@RAHforHEE I sent it, not that I expect it to change your mind.
@RAHforHEE Like I said, it’s only one factor. I’m going to step out of this argument as you seem to have unending energy to argue this point. Good luck man.
@music1990 Thank you for sending,and you are correct. I will continue to stand on my point of view, regardless of what others may think. Enjoy your vacation!
Wow. Read through this whole this and I see a lot of logical replies, and then nonsense all or nothing replies from RAHforHEE, and he’s someone who seems to confuse his opinion with facts.
“1990 If Stanford and Cal are at those rankings, then the Stanford students would always get the job over the Berkeley students. This is what prestige means, right? Because Stanford is ranked higher than the two, STanford would take all the jobs of Berkeley students. But that argument doesn’t hold because there are in fact Berkeley students working in those offices, so it doesn’t make sense to say that prestige matters because it NEVER WILL MATTER.”
No. They’ve pretty clearly said it plays a factor, but it isn’t all or nothing, as you manipulate their position to be to make your point.
“Again, I AM NOT ARGUING FOR FAIRNESS SAKE. I AM ARGUING AGAINST THE INDEED FACT THAT PRESTIGE WLL NEVER PLAY A ROLE IN YOUR ADMISSIONS OR JOB DECISIONS.”
Again, this is your opinion. And there you go with the “all or nothing” approach. “FACT…” “NEVER…” Those are some serious words you throw around so casually for someone who is simply expressing their opinion.
“I will continue to argue my point in this discussion because I know that prestige means nothing, and it is too hard for any of you to accept”
Again, your opinion. You just seem confrontational with some complex that you feel threatened when others disagree with your opinion or you don’t hear what you want to hear. Your financial aid thread that was locked was filled with responses by others along the lines of “This is a public forum. You have to understand that you open yourself up to anyone’s responses regarding your question, whether they are applicable or not. You can simply choose to not respond to questions you don’t want to answer.” and “You seem to think everyone is scolding you. I wasn’t. I said you didn’t have to take a full semester every time you needed to take a math class, and that a counselor should have helped you plan better. And you took offense.” Funny.
“And it is never ranking that plays a role in someone getting a job.”
Using those concrete words again, like “never.” You must be a recruiter with all these “facts” you’re throwing around.
“How many times do I have to explain my argument? I am completely against prestige and believe that it is never considered, so when someone says that prestige plays a role, even if it is microscopically small, I am against this because as I continue to say, PRESTIGE WILL NEVER MATTER.”
That’s a nice opinion you’ve got there.
"Here’s an article for you:
http://time.com/54342/it-doesnt-matter-where-you-go-to-college/"
The biggest point this school speaks to is a study that “compared the earnings of graduates of elite colleges with those of ‘moderately selective” schools’” and found that the school you attended doesn’t matter that much when it comes to earnings. It doesn’t speak so much to applying for graduate school or hirings. For what it does say about hirings, it talks about how employers want to see skills. That is obvious, no employer, regardless of where an applicant went to school, wants to see a skill-less employee who can’t think on their own. This article doesn’t prove your position.
"Other requirements included:
Exceptional one-to-one instructional ability
-Superlative drive
-Relentless dedication
-Consistent evolving
-Superior communication skills
-Work independently
-Bachelors degree from top university
Look at the ratio of skills to university ranking."
The ratio of skills to university ranking? LOL. Why does that matter? Beyond the absurdity of this comment, that list clearly shows that prestige matters for a company recruiter at Berkeley. You have said It “NEVER” matters and that’s a “FACT,” yet here is a recruiting memo that disproves that … and your only rebuttal is “the ratio of skills to university ranking.” L O L. Again, nobody said people get hired simply because they went to a prestigious school and you twist their argument into something concrete, alleging that people are saying prestige is the only thing that matters from one applicant to another (i.e. your tired arguments of “what if student 1 and student 2 both from school X apply” or "what if student 1 from school X and student from school Y apply…), all while you’ve been saying prestige NEVER matters. Except they said it was only one, of many, factors. And here is a list of several factors, in which one of them prestige. The “ratio” of factors is irrelevant.
To summarize the above paragraph, here is a recruiter at Berkeley saying that prestige matters. The “ratio” of university ranking to other requirements is irrelevant.
