The payoff for a prestigious college degree is smaller than you think

College Search & Selection
962

If I understand this correctly, you’re saying that Brown, naturally, is going to have more students with the right characteristics that will lead them to higher success rates in clearing the barriers to entry in this particular industry. If that is what you’re saying, then not only am I not in a position to disagree (I’m not a CS person), I instinctively agree. There’s always that issue though. UW direct admit to CS is incredibly difficult, so they wind up with very capable people. So those people tend to go on and be successful, doing the things they need to do to help UW’s hiring stats look impressive. That makes sense and is not something with which I’d have disagreed from the outset.

But if the other take away is that this means we shouldn’t evaluate the quality of the program itself - i.e., facilities, quality of teaching, etc. - based on these end results, then I would propose that’s always a problem in evaluating elite institutions. I’m in no position to know whether, organically, Brown CS is as good as GT CS. I think that’s a topic for you and the other CS people who are familiar with these programs from the inside out to discuss. I’d have nothing to contribute.

But on its face, the fact that Brown places people in those markets would mean to me that, as a potential CS student there, a path has been worn for me to potentially access those competitive markets. If I’m the person who is open to the SD opportunity and Brown people never go there, then I suppose I’d pay attention to that. In all cases, though, I would assume that the Brown CS program itself is at least competent (and probably better than that) at teaching me what I need to know. The reason I would assume that is because I can’t imagine Brown would be successful for long in placing people in a place like SV if their graduates were not technically cutting it.

963

Isn’t it kind of a luxury to make the decision purely on academics and social factors? I absolutely LOVE the idea of surrounding my kid with great faculty, bright students, and top-class academics. I’d also love to send my kid on an all-expense paid tour of self-discovery and cultural immersion in countries all over the globe.

But we have to decide on the best use of limited family resources. Not every wonderful experience I would like to provide my children is affordable.

So then, how do we decide if THIS experience is one we pay for? We have to determine whether the arguably better academics and social environment is worth paying twice as much or more. Worth spending a full year or more of retirement living expenses to make it happen. Worth delaying retirement or forgoing trips in retirement. Maybe worth going into debt for.

How does one measure that? Looking at ROI is one way of helping to decide whether the extra expense is a wise financial decision.

I don’t know if ROI is the best measurement, but for those without enough money to pay for an elite school without sacrificing something else, how do you propose families determine whether the academics/social advantages are worth that sacrifice?

7 Likes
964

I think it’s very difficult to do because you’ll necessarily make the decision beforehand with imperfect information. The advantages, insofar as anyone agrees there are any, and this thread is evidence that there is great disagreement about that, are mostly subtle and hard to measure.

With that in mind, I think things you listed, which I know wasn’t meant to be exhaustive, is a good start. If paying for it means really any of those things (other than perhaps some very moderate amount of debt), then I think it’s probaby something on which you take a pass as the paying party. Nobody should work for a materially longer period of time or sacrifice unreasonably for their kid to go to school X, especially if you’re lucky enough to live in a state with a great flagship, as so many of us are.

While I wouldn’t myself say that the test is “I can pull it off with little or no pain,” I don’t think it makes sense if you’re implicating the things you described. Had that been it for me, I’d have said, “No,” or I would have given them what I can afford and have them figure out the rest, while discouraging any significant borrowing to make up the difference.

1 Like
965

I believe a highly motivated kid can create the “elite school” environment anywhere- and I’ve met hundreds of such kids (and hired many of them) during my career. The kid who can’t afford CMU at full freight, or with aid that gaps- look at Missouri M&T. The stretch for NYU Stern is way too risky-- for the kid who honestly and truly is intent on a Wall Street career and has been following the market since s/he has been 9 years old-- look at Baruch. Love the science/lab resources at JHU but it means risking retirement altogether? Stonybrook- the unsung hero of the NY State research community. And it still flummoxes me that Rutgers doesn’t get more love in NJ, given that national employers respect it so much. Applied math/statistics, poli sci, history- fantastic bench strength among the faculty, and a motivated kid will NEVER run out of things to study.

But that leaves the “not motivated” kids, and although I don’t meet those professionally, I do try to help them as “friends and family” favors, and I think that’s a more complicated skein to unwind. These are the kids who went to college to get their ticket punched, and wake up in May of senior year wondering “where do I go next year”? I suspect that some of the ROI threads on CC deal with this population, although either the parents are in denial, or don’t want to post something mean about their own kid. It’s THAT type of kid where risking your financial future is really a bad idea- whether debt, HELOC, spending the 401K. Those kids are likely NOT going to figure out how to make U Maine more like Bowdoin, and are likely NOT going to be taking advantage of U Mass’s consortium by taking a fantastic class at Amherst at state school prices. And so those are the parents wondering if the more intimate environment of Hofstra or Drexel for engineering, vs. a non-flagship branch of their state U system is worth the extra dollars- significant dollars. Or trying to bet if

I have no answers. But a kid who has been cheerfully “getting by” in HS, seems very happy to hang out with the HS friends after school, doesn’t like to read, and is somewhat disengaged academically might not be the kid to bet the farm on financially.

