Yale vs. Harvard: Economics

Colleges and Universities A-Z Yale University
21

<p>
[quote]
I'm not sure why, but I get the feeling that tetrishead and datalook are both one and the same...
Maybe it's because of their extreme anti-Yale-ridden comments?
When posters are so keen to point out the negatives of a college this much, you really have to question what event took place to make them feel that way, don't you think?
Anyways...

[/quote]

Uh, I'm not really sure what you're trying to claim here. Wharton is known for basically having the best possible placement of any undergraduate business school. Saying Yale econ has better job placement than Wharton is just completely inaccurate.</p>

<p>I like Yale. It's an amazing school. If I wanted to major in economics and I had to choose between Yale or Northwestern, I'd choose Yale because of the intangibles of the rest of the school--but not because the economics department is superior to NU. The economics department is probably in the top 10-15, and that's saying something considering just how many schools there are in this world. But if you're really talking about undergraduate job placement coming out of the econ program--it's just not where Yale is its strongest. It's still in elite company, and you'll still get a great job. But it's not where Yale is #1. The graduate program is relatively well-respected, but it's understood to not be at the level of a Chicago or Harvard in theory, or a MIT or UCB at the quant level.

[quote]
I vote for the above paragraph to be quoted in the next "1001 dumbest things ever said" book.

[/quote]

Economics department != entire schools. Is Yale a better school than NYU, Stanford or Northwestern? Yeah, in most instances I think so. But are those schools undergraduate economic departments better than Yale's? Yes. Is their job placement better out of the economics program? Absolutely. It doesn't take anything away from Yale to have just one major that isn't in the top 3 in the country. You're not going to go wrong majoring in economics at Yale, whether you want to get a doctorate and be a researcher or work in finance. But there are other schools that are known for their economics departments, and for those departments practically alone. There's a reason for that.</p>

22

<p>And, by the way Tami, for someone who's smart enough to go to Wellesley I would have thought you'd have been introduced to analytical thinking by now. Just because <person> loves Yale doesn't mean <person> can't separate themselves from their biases and assess Yale's position from as neutral a standpoint as possible. You made statements that were simultaneously unsubstantiated and irrelevant to my stance on the issue all while providing nothing of substance on your own, and that's quite the feat.</person></person></p>

23

<p>You definitely softened your stance there a bit, eh? ;)</p>

<p>How do you exactly back up your rather adament claim that Yale is "no where near" the job placements in comparison to NU, Stern, Columbia, Princeton, etc.? </p>

<p>I never said econ departments are the makeup of entire schools, nor did I imply that. I was directly countering your "job placement" argument, and I still stand by my comment.</p>

24

<p>Tetrishead, for someone who's smart enough to point out that Wellesley ladies are quite the bright bunch (;)), I think you've failed to recognize that there is little need for analytical thinking in this situation.</p>

<p>There's hardly anything neutral about lowering a school's image with no factual evidence. I consider neutral as one who can speak on both the strengths and the weaknesses on both sides, of all institutions.</p>

25

<p>Okay, if Yale isn't known for econ, what IS it the best at? Yale is clearly among the best undergraduate schools in the country, but all I hear is how these "less elite" schools like NU and UChic are better at one thing or another... what is Yale exceptional at?</p>

26

<p>
[quote]
You definitely softened your stance there a bit, eh? ;)

[/quote]

I softened nothing. Your reading comprehension ability resulted in you believing I said Yale was not on-par with those schools, even when we are both aware that the discussion was specifically relating to economics department and any statements made about schools in that context should have been assumed to be about said topic and not needed a qualifier every single sentence.

[quote]
How do you exactly back up your rather adament claim that Yale is "no where near" the job placements in comparison to NU, Stern, Columbia, Princeton, etc.?

[/quote]

Well, for graduate school I suppose we could go through the normalized institution rankings for students eventually receiving Ph.D's in economics per 1,000 students. That's probably a not great indicator of quality, though, is it?</p>

<p>So then what you're effectively left with is (1) either trying to assess undergraduate programs, which is basically impossible and arbitrary, or (2) assessing the general opinion of the programs of such schools in the business world and assessing their graduate programs. The only exceptions to this are NU and Stern, where I suppose we can look at NU's strength in the fed challenge as a boon to their undergraduate program (as well as the new Kellogg undergraduate certificate in financial economics), and we can give a (somewhat) unfair bonus to Stern by virtue of its position so close to Wallstreet, which from logically you can deduce that intern and externship availability is superior, which directly correlate to job offers coming out of school. This also applies to Columbia, which is effectively starting to become incestuous with Wallstreet.</p>

<p>Then I suppose there's the reputation factor, which while obviously is incredibly unreliable still places Yale further down the totem pole than the rest of the schools we're discussing.</p>

<p>As for job placement Yale economics v. Wharton, that can be quantitative. I don't think anyone who's seriously ever looked at how well Wharton places in general "business" (which is a lot of things, obviously) job market thinks they're anything but the single best undergraduate school for job placement in business.

