I said the VAST majority are not. If you are going to quote me, please use the entire sentence. A tiny percentage of students go to a Harvard.
1 Like
Starting salaries are the same for engineers whether they graduate from Cornell or U of Akron.
2 Likes
I’m genuinely asking this question because I’m told that I will have the same outcome if I go to a state school as if I go to an elite school. why are people deliberately choosing to take out loans and send their children to elite schools, paying upwards of 80k? what about it is worth breaking their backs to go there?
also note: the starting salary might be the same, but that company will probably have/want more cornell graduates than akron graduates, right?
IMO it’s totally unnecessary to take on debt for an engineering degree as long as you go to an ABET accredited school.
3 Likes
I said the VAST majority are not. If you are going to quote me, please use the entire sentence. A tiny percentage of students go to a [Harvard]
Yeah, but we’re talking about kids who want to go to elite colleges, not a majority of kids. They’re different groups.
Most people don’t even apply to Harvard.
And to my original point, many people place such a high importance on getting into a top college because the connections + job opportunities are so much better than at an ordinary college.
My point is, elite firms have to stop recruiting so disproportionately from a handful of schools but that’s not going to happen in my life time.
I don’t think elite college admissions should be a lottery. But the way to stop the ‘elite college problem’ is to make elite employers recruit more from public colleges.
That way, there wouldn’t be a difference in career outcome between a Harvard grad and a state grad controlling for ability. If you bring other colleges up to the same level, this desperation to get their kids into top colleges will reduce.
It won’t stop but the impact would reduce.
1 Like
Could be:
-
they assume causation when there is only correlation, or are otherwise misguided
-
they are well aware that it won’t matter in terms of junior’s opportunities, but are paying for cocktail party bragging rights, assortative mating, or other factors
-
college reputation does matter for junior’s employment, grad school or professional school opportunities
I hold the same belief- but a vast majority of academia, and most importantly, employers, might not. And that’s the issue. There’s obviously preference that needs to be distributed and given to a wider variety of students, instead of concentrating opportunity and employment at elite schools
People pay 80K because they have the money and they want their kids to have certain educational experiences not necessary because they ll get better jobs/more pay. And they chose to pay that money to schools that are nowhere near “targets” or for majors that does not matter. Why would anyone pay Boston college for a nursing degree when a student can get the same degree at Umass Boston? Exact same career prospects and pay. But parents do it routinely.
3 Likes
I only learned about U of Akron recently because we noticed how well they had done with their Formula SAE team, Zips Racing. What a fantastic team! We looked into Akron more, and it sounds like a great school! And I had NEVER heard of it before this. I have loved learning more here on CC about these schools that are less talked about where we live in CA. So many great schools out there with wonderful programs.
3 Likes
I feel like it’s very hard to be misguided on the value of going to an elite college if you are qualified to go to one. You probably know how the system works and why the college is held with such high regard, so you’re informed that going there is a good decision. And if going to xyz college is going to grant them bragging rights, something about xyz college must be so great that it warrants people prestige. The most feasible is the third point and there’s plenty data to show that it’s true
People pay 80K because they have the money and they want their kids to have certain educational experiences not necessary because they ll get better jobs/more pay. And they chose to pay that money to schools that are nowhere near “targets” or for majors that does not matter. Why would anyone pay Boston college for a nursing degree when a student can get the same degree at Umass Boston? Exact same career prospects and pay. But parents do it routinely.
People choose to go to colleges for many different reasons. There’s no single reason why someone chooses to go to a college.
But there wouldn’t be such a desperation to get into top colleges if it didn’t matter economically or if the brand didn’t matter to employers/society at large.
You wouldn’t have kids feeling like their lives are over (I’m being genuinely serious, there are lots of posts like that on various subreddits) before their lives have even begun.
1 Like
Yes, because no one ever makes irrational financial purchases based on asymmetrical information nor just plain foolishness.
5 Likes
because they have the money
majority of families don’t have 50-80k lying around to sacrifice for “certain education experiences” that don’t grant better jobs or pay. parents procure up 80k because there is an obvious advantage for attending elite schools, in many different ways.
Exact same career prospects and pay.
but this doesn’t seem to faze them, why?
Yes, because no one ever makes irrational financial purchases based on asymmetrical information nor just plain foolishness.
I thought economics said consumers were rational.
And it seems pretty rational in my eyes.
How are you defining “top employers”? What does that even mean?
Yes! I remember filling out paper applications. Oof.