7 Likes
966

This is relevant for most of America.

A friend of mine sent his son to a highly regarded OOS flagship at full price. He had fun and a GPA of 2.5. Would my son do the same? Would a LAC on the same plane serve those kids better? Would it cost another $20k per year to get a more intimate experience? Is that the answer or just the kid?

1 Like
967

Yes, it’s a luxury that not every family can afford. However, every family can prioritize and optimize within their own set of constraints, whether these constraints are financial, geographical, or something else.

If anyone has figured out how to compute ROI a priori for their kids’ college education, I’d love to see it. All the ones I’ve seen so far can only be kindly described as worthless.

968

Exactly. I have no answers. But if someone has had trouble motivating a kid when the kid lives under your roof, and has provided a TON of scaffolding- dragging the kid out of bed, providing a car so the kid doesn’t have to make it to the bus stop on time, reminding, nagging, driving homework to school when the kid forgets it, intervening with teachers to get that extra credit project to bring the grade up to a B+, etc… is the idea that the small private college is going to do the same for an extra 20K per year?

I don’t know a single college where a Dean drags your kid out of bed.

So y’all are debating about the ROI for highly motivated, burn the candle at both ends kinds of kids- my observation is that those kids can figure it out on their own regardless of where they end up (except for the outlier colleges-tiny, very dogmatic religiously so that science courses aren’t taught with the scientific method, etc.). Why not a debate on ROI for the “other” kids ? That seems more relevant than the perpetual “will Brown pay off”.

15 Likes
969

100%

7 Likes
970

Different kids function well in different environments. There is nothing wrong in thinking about the ROI for kids that are not type A. And certainly if you can afford it, a smaller college may have a better ROI than a larger college for them. It depends on the kid and the college. If they are not getting off the bed at 5 in the morning, it is not that as a parent one would show tough love.

As a separate matter, the type A kid might be less type A if she is in a less competitive environment. Something that is better for her health and sanity, and something that I may wish for as a parent.

1 Like
971

It is so tempting to conflate “elite” college with competitive environment. Reality doesn’t always bear that out. And there are many public U’s with a high percentage of first gen college students and/or immigrants where the competition is ABSOLUTELY fierce, despite a relatively generous admissions policy. If I meet a kid with a 4.0 from Baruch I’m impressed. It doesn’t matter that the bottom end of the Baruch class might have a bunch of kids getting their ticket punched. I know the top end of the class, and those kids are every bit as intense workaholics as their cohort at the elite private U’s- which STILL grant “gentleman B -” grades instead of a previous generation’s “Gentleman’s C’s”.

So less competitive- choose with care.

5 Likes
972

I am only saying people that are looking to pay 75k are often choosing with care :-). They are usually very well informed about their own kid, the kid’s needs, and what they are getting or not getting from an elite or a non elite college. Everyone is navigating uncertainty. We should not think that many of these people are making poor choices for themselves.

2 Likes
973

Agree. Folks who have done their research and know their kid rarely post on a public message board “Is it worth paying for Bard when SUNY Binghamton would be free”. They have figured it out.

It’s the folks who post, asking for the opinions of anonymous strangers, who then resist hearing what those same strangers are saying, who I think often need a bit of a reality check. We’ve got active posts right now of parents doing HELOC’s, taking money out of 401K’s, getting a second mortgage for kids that they post “I don’t know if they are ready for college and kid has never read a book” and when a number of posters ask “have you considered community college first” get shot down and told they are elitists.

7 Likes
974

Absolutely correct. Anyone who selects a college based on some mathematical assessment of financial return is guaranteed to have underestimated intangible costs. The pandemic has proven that time and freedom have been under-appreciated benefits. CIties like those mentioned are quickly losing their appeal. Who knows what the world will look like in 5 years?

The thread is about payoff for presumed prestige. I think it’s likely that the value of a known entity will increase with remote work. Is Brown’s reputation more valuable than USC’s…I guess you’d have to ask the hiring managers.

975

I do not disagree.

I do understand the impulse to want to try.

If I am going to buy a Tesla at twice the cost of a Honda, I want to know if the Tesla will offer me something more than the Honda other than prestige. Am I paying thousand more JUST for the prestige or are there quantifiable features only the Tesla offers?

In my questions/ponderings above, I am trying to get at how to evaluate the “gray area” cases — and I have no answers.

For the very wealthy with lots of disposable income and whose kids will have trust funds to subsidize their incomes for life — by all means, go to the elite school!