Chill out. Stop being so angry.
@briank82 Just because I point out a ratio, doesn’t mean I am changing my argument. The employer put down that he anted someone from a top university, but that says nothing about the prestige of the institution. A top university is a relative term, most of all US schools are top universities.
And I have to continue repeating the same thing over and over again. Prestige does not count towards anything, whatsoever. If someone says that there is a small chance it will have an influence, I say to them, “You are wrong”. This is all I am trying to get across and I have done so many, many times throughout this thread.
You can dick ride the other followers on here all you want, but it doesn’t mean you are in the right at all. We can throw around opinions all day about this!
@briank82 The article still points out the fact that prestige does not matter, whether it be an earning, a job field, a graduate school. etc. The prestigiousness of your institution does not and will not ever define the success you will have in the future. It is your work ethic and determination that will get you where you want to be.
I don’t care if you’ll change your argument. It’s clear you have no intention to do so, so you can stop announcing to us all that you don’t intend to.
Since “top university,” in your opinion, is a relative term and most US universities are “top universities,” why would the employer specifically note they want graduates of top universities? That alone seems to work against your argument.
“And I have to continue repeating the same thing over and over again. Prestige does not count towards anything, whatsoever. If someone says that there is a small chance it will have an influence, I say to them, “You are wrong”. This is all I am trying to get across and I have done so many, many times throughout this thread.”
That sure is a nice opinion you have there. Thanks for sharing.
“The prestigiousness of your institution does not and will not ever define the success you will have in the future.”
Thanks for saying what everyone who disagrees with you has said. Are you so confused that you can’t even follow the arguments of others without needing to twist their words into something they never said?
“The article still points out the fact that prestige does not matter, whether it be an earning, a job field, a graduate school. etc.”
No, it doesn’t. The main argument of that article revolves around “the impact of college selection has focused on comparing the earnings of graduates of different colleges.” It was strictly about earnings, which nobody is debating. “The economists found that the earnings of the two groups 20 years after graduation differed little or not at all.”
Nobody is saying prestige is all that matters. There is no single factor that matters, but many factors, regardless of how little or big specific factors may be weighted.
But you’ve said prestige means absolutely nothing. You’ve stated this, definitively, multiple times.
Accountemps, as reported by TIME, did a survey with CFOs on the hiring of finance majors. “the results were split — 49% said ‘not important at all’ while 51% said it was ‘somewhat or very important.’”
The chairman of Accountemps concluded: “Because many entry-level candidates have little professional experience, hiring managers often consider non-work-related factors, such as the quality of the applicant’s formal education,” said Max Messmer, chairman of Accountemps and author of Human Resources Kit For Dummies. “But learning extends beyond the classroom — valuable skills and knowledge also are gained through extracurricular activities, internships and jobs held during college.”
“Employers should avoid letting a single factor, such as where an applicant went to school or which internships he or she completed, carry disproportionate weight in the evaluation process,” said Messmer. “A strong work ethic and the ability to adapt quickly to new environments for example, are equally desirable.”
http://business.time.com/2007/07/19/does_university_prestige_matte/
This article alone cites multiple studies that show prestige is absolutely a factor in placement: https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/02/13/study-suggests-insular-faculty-hiring-practices-elite-departments
From just two of those studies:
“The new paper argues that English is a field where the perceived prestige of a Ph.D. program has a huge impact on where its new doctorates land. As a result, the good jobs that are out there are not in fact likely to be available to most new Ph.D.s and the searches to fill those positions are much less open to all than faculty members may like to think, the paper says.”
