why would the “pay off” have to be in the form of money? it can be several different forms. think connections, employment opportunities, facilities, etc… not at all fair to make a comparison between an inanimate object bought for luxury to a degree that starts off a lifelong career…
Yep… just the other day, I overhead my son explaining to my husband about Veblen goods (I guess my husband had never heard the term) and positional goods, in the context of college admissions. It seems that they covered this in my son’s AP Econ class 
2 Likes
comparing a degree to goods is honestly disheartening but that could just be me 
I guess this is the current situation of college admissions
Pay off doesn’t need to be in the form of money. Ego is often stroked by brand names and ‘selectivity’. But an ego being stroked doesn’t mean there is necessarily a bigger pay off - no school guarantees connections, or opportunities due to their brand.
If they did, there would never be threads from students at top schools complaining about their lack of internships, the jobs they don’t have and the career service office that is unhelpful.
And if you don’t think expensive cars and Rolexes aren’t being sold with the implicit promise of better connections and opportunities, a larger payoff if you will - I don’t know what you think the allure is of those items.
College is an item for sale, that you purchase. It’s not a romantic relationship or your best friend forever.
Sure, it’s an experience that can change your life. Other potentially life-changing experiences that you can buy, like going on a trip where you meet someone who hires you for that dream job, or you fall in love with, (or, fill in the blank), are also purchases.
2 Likes
Right, but I don’t think (m)any people think that certain schools guarantee certain outcomes or that no graduates of other schools will have those outcomes. It is a question of whether college reputation helps, not whether it guarantees or precludes.
1 Like
Could it be that their best prospective employees come from those “top” schools? I know that’s not what many on CC think, but………
2 Likes
no school guarantees connections, or opportunities due to their brand
of course, but it’s a given that students at elite schools are way more likely to form meaningful connections, gain valuable opportunities, and overall have much, much more access to means that advance their career. there is a reason why parents prefer to invest so much to send their students off to colleges that grant these benefits at a likelier rate than non-elite schools. or else, you would be admitting that the hype around these schools is pretty much for nothing. that’s not true is it?
Just because there are some struggling students at an elite university doesn’t mean that they are bound for the same opportunity as non-elite college students. they just have more means to gain internships, jobs, or professional guidance… and it’s obviously making a difference.
though yeah, luxury items are almost like elite colleges, they’re much more simple and I just don’t think it’s a fair comparison. and even if it was a fair comparison, it’s again saying that there are some benefits to elite colleges other than just good education. people buy into this narrative and people achieve higher levels of success from this narrative
Before I get angry messages, people choose colleges for a wide variety of reasons from the experience to the status symbol it gives you to the connections and employment opportunities.
My argument wasn’t that people are choosing to go to top colleges for employment opportunities, I’m saying the desperation that young kids have is because society places an incredibly high weight on degree name.
Could it be that their best prospective employees come from those “top” schools? I know that’s not what many on CC think, but………
Nobody said they don’t.
Employers are behaving rationally. But a part of it is that clients don’t mind high fees if you’ve got a Harvard grad looking over the work 
I’m saying we get articles like this continuously because there’s such a divergence in outcomes between different universities. If employers stopped putting such a high premium on certain universities, that would help.
Of course, it very well could be.
I don’t know if this is a given. Over this admissions season, I have been spending time checking out reddit for the various schools that my kid applied to. On the highly ranked schools’ reddits, I have been seeing just as many (or even more) students complaining, “why have I been here for a year and have no friends?” or “why don’t I have an internship after sending out 400 resumes?”
I think these schools have lots to offer, but I don’t think it’s a given that it’s way more likely for every student to have much, much more access to opportunities.
2 Likes
imagine the difference between a community college and Harvard. I believe it’s a given that Harvard students are way more likely to have much, much more access to opportunities. This includes education, research, counseling, financial aid, internships, etc… with future employment included. It is most assuredly a given that the Harvard student will have much less trouble finding any sort of opportunity… and this includes future career outlook.
But let’s say that it’s not a given that elite schools are way more likelier to offer a wider range of opportunities to students than non-elite colleges. Then why are people still paying anyways? That’s because general assumption among people is that education at Harvard assures a way better chance at employment than most other non-elite universities. And this is literally true, and there’s data to back this up. Outliers will exist everywhere and I’m talking general terms, but regardless, the kids who are complaining about opportunity are going to have greater access to help for those issues compared to non-elite college students.
again just to reiterate that I genuinely just think college name is becoming an issue for my peers in high school
I doubt that this is a choice that many students are making. Realistically, most students are looking at choices that are somewhat closer together on the “eliteness” spectrum.