On the other end of the spectrum, folks should not look to that elite school if it means they would go deeply into debt and end up unable to cover their monthly expenses at age 75, especially if their child is either motivated to succeed anywhere or unmotivated enough to struggle everywhere.

But where I think it is harder to dice —

  • those situations where the extra expense doesn’t saddle the parents with debt, but means regional road trips instead of vacations to Rome, or making do with one car instead of two in retirement— that kind of thing, and/or

  • the student is not Type A or Type B, but more A-. For examples : a kid happy to look into internships, but not the first in line. A kid who might lack confidence and be a little intimidated or anxious at first rather than invigorated when surrounded by high achievers. A kid who embraces challenges, but also draws limits — is not so passionate about a project that pulling an all-nighter is “fun”; is eager to pick up a book, but only among certain appealing categories and isn’t equally intellectually curious across the board about almost all subjects, etc. In other words, a bright student who was very successful in high school but not in love with all aspects of school and who tends toward less academic hobbies during downtime.

Maybe going to an elite school is where that student would come alive, make a squad of lifelong friends, and the investment would launch them into a fabulous career and SES superior to their family of origin.

Or maybe the student would wind up in the same middle management position they would have had had they gone to their state flagship, with generally positive but a bit lukewarm feelings toward their alma mater and its alums — arguably squandering funds that could have given the parents a more comfortable lifestyle in their golden years.

No one has a crystal ball and maybe people just want to use ROI to create one. But it seems too simplistic either to say (a) if you can beg, borrow, and steal to come up with the money with modest or no borrowing, elite schools are always better because of smart students/better academics, or (b) elite schools are never worth another $100k+ because a smart student can succeed anywhere.

I guess in the end it is probably too subjective to establish any guidelines. People have different values. A certain kind of academic experience vs income potential vs a brand name vs avoidance of debt: each factor will mean more to some people than others. Some people will pick the Honda every time and others will always opt for the Tesla.

9 Likes
976

I think the reality for most kids is that they bloom where they are planted, and can be happy and successful most places.

3 Likes
977

“If the GT kids stay in Atlanta and don’t venture out much (I have no idea), then maybe that’s a slight mark against GT because they’re not being heavily represented in arguably the most important markets for that talent.”

Definitely not true and people should not get that impression with that salary data, which can be misinterpreted. There are more GT grads, even controlling for enrollment, than any ivy. It’s a targeted place where SV high tech recruits, only two other ivies may be similarly targeted, Cornell and UPenn. I know many many hiring managers and have been involved in hiring in the bay area and the list that sushirtio linked started with Berkeley and Stanford at the top is accurate.

"So west coast tech salaries at top places range from 200k (give or take) at the start to 4mm (at the higher end) for jobs that are reachable without being special – i.e., without being a startup founder, or a Google SVP. The people you saw may have been making 400k a head per person. If married, that is 800k (possibly more) by the time they are 30. "

That’s way off from what’s actually happening, I don’t even know where you getting these numbers from. The most recent data (census, labor statistics) on this in 2019 is only 4-5% of Santa Clara Country (where Google, Apple, Cisco etc are headquartered) have a household income over $200K. Very few people make 400K by the time they’re 30 even in SV, Larry Page was 31 when Google went public, btw the two Google founders went to UM and UMd for undergrad and Stanford for grad.

1 Like
978

Absolutely. But the pressure to do it anyway is ever present, especially amongst UMC parents. I’ll give an example of an email I saw from a private college counselor recently that could apply to S23 and many of his friends:

“It is good…that X has a higher college budget (than X’s siblings a few years ago). Costs have been soaring and frankly, I think a smaller (likely private) school would be better for X…I know their sticker prices are high, but…”

1 Like
979

Agreed. And the good news is that those kids live in a country that is built for second chances, especially if you live in a state with a good flagship. Living in the Seattle area, I have lost count of kids who weren’t quite “there” in HS who went on to one of the many great community colleges in the area and achieved auto transfer to the University of Washington. Many of those kids really took off once that happened.

2 Likes
980

Regarding your first quote from my post, that is a small part of a multi-post discussion with another poster about Brown’s CS department. I didn’t say that GT grads tend to congregate around the greater Atlanta area. As I said in the quote, I have no idea.

As a random aside, a friend of mine in New England, who is a very well known serial start-up figure in that market, was one of the very first GT CS grads many years ago. In his words, he studied CS at GT really before CS was generally recognized as an academic degree course of study. So although it’s not my field, I’ve been of the general impression because of him that GT has been doing CS for a long time.

Your other quote about SV salaries didn’t seem quite right to me either. $4 million for reachable jobs without being special? I know there’s a lot of $$ flying around down there, but that seems like a stretch.

981

That’s my view.

3 Likes