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/01/08/economist-offers-critique-job-market-phds-english
“Our research confirms that there is a direct correlation between institutional prestige and candidate placement. If we consider the highest ranked programs, the three tied at #1, we find that Harvard University has successfully placed 239 political scientists at 75 institutions—including twelve at Harvard. Princeton has successfully placed 108 political scientists at 62 institutions—including five at Princeton. Stanford has successfully placed 128 political scientists at 51 institutions—including three at Stanford. The highest ranked public university, The University of Michigan at Ann Arbor (ranked number four overall), has successfully placed 141 political scientists in 61 institutions—including seven at Michigan. These four schools contribute 616 political scientists; roughly twenty percent of the total tenure-track lines in the discipline at research-intensive programs. The median institutional ranking for the 116 institutions covered is eleven, which implies that eleven schools contribute 50 percent of the political science academics to research-intensive universities in the United States. Over 100 political science PhD programs are graduating students that will contest the remaining 50 percent of openings.”
http://gppreview.com/2012/12/03/superpowers-the-american-academic-elite/
That sure makes it sound like there is SOME correlation pertaining to prestige. And I’m just saying SOME, while you’ve made it clear you feel that there is absolutely no correlation whatsoever in any way. “Our research confirms that there is a direct correlation between institutional prestige and candidate placement.” … that alone would prove you wrong.
^^ in case of “too long; didn’t read” … there are studies that show a correlation between prestige of university when looked at in terms of job placement.
So feel free to once again assert that prestige means nothing and we can’t change your mind otherwise, but here are multiple studies that suggest there is a connection. Regardless of how small or big that correlation might be, it’s there. And you have said multiple times that there is absolutely no correlation and that prestige means nothing.
TL;DR … you’re wrong.
@briank82 Since we are talking about opinions here, why is it okay for you all to have an opinion and for me not to have an opinion? I seem to obviously be on the other side of the majority, but you will not be able to take my credibility and stance on this position away from me no matter how hard you try.
There is something wrong with you if you believe that prestige matters. It will never matter, and it is never considered when people apply for jobs, graduate schools and other opportunities. And the TIME magazine article I posted does indeed point out the insignificant amount of weight that prestige holds; absolutely nothing! Just because it is talking about money, does not mean it is not comparable.
Let us not get things confused here, folks. The article does point out that income is no different from school to school. My argument is that no aspect of academics, from graduate programs to jobs in the work field are not influenced at all because of your school of attendance. If you have trouble understanding this, I do not know how to communicate it any clearer.
You can post all of the articles that you want, for every hundred you have, I have a thousand more that points out the insignificant upper hand a prestigious degree will supposedly give you in the most extraordinary of circumstances. Prestigiousness does not matter. If we all went to Berkeley we would theoretically be the same candidates with very similar stats. How would someone go about picking between two potential employees from the same school? They don’t consider prestige in this case because they are from the same school. Therefore, prestige cannot ever be brought up in a situation like this.
We can extend it further to the students who do not attend these big institutions but still somehow appear in the workforce, working vibrant and well paying/respected jobs. They did not get these jobs because of their prestige, but because they had better opportunities to get them due to close proximity. There are so many other factors that come into play and prestige will never be one of them.
Take it or leave it.
If you all were to get into Berkeley you will realize this; people from the less prestigious UC Davis will be working int he same offices and interning in the same positions as you all will. It is not a big deal to be at a prestigious university. Yes, it takes hard work to get into the school, but it is never prestige that will get you into that school. It always comes down to hard work and dedication. ALWAYS. Prestige is never considered.
“but you will not be able to take my credibility…”
That’s the problem; you don’t have credibility. For some reason you think you do, but you don’t. I don’t either, which is why I’m referencing studies by people that actually have credibility.
I’ve just posted several credible studies that show a correlation between prestige of school and candidate placement. You’ve posted one article that talks about earnings. We are not talking about earnings.
“There is something wrong with you if you believe that prestige matters … My argument is that no aspect of academics, from graduate programs to jobs in the work field are not influenced at all because of your school of attendance.”
I guess there’s something wrong with the multiple studies I’ve found that correlate prestige of institution to factor like candidate placement. The multiple studies I posted previously say your opinion is wrong.
Show me studies that argue that prestige of institution has no bearing on candidate placement or other tangible benefits. I’ve showed you several.
Here’s more on one, and this is directly from University of Colorado’s website.
"A new study finds that small differences in institutional prestige have an enormous impact on the likelihood that a person who graduates with a doctoral degree will land a coveted faculty job.
The advantage of alma mater prestige in finding a job is so great that it cannot be explained solely by a difference in educational quality between the universities, according to the study, led by the University of Colorado Boulder and published today in the journal Science Advances.
Instead, the findings indicate that the social status of universities plays an important role in the faculty hiring process among their alumni.
