Like successful people, I’ve come across personality issues from all backgrounds. There are inflated egos across the credential spectrum.
And is there likely to be a few more “look at me” types coming from credentialed educational backgrounds? Sure, that’s probably true to an extent.
Sometimes they’re just darn good. Way back, I had a Harvard analyst working for me on my team. She was solid, good presence and politics and ground work out. Her type of capability in terms of brain power and work ethic is a “diamond in the rough” at a regional college. She’s been a private equity partner for years.
I have no idea what you’re talking about, and I am an attorney who did big law and in-house GC roles. Corporate attorneys have fewer career options? Than litigators? If anything, it’s the other way around.
Or are you talking about the 1 in 100 superstar plaintiffs lawyers? Yes, in every bar there are some very wealthy plaintiffs lawyers. Their career options are limited because a PI lawyer isn’t all that useful in a corporate setting.
Okay, so let me reframe the question using a hypothetical:
Student wants to pursue some kind of major leading to a business career (not med school or law, also not CS or engineering). Student anticipates working in a mid-size to large city, but not Wall Street.
Family has enough money to pay full cost at a prestigious school, but just barely, leaving zero to contribute to grad school. They could cover the cost without loans, but it would mean a more modest retirement lifestyle for the parents.
In that scenario, is it “worth it” to pay for undergrad at Stanford or Harvard, and let the student figure out how to fund grad school from there?
Or would there be more “value” in sending the student to a school costing $30-45k/year, knowing that grad school would be covered, too? Does that both free the student to pursue a career that is less lucrative but more fulfilling and decrease the financial pressure on the parents?
Or does it mean passing up unique career opportunities and trajectories that are hard to come by outside of a Stanford or Harvard and are worth the extra undergrad tuition?
Thoughts?
Hard to justify if you pre-decide that you won’t work in “large” industry of some kind. If you are open minded about the high-paying careers at a T5 school, which usually involve working on the coasts, then paying the extra 30k a year is worth while. In some paths, you will make up that money in just summer internships from the second year onwards. The high-paying careers are tech, finance, mgmt consulting, law, and medicine. There is no getting around that. The fresh out of under-grad pay that is possible at these places is hard for someone to imagine if they have never been exposed to that environment.
Mgmt consultants are starting at around 120-130k.
Tech has a much wider range – it can start between 70k - 250k, depending on what your skills are. A few jobs pay more - up to 400k or so.
Good finance jobs can go from 100k to 200k, and occasionally 400k starting.
Medicine and Law, you need to go to more school. Medicine is really the longest path – undergrad plus 7 years minimum.
Tech summers can pay upto 35k.
I have seen the occasional freshman Tech summers pay enough to cover all expenses (stay, travel, food) + a reasonable 5k stipend.
Regular good finance summers may pay 25k-30k for 3 months.
Some finance summers can pay upto 65k+ – for 3 months.
A lot of these things require a GPA in the 3.8+ range in your chosen field, often good people skills etc. At Harvard or Stanford, or wherever you go. Not all these opportunities will be available at a state school in quite the same numbers, although they will still be available.
Also, if you come in with enough APs etc, in some cases, you can finish your degree in 3 years. Rarely in 2.5 years. So you won’t be paying the 75k tuition for 4 years. People don’t do this. Because they want to enjoy the 4 years of college. Sometimes you can finish in 3 and stay on for an extra year of masters – occasionally with no tuition to pay.
Some/many of these students don’t need to go to grad school to continue earning at or above those levels. They will have regular career progression.
Incidentally, the quality of education, and the quality of your peers is simply stellar. That is a joy in itself. Oustiders clearly don’t know what they don’t know :-). A lot of these places are not pre-professional though. You go there for the joy of learning. The material benefits that are possible later on are incidental. Harvard does not have an undergrad business school. Likewise with Stanford.
Here is the interesting part – you can keep most of these career options alive at least until junior year. You don’t need to pre-decide. You can try each of them during one of the summers, and decide late if you choose.
We did a ton of research looking at this for my D. Basically, HYPS is always worth it. I’d add MIT and Caltech to the list but those 2 are a bit different. Especially if you major in something like Gender Studies. When there aren’t a lot of jobs the prestige will help the most.
After these tippy top schools it gets pretty murky. Depends a lot on the quality of your instate flagship and what you will actually pay there because someone who was accepted to a T20 school probably got aid from their state flagship. For example is U of M at $35k better than Brown at $78k for business? Or UGA at $10k (lot of merit there) vs Brown at $78k? If you just look at numbers it’s the state school, but what Brown is offering is an experience.