4 Likes
it’s an extreme comparison im making to show the disparity between students on the two opposite ends of the spectrum
and even if the comparison is extreme, both those students exist
I would word this differently. For engineers at the same company, starting salaries for a particular position tend to be the same regardless of where the student was from.
But the opportunities for college students can vary based upon where they went to college, with more elite colleges providing easier entry into what many consider more desirable options. For example, for students in most CS programs, landing a job at a FAANG used to be the dream (before the recent layoffs). But in a few elite colleges, those companies were the safeties.
1 Like
again,
I’m trying to show that
Where you attend school doesn’t define who you are or determine what success you’ll have.
Isn’t entirely true and what school you attend is starting to make a very real and profound impact on employment. This is what I notice as a high school student and as many others have mentioned before, things have gotten way more competitive, with more preference being given to elite universities. It is only fair to call out the type of impact this is having/ will have on employment, let alone high school extracurricular choice. I am saddened that my peers feel as if they have to change their interests and dedicate copious amounts of time on activities that mean nothing to them, for the sake of attending an elite college. Originally my solution to this was
so it really does depend on giving qualified students that might be rejected from an ivy, despite their accomplishments, more options. atleast in my opinion, there should be an expansion of state schools and more pathways for students to access “elite” opportunity. this way, they wouldn’t see Ivies as the best thing ever and would understand they have so many good options : )
and it still is!
I think it is a question of economy of scale - at a top school there will be a greater concentration of the kind of students they are looking for. The same caliber students can be found at many, many schools - just not in the same numbers. FYI, I don’t doubt the quality or appeal of an elite school (and S24 is considering a couple - we’ll be happy to pay if he is admitted) but there are many avenues to success so if a smart, talented kid isn’t accepted (all too common these days) it isn’t the tragedy that some make it out to be.
6 Likes
I think you’ve been consuming too much marketing. I don’t blame you. There’s a lot of it out there.
My husband had one of these exclusive paid internships the summer after his junior year (that turned into his first job) at a top 10 school and he was shocked to find public college students in the exact same internship he had. The school talked to him and his classmates like they were the only people in the world to get this ‘in’, and he felt duped.
Employers tend to hire who they know. The days of employers hiring from one or two schools are just not what they used to be. Skills get people hired today far, far more than names on diplomas.
1 Like
Some off the 5 FAANG companies are among the more common employers of tech majors at many “elite” private colleges, but this doesn’t distinguish between whether the particular college name is the cause of this relationship or correlated, with other driving forces. For example, I’d expect that the type of kid who thinks is important to attend a private college that he/she considers to be “elite” is more likely to be the type of kid who thinks it is important to be employed at a company that he/she considers “elite.” In contrast, I’d expect kids who favor attending an in state public are more likely to favor remaining in state after graduation, rather than dreaming of getting a job at FAANG and moving to Silicon Valley. I’d also expect the type of kid who attends an “elite” college to tend to do well in tech interviews, increasing chances of gaining employment, if they apply.
For example, I’d expect most tech employers are quite familiar with GeorgiaTech and have positive associations with the school. USNWR ranks GeorgiaTech among the top 5 schools for both undergraduate CS and undergraduate engineering. In previous years, USNWR has ranked GT as high as #1. Nevertheless, the most common location of employment after graduating was the state of Georgia, for both GT CS grads and GT engineering grads. Among GT engineering grads, 400 worked in Georgia after graduation compared to 14 for CA, 12 for NY/NYC, etc. GT kids certainly aren’t flocking to FAANG or the other hot companies listed in this thread. Is that because FAANG is biased against GeorgiaTech grads, or is that because GT grads often prefer staying in Georgia over moving to Silicon Valley and working at FAANG?
I work in tech and attended Stanford. My personal experience was many Bay Area tech companies attended Stanford career fairs, including some of FAANG (not all). I had no problem getting interviews, although I’m not sure how much this related to the school name and how much this related to having a quality resume, with desired skillset and experience. At the interview, I went through the same application process as students from other colleges, including many public colleges. We often did interviews in sequence on the same day. Without exception, this involved a series of technical interviews, with a lot of problem solving. It was certainly not an auto admit based on where you attended college, and I am not aware of anyone in my class who treated FAANG like “safeties.”. Some persons I know in my major didn’t didn’t get as many interview offers and/or didn’t do well in interviews, leading to a huge number of rejections, before finally getting a job offer. Others received multiple job offers.
2 Likes
At elite private colleges FAANGs are not considered elite. As @hebegebe suggested, many consider them to be safeties.