I think a lot of people find Harvard appealing because of its world-class academics. Whether you think it's over-rated or not, no one can argue that Harvard doesn't attract some of the most famous and brilliants professors and guest lecturers in the world. </p>
<p>I think to be admitted to such an exclusive school, many students must have a desire simply to learn as much as they can and broaden their intellectual horizons.</p>
<p>Could they mean that 16% have no salary and 37% make under 50K, including that 16%? Then only 21% would be making under 50K that are actually employed, which makes more sense.</p>
<p>I would agree with everything that jessie says except that the article stated that only 3% had children. Those possiblities of first five years career paths easily could add to a high percentage of the class. For example, that WSJ survey showed that somewhere ~ 20% of the Harvard class ended up in one of the top 5 programs for JD, MBA, MD, which with a high probability will occur at five years out of UG; not to mention the slackers who only go to the #8 ranked schools in each of these disciplines. Also, you can desire to be surrounded by exceptional peers without unduly forcing an extreme unpleasant environment like Swarthmore upon yourself.</p>
<p>Could you please tell me more about the 'extreme unpleasant environment like Swarthmore'? Swarthmore is on my D's list of colleges to look at.</p>
<p>Only 9 partners? Does that seem low to anyone?</p>
<p>I think Swarthmore is renowned for having a more intense academic experience with higher workload than even most other top schools.</p>
<p>Um... how is that 'extreme unpleasant' for kids who <em>enjoy</em> an intense academic experience?</p>
<p>13% have had more than 9 sexual partners since college, and 13% are going to vote for McCain. Coincidence? I think not. Who says Republicans don't know how to party??</p>
<p>
All of these do not warrant 53% of Harvard students, and that is my point to your original assumption.
50% of MIT students go directly to grad school (page 3 of this</a> PDF), and another 30% of the class eventually returns to school for a graduate degree. I don't see why Harvard would be different, particularly considering that Harvard has more pre-professional students than MIT does.</p>
<p>Also, I'm a PhD student, I plan to be in graduate school for at least five years (my program's average is six), and I definitely refer to my stipend as a salary.</p>
<p>
[quote]
"I think maybe the better question to ask is twofold: how many of the kids on CC who say they want to go to Harvard so they can more easily pursue ibanking end up getting into Harvard, and how many who get into Harvard and say they want to do ibanking end up still wanting to do it after they arrive on campus, take a few classes, and then decide that nonprofit management (or zookeeping, or whatever) is more their thing?</p>
<p>I'm sure I don't need to remind people who are interested in this line of work how competitive and unpleasant ibanking can be, particularly for college students and interns. I think it's something that people say they want because they think they can earn a lot of money through it, but the "fat cats" I know-- both recent college grads and more established adults in their fifties-- are complete workaholics.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Word, unalove :-)</p>
<p>It's annoying how the top poster is considering people who make < $50K "unsuccessful." Nothing unsuccessful about being a minister, a teacher, a stay-at-home parent, or just a big-time volunteer.</p>
<p>The only conclusion you can reach 'scientifically' from the article is this - the 40% or so who are getting some seven times a month can't be i-bankers.</p>
<p>Let's do the math. We all know that i-bankers routinely work more than 100 hours a week. That means you have to work 16 or more hours a day Monday through Saturday, and still have to put in 8 hours or more on Sunday. And that's not counting commuting to and from work ... and we all know that commuting in NYC is nightmare. So the only day of the week you get a bit of time off is Sunday. And there are only four Sundays in a month ...</p>
<p>
[quote]
50% of MIT students go directly to grad school (page 3 of this PDF), and another 30% of the class eventually returns to school for a graduate degree. I don't see why Harvard would be different, particularly considering that Harvard has more pre-professional students than MIT does.</p>
<p>Also, I'm a PhD student, I plan to be in graduate school for at least five years (my program's average is six), and I definitely refer to my stipend as a salary.
[/quote]
The final figure for graduate is still a lot less than what you claim. Here's why.
Take EE, ECE PhD program at Duke for example
<a href="http://www.gradschool.duke.edu/about_us/statistics/completeece.htm%5B/url%5D">http://www.gradschool.duke.edu/about_us/statistics/completeece.htm</a>
5 years running total matriculated: 104
total graduated: 55
total withdrawn: 47.</p>
<p>Berkeley does not publish this information, but it's something along this line. If you fail the prelim exam for PhD twice, you're out. Pass rate is low.
50% go directly into graduate school, but how many of them actually finished?<br>
Is the one year MEng at MIT graduate school? Is 2 years MS graduate school? If so, they should be done. The number quoted is 5 years after graduation so all MEng, MS people should be done already and not count toward the statistic of those making less than 50k/year.</p>
<p>With today's Bear-Stearns arrests, look for the # of sex partners to skyrocket, while % with kids stays about the same.</p>