Prestige/Expensive vs. Good/Cheap

<p>I am an engineer at a large successful high-tech company and occasionally interview job candidates. I also have a master's degree in engineering from a top 10 public, Ga. Tech. My company hires from a variety of universities, ranging from a not ranked local university to MIT etc. The MIT grads have a slight advantage when we choose who to interview, but not in who we choose. We do have a fairly rigorous interview process, including technical quizzes. I have also been interviewed in a similar fashion at several engineering companies during my career.</p>

<p>My D has decided to pursue a degree at a good public university and has received several nice scholarship offers.</p>

<p>That works fine if the student is sure of their major. A significant percentage change their minds during the undergraduate years. That, in my opinion, speaks for considering schools with highly ranked programs in many areas.</p>

<p>dggt makes good points. In tech careers, such as engineering, the interview process will include very involved "technical quizzes" or at least very detailed and explicit questioning on how the candidate would approach a design process or solve a hypothetical problem. Doesn't matter where you went to school --- you have to jump right in if you are seeking a job in those fields. Liberal arts fields might be more likely to rely on the college's reputation.</p>

<p>I think the ability to get to the interview stage is important -- after all, if you don't get to the interview stage first, there's no way you're getting the job.</p>

<p>My fiance and his best friend have recently gone through interviews for a well-respected aerospace company. The company is not officially hiring this year, but the CEO heard of their (awesome) senior project through the grapevine and personally invited them to interview. For sure, they wouldn't be getting job offers if they couldn't ace the technical interview (which they can), but they wouldn't have even gotten the interview if they hadn't gone to MIT.</p>

<p>moliie, I thought it was their (awesome) senior project? Would their (awesome) senior project have been less awesome had they gone to Cal Poly SLO or RPI?</p>

<p>mollie, great example. </p>

<p>Networks (specifically the college network) can be significant in getting the introduction or first meeting, or in your example advertising the success of their sb. And those first contact points are not trivial, all other factors being equal the network contact is actually the key factor. </p>

<p>The point is that the same senior project done by identical students at cal ploy would not have been noticed by the CEO, because cal poly doesn't have the same network as MIT. MIT's network (GRAPEVINE) is the “channel” that allowed these students with great work to be noticed by the CEO.</p>

<p>It doesn't mean you can't work hard and achieve, but it is a truism that networks give capable people advantages. Life’s unfair, what’s new about that?</p>

<p>IF that be true app, then I'd say the senior project wasn't that awesome , now was it? And I didn't view mollie's use of the word grapevine as being an MIT only to industry exclusive line. You did. Imagine that. LOL. I viewed it as an aerospace grapevine, or engineering grapevine. </p>

<p>My experience tells me that projects of serious import get plenty of attention at symposia and result ofttimes in published papers and journal articles. Or are you suggesting that industry bigwigs only read MIT and , of course, USC journals or articles about the exploits of their students?</p>

<p>And there is nothing new about close-minded people. They are literally everywhere.</p>

<p>network is a broad term and part and parcel of "network" is the universities brand. And yes, MIT's brand and network gets to BIGWIGS a heck of a lot better than Cal Poly.</p>

<p>I doubt anyone else on CC will agree with you that Cal Poly is on a level playing field in getting its students recognized. Or that cal poly has a comparable "line" to industry as MIT.</p>

<p>stateschool = better education than ivy</p>

<p>App--don't know what coast or planet you live on, but an informal poll here turned up MIT, Stanford, Cal Poly, Rose Hulman, Carnegie Mellon as schools recognized in "industry." </p>

<p>There are others but not as big names to the average person.</p>

<p>
[quote]
App--don't know what coast or planet you live on, but an informal poll here turned up MIT, Stanford, Cal Poly, Rose Hulman, Carnegie Mellon as schools recognized in "industry."

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Gee, Appie. I guess you were wrong. ;)</p>

<p>And anyway, I didn't say anything about comparable (edit: or on a level playing field). You said that. I asked if the project would still be just as awesome if it came from Cal Poly. The rest is something you are adding to make yourself feel better.( And why so angry today? It's the SuperBowl!)</p>

<p>Edit: See here's my post just to refresh your memory of what I said to mollie</p>

<p>


</p>

<p>appstressin, I think that those who are beneficiaries of the "network" opportunities at Ivy League/elite colleges live in a somewhat narrow, perhaps self-congratulatory and equally self-deluded world. They have indeed been beneficiaries of great networking opportunities, and since their network hooks them in with others from the same network..... they mistake their network for the <em>only</em> network. Thus the posts singing the praises of the elevated path to success... all blissfully unaware that there many other routes to the same level of success, and even into the same "network". (You would be amazed at who young people sometimes meet through their volunteer work, for example). If meeting someone or having a degree from Harvard or MIT landed a first job, you make the mistake of assuming that but for the degree or the connection, there would not have been a first job or the job would not have been as good...... but that simply is not what really happens in life. </p>