[quote]
I never said econ departments are the makeup of entire schools, nor did I imply that. I was directly countering your "job placement" argument, and I still stand by my comment.

[/quote]

Your comment is that I'm anti-Yale because I said Yale has a 10-15 economics program instead of a 1-5. I don't seriously see how that can be considered an "extreme anti-Yale-ridden comment." Anyone who sees that as an insult or the ramblings of some bitter internet poster is absolutely delusional, and seriously needs to reassess the way they view the world. 10-15 is great, and it signals that there's a great program. If that tweaks you, then you're going to have big problems throughout the rest of your life dealing with other human beings.</p>

27

<p>
[quote]
Well, for graduate school I suppose we could go through the normalized institution rankings for students eventually receiving Ph.D's in economics per 1,000 students. That's probably a not great indicator of quality, though, is it?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Nope!</p>

<p>
[quote]
2) assessing the general opinion of the programs of such schools in the business world and assessing their graduate programs.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Right. Sadly, this cannot be done by you, either. I guess I have to spell this one out for you--you don't represent the "general opinon." Period. What position are you in to know the "reputation factor" of these schools? Internships, etc. Fine. But what makes, for example, Princeton. a no match winner against Yale in job placements? You've still avoided in giving me concrete evidence besides your opinion, which I couldn't care less about (just like you couldn't care less about mine).</p>

<p>
[quote]
Your comment is that I'm anti-Yale because I said Yale has a 10-15 economics program instead of a 1-5. I don't seriously see how that can be considered an "extreme anti-Yale-ridden comment." Anyone who sees that as an insult or the ramblings of some bitter internet poster is absolutely delusional, and seriously needs to reassess the way they view the world. If that tweaks you, then you're going to have big problems throughout the rest of your life dealing with other human beings.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>No, you're right. But you continue to put an anti-Yale sentiment in your comments by repeating that people who think Yale has a better econ program are "delusional" or are "not commenting from Earth." Can you really say that is neutral? </p>

<p>
[quote]
If that tweaks you, then you're going to have big problems throughout the rest of your life dealing with other human beings.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>No.</p>

28

<p>To SourApplezz,</p>

<p>NOT sure if datalook is really more stupid than you are. If you can not tell the strong correlation between the quality of a graduate program and the quality of an undergraduate program for the same school, you may want to take an IQ test. I bet your IQ is not high.</p>

<p>Hint: look at any usnews ranking in a specific major, such as business and engineering. See if you can find any notable difference between undergraduate ranking and graduate ranking.</p>

29

<p>bmwdan,</p>

<p>To be fair, Yale does have some super strong programs, such as law, English, history, psycolology, and some arts and humanity programs. Yale is also very good at science and social science, just not top-notched (I mean not top 5). Obviously, some Yale people always over-promote Yale. Mr. PosterX even claimed Yale is #1 in engineering. That is laughable.</p>

30

<p>Datalook, it's ok if Yale didn't take you. I'm sure the college you're going to is awesome. Cheer up!</p>

31

<p>Trix-D, you are funny.</p>

<p>I never applied for Yale. Yale is not so great in the areas I'm interested in.</p>

<p>Because datalook pointed out Yale is not top-notched in some areas, he/she must have been rejected by Yale? </p>

<p>Don't be too naive.</p>

32

<p>There are a couple support threads if you use the search function for denied students. Some great ones are in the parent cafe.</p>

33

<p>Oh, and if you have the time, you should really swing back to the "Yale vs. Harvard: Biology" thread to answer a couple concerns that people have been posting rather than ignoring it!</p>

<p>Good luck with all your future endeavors!</p>

34

<p>Among the large research Ivies (Harvard, Yale, Columbia, Penn, Cornell, Princeton), Yale is comparably weak in some of the sciences (like physics) but its working to improve that (e.g recruiting more science students).</p>