Finally, when you look at outcomes it’s important to remember the person who gets into a T20 school will probably be one of the top students at their state flagship and have access to a ton of opportunities. Also the outcome depends a lot on what the student needs from college. Some kids will love the small classes and bloom while others will just go to class.
Finally #2, People vastly overestimate the networking value of most schools. We asked a lot of alumni of T20’s if the network ever helped them get a job, and it’s rare except for Princeton, Stanford, and USC. USC? yeah, but it’s limited to Southern California. It’s more about whether companies like graduates from a school and recruit there hard.
My dad said we can’t afford a prestigious college but grad school is what matters. I went to a regional U on big scholarship and paid for grad school (MBA) because I’d been working four years. The jobs after undergrad would’ve been far better at a prestigious university.
If the hypothetical kid is still going to a college that costs $30-$40k per year, they can be an honors college and big person on campus. Still on them to perform well. Get one of the best jobs, which may not be as good as the one at Ivy Plus but then grad school admission is assured as next launching point, but probably to leadership development programs since avoiding IB and MBB. The fun refrain from Wharton undergrads is that they don’t go to grad school because they don’t need to.
Brown kids are highly represented on Wall Street and it’s a great network. But not for watching sports.
It depends. Harvard and Stanford offer a lot and if a student is admitted it is hard to pass up. Of course, it depends on what the alternatives are - another top 50 school with merit, state flagship etc. For our own kids, we are offering to pay for any undergraduate school they want (we can afford it comfortably) but if they go with the most expensive option, that’s it. They will need to fund grad school themselves (if they even want to go). I wouldn’t take on debt to afford a more expensive school, though, or compromise retirement. I know of a situation where someone cashed in their pension to pay for Harvard - they never recovered financially and were working into their early 70s - a big mistake in my view. Of course, for most students this a moot point since few get into HYPS.
Also hard to justify going to an expensive school if you are not in a profession that makes good money. For example, if you want to teach in middle school, and you cannot afford to pay a Harvard tuition comfortably, you should not go to Harvard. If you are willing to go into Tech or Finance, and you know that you will work hard, you can go to Harvard, and promise to pay off your parents over the next 5-10 years. It is not hard to justify the decision if you see the child and parent as one economic entity. It matters a lot what you major in. Can’t do gender studies etc. Journalism is borderline. Policy analyst job – doesn’t pay enough to pay off 300k in loans in reasonable time. You get the drift … It is a luxury product. If you are sufficiently poor also it sort of works out, because you get full financial assistance. If you are middle class, it is tough.
But the child and parent are not one economic entity. It is asking a lot, regardless of choice of major, for parents to borrow/extend themselves uncomfortably to finance a child’s undergraduate education. Especially since excellent lower cost options are available (particularly for high achieving students). What if a child decides to change careers to something less well paying and can’t pay their parents back? What if the job they get isn’t as lucrative as they think? What if they just decide not to pay their parents back (despite promising to do so)?
All valid points. It is a complex decision. Depends in part on family dynamics. Culture you come from etc. The kid also can choose to borrow directly in the market. So incentives are aligned.
That is very true. I’m just of the mind that paying for “name” at any cost is a losing proposition. It doesn’t always work out - especially for the parent left with bills they can’t really afford. I think HYPS are wonderful schools that offer a world class experience to students, but attending one of these schools isn’t required to be successful.
Don’t graduates from those colleges rarely end up with tons of loans?
Not if the kid is money minded and goes into professions that pay well.
That means they can pay off the debt.
I thought those need blind collleges work to cover what the family cannot. If I have a lot of earnings, home equity or savings and don’t want to spend it, that’s a different story. Those over 529 saving I guess.
The issue really is for middle class kids. The university and you will often disagree on what you can pay 
They do give some aid to parents making in the $250k range. That doesn’t always make it affordable.
If two kids are going to college at a private school.
The most successful person in our family went to a Cal State school. Second most successful, a regional no name school. Those of us in the family who went to an Ivy are doing just fine too but it wasn’t the school that carved out the trajectory, it was what people did while they were at their school.
I really really don’t believe stretching and risking a comfortable retirement are worth it. If you have a kid who is smart enough for HYPS, they are going to have a ton of great schools offering them merit awards that will bring your costs to $40/year or less.
I will also throw out that many companies will help fund MBAs and most PhDs are fully funded. And there is no requirement that parents pay for grad school ; )