<p>"Networking" is important, but the network is wide open -- you don't have to enter via any special door.</p>

<p>All the major aerospace companies (Sikorski, Boeing, Lockheed Martin )hire people from various colleges. Ahhh, give me a break.</p>

<p>And MIT guys might be offered $500 more a year than say Penn State.</p>

<p>And did you know some of these companies are more concerned with not hiring the 4.0 intense guy because he/she can't make decisions based on incomplete data which is a daily occurance.</p>

<p>calmom and curm</p>

<p>Agree completely. In most fields, I doubt it matters and for those where it does (investment banking??--certain law firms??)--I'm glad my son isn't interested. As far as med school and grad school in any number of areas is concerned, some of the small LAC's do as well as anyplace--or better. It's really about the student, not the school. And if you can get $$, so much the better.</p>

<p>Very good friend of ours is an MIT grad, with a masters from there to boot. He says he hires from all of the schools, and though he may be a smidgeon partial to MIT as an alum, it's not an advantage in getting a job with the firm where he works, which is a highly desireable one. THe decision is made by a team and the makeup of the young hires are diverse in terms of college. And there is no differentiating among UG degrees when it come to pay.</p>

<p>Folks, I will never dispute the value of an elite degree. I know there are some schools that ring out much louder than others . I'd be foolish to challenge that. But at the end of the day there are just a few professions where that elite UG degree, as the terminal degree, is a virtual prerequiste for success or even entry. </p>

<p>As I pointed out to someone in a p.m. a few minutes ago, if you were to look back on this thread you'd find me saying that for a career in politics/government than I would have been more vocal in favor of Yale , even in my own D's situation. I-banking could well be another , and I absolutely recognize that certain Wall Street firms will only hire from certain top law schools. But I know of none that require an elite UG degree to go with that law degree. There could be some. But probably not many. </p>

<p>Med school? I'm still learning but my D wants to attend either of two top 20 schools here in Texas , both for reputation and costs. Do I feel her attendance there may lead her to a better "match" placement? I'd hope but from what I have read , it's not that direct a link EXCEPT in what is called "academic " medicine. I have a lot to learn before I'm comfortable talking much about it. But were we cognizant of my D's undergrad school's proven ability to get kids into WashU, Baylor, and UT-Southwestern medical school? You're durn tootin' we were. ;)</p>

<p>(Edit: I think this is real important for some to hear.)The question she asked of a school was , can you get ME where I want to go? If the answer is yes and the school feels like a fit, and you can afford it - then I wouldn't be concerned too much about the elites. You're in a good place. And if the answer is no, then you need to dang sure keep looking 'cause it's out there for you. That's a promise.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I-banking could well be another , and I absolutely recognize that certain Wall Street firms will only hire from certain top law schools.

[/quote]
Those are their entry-level positions. Their lateral hiring practices can be a lot more interesting.</p>

<p>

They would have been the same amount of awesome, no doubt (and, although I am clearly biased, I think they are two awesome guys :D). The project itself probably would not have been as awesome -- their best airplane buddy/advisor happens to be one of the world's best design gurus, and he gave them significant help in design and fabrication.</p>

<p>As I've tried to say before, I don't think going to a school like MIT is an all-or-nothing -- being an MIT grad isn't the only thing that got my fiance this interview, as he has a background level of airplane amazingness that he would have had regardless of where he went. But the small advantages that accrue from going to a school like MIT -- his advisor, the money that was available to fund the senior project, the network of aerospace-guys-who-gossip -- all of that adds up. And a small advantage for him to be able to prove his intrinsic awesomeness is all he's asking for, yeah?</p>

<p>mollie, have the guys been offered jobs? I'm curious, because often interviews are conducted in tech fields for the benefit of the company which has no interest in finding new employees. Industry likes to keep their finger on the pulse of academia. Who is doing what where. Who is funding it. What competitors are also interested. Heck, most patents are secured with no intention of developing the product -- it's simply a way to keep a new avenue of exploration closed to the competition. I'm sure some old timers on CC have had interviews where their brains were being picked and no opportunity was waiting for them. Learning how much to share, & how much to hold back, is an artform that is shaped with years of experience.</p>

<p>I know you love MIT, your fiance, and everything you've shared over the years. But really, engineers are usually not hung up on what school their colleagues or new hires attended. So many of the best academic/industry partnerships (complete with tax incentives for the corporations) take place in state schools, that industry doesn't have to look very far to snag great talent that has already been proven through these relationships.</p>