<p>For finance, Yale also lags behind its peers (Harvard, Princeton, Wharton, about equal to Columbia). This is not anti-Yale trolling, this is simply a matter of fact. Yale has an excellent rep on wall-street as all Ivies do, but it's not Harvard, Wharton, or Princeton when it comes to recruiting.</p>

<p>What Yale IS KNOWN for however, is its phenomenal history, english, and in general humanities program. One reason Yale has produced a couple of presidents in the recent decades is because about 50 years ago, Yale's president then decided that the University would be focused on PUBLIC SERVICE. In fact, Bush Sr. himself cites Yale as the reason he eventually pursued politics.</p>

<p>Additionally, Yale is very strong for premed and prelaw. If you want to become a doctor or lawyer, Harvard and Yale are as good as it gets. If you want to become a BANKER/Economist however... IF you can gain admittance into Yale, you can gain admittance into schools that would serve that purpose better.</p>

35

<p>
[quote]
Right. Sadly, this cannot be done by you, either. I guess I have to spell this one out for you--you don't represent the "general opinon." Period. What position are you in to know the "reputation factor" of these schools?

[/quote]

Well, persumably I'm in a better position than you are since I'm more familiar with the financial industry, but your point is taken and accurate. We'll leave this part of the conversation aside, then.

[quote]
Internships, etc. Fine. But what makes, for example, Princeton. a no match winner against Yale in job placements?

[/quote]

I'll talk about quality because that's what generally leads to job placement (the alumni networks are about equal, although Yale has more blue bloods). The graduate program in economics at Princeton is stronger quantitatively, ranked better and at the undergraduate level there's greater specialization. AFAIK Yale has no program that allows any specialization in finance, while Princeton has the Bendheim Center. Princeton is also stronger in CS and EE in general, which applies itself to the financial engineering and finance postgraduate degrees (and is generally the hallmark of good quant programs).

[quote]
You've still avoided in giving me concrete evidence besides your opinion, which I couldn't care less about (just like you couldn't care less about mine).

[/quote]

Schools aren't historically, uh, forthcoming with data about the future career paths of everyone that graduates from X program. They list a couple of top-flight employers who a few kids went to, say some are going to graduate schools here and here and here, and that's about it. My understanding of the perception of Yale compared to Princeton is that they're not on the same level, that Princeton is stronger quantitatively and quant work is a requirement for any form of financial analysis--that last bit is true, regardless of the unreliability of perceptions. Since we have agreed that my understanding of the perception is irrelevant (even though this is one of the few areas where I consider myself knowledgable), it goes back to the part above this.

[quote]
No, you're right. But you continue to put an anti-Yale sentiment in your comments by repeating that people who think Yale has a better econ program are "delusional" or are "not commenting from Earth." Can you really say that is neutral?

[/quote]

That's my assessment from a neutral position. I don't go to any of the schools we're discussing, even though I'm probably applying to all of them RD. Ironically, Yale has been my dream school since I was a kid, and it's my #1 choice. Neutrality does not require you to be watered-down, it can result in a fairly extreme opinion. Yes, people who think Yale has a better economics program than Harvard are delusional, and yes, anyone who seriously ranks Yale as a top 4 school in job placement out of econ in business and bumps out Wharton to a 'second tier' is either literally, certifiably insane, or just completely ignorant. When I saw the post posterX made I was incredulous.

[quote]
No.

[/quote]

In that context what you just said is basically the equivalent of "fail," and if you know I already don't care about your opinion then you know that I won't exactly consider that no in the firm tone it's written. When I read it I heard Yakkety Sax playing in my mind.</p>