“We’re not talking about a huge difference in quality between the top-10 institutions and the next 10,” said Aaron Clauset, an assistant professor of computer science at CU-Boulder and lead author of the study. “And yet, in terms of the ability to place people in tenure-track faculty positions, it is a huge difference.”
The study relied on hand-collected data about the educational histories of 19,000 current faculty members in three disciplines at hundreds of doctoral degree-granting institutions across the country.
Clauset and his colleagues found that only 25 percent of doctoral degree-granting institutions across the country produce 71 to 86 percent of tenure-track faculty, depending on the field.
The study also showed that the top 10 schools in each of the fields studied—computer science, business and history—produced between 1.6 and 3 times more faculty than the second tier of 10 schools and between 2.3 and 5.6 times more faculty than the third tier of 10 schools.
That, right there, directly counters your assertion that “Prestigiousness does not matter.”
This study also is irrelevant to your claim about proximity.
Post some studies that show that prestige has no value. Since this is a fact that is, in your mind, concrete, it should be pretty easy to show that there is no tangible value in the workplace from attending a prestigious institution.
“If you all were to get into Berkeley you will realize this; people from the less prestigious UC Davis will be working int he same offices and interning in the same positions as you all will.”
For the millionth time, nobody has argued against that.
“Prestige is never considered.”
I’ve presented studies that show the correlation of candidate placement relative to prestige of schools. Present something, aside from your opinion, that speaks to the contrary.
Can we just stop this debate? Lets just bond over our love of Berkeley <3 
Okay, fine. Here you go:
Many articles have been saying everything that I have been saying.
http://www.thecollegesolution.com/does-where-you-go-to-school-matter-to-employers/
“It matters not at all where they got their degrees but rather what they did with their time in the colleges they did attend. It matters what kind of person they are, how persistent they are, how hard they work, how creative they are, and how they present themselves.”
This woman works for a big time corporation and also states, “We have people from famous and not-so-famous colleges. We have smart people from every type of college you can imagine — people from Middle Tennessee State University working alongside people from Harvard. And guess what? They’re all doing the same work with great enthusiasm, smarts, and capability.”
Here, she also comments on someone who goes to a Cal State which is obviously less prestigious:
“Sometimes the poor kid who had to pay his way through Chico State has the most pluck and is the most driven. These types of employees are sometimes the most successful of all, because they are used to working hard from the get-go and did not come by anything in life through their dad’s connections. They have no sense of entitlement, so are willing to get their hands dirty for the mission.”
The bottom line is that prestigiousness does not give you an edge over the competition. Great! You went to a prestigious college, but what can you do as an individual!
Here is another article that focuses indirectly on prestigiousness not being a factor at all:
http://www.overcomingbias.com/2009/03/college-prestige-matters.html
They go on and say, “students who were accepted at an Ivy or a similar institution, but chose instead to attend a less sexy, “moderately selective” school. It turned out that such students had, on average, the same income twenty years later as graduates of the elite colleges. - See more at: http://www.overcomingbias.com/2009/03/college-prestige-matters.html#sthash.s6upM7x4.dpuf”
So I don’t understand why you’re having a hard time getting this through your head. Everything I have been talking about is in these articles. You have some articles that go against mine and I have some that go against yours. So, who really wins here? At the end of the day, you can go to a top notch school but that doesn’t discredit anyone who didn’t decide to go to that school for one reason or another. Employers are not interested in what school you went to anymore, they want to see your work ethic.
@briank82 Of course you’re arguing against that because you believe prestige has some sort of influence in the decision. Obviously it does not if UC Davis kids are working in the same building as Berkeley kids.
:’( plz
@Molisha We will be able to move on once some people understand and get the concept of prestige not having any influence on your job expenditures or any sort of graduate studies! Until then, we will be in a battle.
@goldencub @briank82 @music1990 @themightybicycle @csmajortom
IS IT CLEAR?!
omg… lol we can all have our own opinions. I think we should all just let other people think what they want to instead of trying to control how they feel =P
@RAHforHEE I think it’s clear that no one is changing their mind. Ultimately, it doesn’t really matter what any of us think though. Maybe it’s time to let the thread carry on with its normal activity.