Yes, you could go to an Ivy League school with good grades, a good test score, and maybe a few clubs on the side. You didn’t need anything more than that, even for T20s.
majority of families don’t have 50-80k lying around to sacrifice for “certain education experiences” that don’t grant better jobs or pay. parents procure up 80k because there is an obvious advantage for attending elite schools, in many different ways.
Generally, top colleges have really good aid.
If you can’t afford $80k per year, you’ll usually get aid appropriate to your income.
that’s also true! but no one applies to elite colleges solely just to get aid. They’ve been aiming for top colleges for the other benefits that are associated with going to elite college. and they’re willing to pay a whole lot to attend, which wouldn’t be rational unless there was a pay off
1 Like
I am not in favor of a lottery system, nor do I favor the holistic admissions. I have tried to convey my rant in the U Chicago forums about how the T20 schools (with the “holistic” admissions) have simply dropped the ball on academic superstars. They simply don’t find these academic superstars to be attractive candidates. There is not a single T20 college that considers pure objective (measurable) standards attractive enough to admit students of extremely high, measurable calibre. These superstars clear the initial bar just like many other “average-excellent” students do, and then they are asked “what else you got?”. T20 schools quickly forget that their singular academic focus itself is worthy of celebration (tests are scored, aren’t they?). The academic superstars are standouts from the “average-excellent”, by a mile, and there are only few of them.
The superstars are typically destined to state flagships, often with good scholarships (absolutely nothing wrong if that’s their choice). Parents and teachers on that Chicago forum tried to convince me that there are simply too many of these academic superstars for T20 to admit. My contention here is that, there are not. A city would be lucky to have a few such students, and nationwide maybe a few hundreds to low thousand students at most. Meanwhile, T20 have ~40K slots available, yet these superstars struggle in the “soft” (subjective) department, after clearing the initial bar of academic credentials.
Let me give you an example. How many of these AND clauses below do you have to remove (or replace with adjacent), before you come up with a cohort of “way too many qualified students” applying to T20.
Class rank 1/1200 And ACT36/1600 SAT And 25 DE/AP classes all with A’s and 5s And extreme rigor (hardest of classes at flagships) And highest reported UW GPA/Cumulative GPA from a school district (not a school, a district, verifiable) And win nationally recognized awards such NMS, Presidential Scholar, math competitions. These AND clauses would be in addition to other soft/subjective measures such as volunteering, varsity sports, writing decent essays and obtaining good LORs. In and of itself, a 36 ACT or 1600 SAT or class rank 1 isn’t impressive, but when you combine all of the measurable things, you get some exceptional standouts. They have put their heart and soul into their academics, yet their trophy is a very uncertain shot at T20 and assured place at safeties (sometimes even safeties/reach schools reject to protect yield. Go figure. UofM does).
Overcame personal struggles and or major adversity? Sure, another subjective measure. How do you measure it? Excellent essays? How do you judge the value of those in today’s climate (chatGPT, teacher/parental help, academic consultants etc)? How do you judge the underlying effort that students describe in their essays? Where is the objectivity in any of these soft criteria? One can objectively assess a URM or first to college or legacies and some such hooks, but not essays. Most schools don’t even interview candidates, yet get a “feel” for the fit given one or two 200 words essays. Academic excellence must not correlate well with success, leadership and potential.
I do appreciate the fact that most here prefer the holistic measures, but objective measures such as the one described above deserves a spot amongst one T20 school. Who here doesn’t appreciate a consistent 3-point shooter?! I do, my kid is headed to a flagship along with many of his academic compatriots.
I am a proud parent of an over-represented ethnicity. I say let there be merit, gimme merit, more merit! Give me a “measurable” objective criteria over “subjective” holistic ones. No lotteries!
2 Likes
No one would buy or lease or borrow to drive an expensive car - there must be a huge pay off to buying an expensive car.
No one would buy a Rolex unless there was a huge pay off to having a Rolex.
No one would go into credit card debt unless there was a huge payoff to having credit card debt.
All of these choices are totes rational because all financial decisions are. The economists told me so.
3 Likes
I don’t think it is that hard to be misguided. Many people (even those who get into highly selective colleges, and their parents) have a hard time teasing out causation. They see the numbers that show that grads of school X earn more than grads of school Y, either overall or in the major the kid or parent is interested in, and they think it could matter.
That being said, I am not convinced that it doesn’t matter. You have the academic research saying one thing and the hiring manager surveys and other information saying something else.