36

<p>tetrishead,
Yale's economics department, whether by reputation or ranking is better than top 10-15. It is somewhere in the 5-10 (7-9 to be more specific) range. NYU, Columbia and Northwestern do not have definitely better economics departments. Though all are very good, they are approximately equal to Yale (with NYU and Columbia weaker). Chicago, MIT, Berkeley, Stanford, Princeton and Harvard (not in that order) are the top 6 economics departments in the country. There is a strong argument for placing Yale 7th, but there are arguments for others as well. Regardless, though, almost any economist would tell you that Yale is a top-10 program.
Of course, this is all graduate level anyway. At the undergrad level, Berkeley immediately becomes weaker because of overall undergrad reputation, size, and other factors. Wharton is stronger if you are talking about employment in finance, but is no better for grad school (in general, academics don't take undergrad business school very seriously). NU and NYU certainly fall behind at the undergrad level (and NYU was already definitely behind at grad school). Columbia may stay level - hurt by weaker prestige, helped by location (though location doesn't help for grad school).
I don't see how you can say reputation hurts Yale. The cachet of the school's name gives it tremendous prestige. And, in fact, for getting a job, the reputation of a school will almost always trump the reputation of its economics department. So for that reason, Yale probably has an advantage over Chicago, and is even with MIT, Princeton, and Stanford. Wharton maintains an advantage due to business-school prestige, and Harvard because it is the most famous name in higher education.
But basically what this comes down to is that it is ludicrous to say that NYU and NU grads have better opportunities than Yale, and incorrect to say that Columbia grads do. It's also wrong to argue that PSM grads have any significant advantage over graduates from Yale (or that the Wharton/Harvard advantage is particularly large).
And lest you think I'm saying this out of personal bias as a Yale student, I'm planing to go to grad school (not in economics), have no interest in finance or finance jobs, and frankly think that most people who want such jobs are uninteresting and arrogant and not people I like having at Yale. If they all wanted to go elsewhere (and fill Yale with people interested in academia and public service, not money-making) it would be fine with me, but I'm not going to pretend it would be better for them.</p>

37

<p>Northwestern has a better economics program if your goal is working in finance. Their job opportunities, alone, might be inferior to Yale--but the network consists of Kellogg as well, which is leaps and bounds better than YSM. I'm relatively confident they have the better economics program overall, but at the least the fed results and the increasing interaction with Kellogg is enough for me to put Northwestern above Yale. I'm not going to comment on whether or not NYU or Columbia have better economics programs because I surmise NYU is inferior and Columbia is about equal, but my rationale in placing them above Yale is that they're literally right there and they often times have unparalleled opportunities during the school year. I also agree with you that Berkeley largely falls out of the top grouping at the undergraduate level.</p>

<p>Name is incredibly important in business, even moreso than in academia, so of course I agree with you there. But Stanford and the Claremont's have practically unfettered access to the financials on the West Coast, and I genuinely (for whatever reason) have always held the belief that Claremont and Pomona especially have the most underrated undergraduate economics departments in the country. I don't see Yale have a prestige bonus over Chicago in consulting, finance and business. If anything, I would imagine it's the other way around, while Yale has the prestige in policy, medicine and the humanities. I would agree that it's probably even in name, in business, with the others. And yes, Wharton isn't great for graduate school placement, but the question is job placement, and no one is better than Wharton at that.</p>

38

<p>Tetris, I understand. My neutral position is that you are ludicrous and ignorant as well! ;)</p>

<p>
[quote]
When I read it I heard Yakkety Sax playing in my mind.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Puahahah! :) That one actually made me laugh out loud. My "No" was the fact that I really am not going to take "life advice" from some unknown internet poster. I really don't care how you consider my "no," in fact, I take your advice to be quite pathetic. But that's my "neutral opinion" again! Tell me--how is calling someone who disagrees with you as "delusional" considered neutral? Just because you are in a position of applying to both schools, does not make you so--you are one sided in the sense that you strongly disagree with people who think otherwise. That is hardly neutral. Dictionary time? ;)</p>

<p>
[quote]
My understanding of the perception of Yale compared to Princeton is that they're not on the same level, that Princeton is stronger quantitatively and quant work is a requirement for any form of financial analysis--that last bit is true, regardless of the unreliability of perceptions.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Your "understanding of the perception?" Based on what? Some narrow scope of your closest friends and peers? Ranking systems? Oh, for god sakes, is it USNEWS? </p>

<p>Quant work? So you're basically arguing that Princeton > Yale in math, hard sciences, and fnancial analysis requires such skills, and THUS Princeton is better for job placements? That is the most ridiculous evidence for "better job placement" I've ever seen presented. </p>

<p>Is financial analysis skills the only criteria for BETTER JOB PLACEMENT?</p>

<p>
[quote]
Well, persumably I'm in a better position than you are since I'm more familiar with the financial industry,

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Whatever you say.</p>

39

<p>
[quote]
Puahahah! That one actually made me laugh out loud. My "No" was the fact that I really am not going to take "life advice" from some unknown internet poster. I really don't care how you consider my "no," in fact, I take your advice to be quite pathetic. But that's my "neutral opinion" again! Tell me--how is calling someone who disagrees with you as "delusional" considered neutral? Just because you are in a position of applying to both schools, does not make you so--you are one sided in the sense that you strongly disagree with people who think otherwise. That is hardly neutral. Dictionary time?

[/quote]

We can go to the dictionary if you like. The end-result of an assessment is only biased if the initial position of the person making the assessment is biased. It is neutrality at the beginning, not at the end, that matters. If we were all neutral in our opinions then we really wouldn't have any opinions.

[quote]
Your "understanding of the perception?" Based on what? Some narrow scope of your closest friends and peers? Ranking systems? Oh, for god sakes, is it USNEWS?

[/quote]

My understanding of the perception comes from time spent on forums where a deluge of financial professionals are members and my perception is partially influenced by what schools are targets for recruitment.</p>

<p>The USNews is irrelevant when it comes to measurements of job placement out of school, even for their b-school rankings. They aren't necessarily bad at ranking the quality of educations, though.

[quote]
Quant work? So you're basically arguing that Princeton > Yale in math, hard sciences, and fnancial analysis requires such skills, and THUS Princeton is better for job placements? That is the most ridiculous evidence for "better job placement" I've ever seen presented.

[/quote]

Actually I'm basically arguing that Princeton's graduate offerings are superior to Yale's, by proxy that influences the undergraduate offerings since Princeton isn't in the same position as a Berkeley, and their strength in CS and EE give them added clout in the world of finance because quant work, at the end of the day, is what matters. The same strength in CS and EE also pretty much guarantees that you'll find more Princeton graduates in the back office.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Is financial analysis skills the only criteria for BETTER JOB PLACEMENT?

[/quote]

In the financial industry it's a pretty major one. It's also a qualification for what the OP was asking, whch was learning more about econ and finance--and economics very rarely just = finance. In general, does it equal better job placement? Yes and no, quantitative analysis skills are all the rage in managerial analysis and efficacy consulting work. Princeton and Yale are pretty much equal in strength of alumni networks and location RE: proximity to major hubs of business, wouldn't you agree? So what you're left with are these other things we've been talking about, and Princeton is ahead there.

[quote]
Whatever you say.

[/quote]

That is the way you should have felt from the beginning.</p>

40

<p>
[quote]
We can go to the dictionary if you like. The end-result of an assessment is only biased if the initial position of the person making the assessment is biased. It is neutrality at the beginning, not at the end, that matters. If we were all neutral in our opinions then we really wouldn't have any opinions.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Right....this makes sense. So if a high school student is applying to both Princeton and Cornell, but says "Cornell is much better than Princeton in math, and if anyone disagrees, they are delusional," they are neutral?? I mean...wow. I'm speechless. What? Please--explain how "your stance makes me think you are delusional" is neutral? You are "strongly one-sided" to the fact that Yale is weaker in the economics area. You can't be one-sided and neutral at the same time.</p>

<p>
[quote]
If we were all neutral in our opinions then we really wouldn't have any opinions.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>What? Again, makes no sense. An opinion that both sides are equally good, would be a neutral opinion. </p>

<p>
[quote]
My understanding of the perception comes from time spent on forums where a deluge of financial professionals are members and my perception is partially influenced by what schools are targets for recruitment.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Then I believe your understanding is not quite as solid as you believe it to be. "Time spent on forums?" Are you serious? And how do you know what companies "target" what schools? Does it mean they do interviews at Stanford and Princeton but not at Yale? Are more recruited from Stanford and Princeton compared to Yale? Data please?</p>

<p>
[quote]
The same strength in CS and EE also pretty much guarantees that you'll find more Princeton graduates in the back office.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>What? No, it does not. </p>

<p>I don't even know how to argue your empty statements. You think job placement is so cut-and-dry that I can't help feel a bit of pity. "Princeton and Yale are pretty much equal in name, so we turn to the rankings of their quantitative programs. Princeton wins there. So Princeton students get better job placements." Are you so blind that you don't see a fault in that statement? </p>

<p>
[quote]
So what you're left with are these other things we've been talking about, and Princeton is ahead there.

[/quote]

What about interviews? Writing and oratory skills? Social skills? Personality? For other jobs, how about test scores? Recommendations?</p>

<p>
[quote]
That is correct.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Nice changing the above quote to "That is the way should have felt from the beginning." ;)
Of course.</p>