I don’t think it is that black and white. It’s not usually a case of nepotism.
My oldest is in finance. He got his first job because his professor sent over a screenshot of his final exam to a contact at Goldman and said “you should interview this kid”. Was my son qualified? Of course. Did the contact help? Undoubtedly.
For his second job, my son’s best friend’s mother worked at a private equity firm. She told him of an opening she thought he’d be good for, and then coached him through the interview process. Did she have an iota of influence over the hiring decision internally? No. Did the connection help my son get the job? Undoubtedly.
Now, I agree that connections are not the be-all and end-all, or a prerequisite for employment. But they sure help!
Agreed. Most people are not going to help an idiot get into a large successful company.
They care about their own reputation and if that person is lazy and incompetent it’s going to reflect badly on them.
The job market is so competitive, you’re helping a qualified candidate get noticed.
And the main reason the hiring manager would consider the referral is because they trust their judgment which would be destroyed if that candidate is terrible.
+1 this in particular. In a lot of ways, it’s like applying to a college where they note 80% of the applicants are qualified. One powerful way to have some differentiation in the job market at least is to have a referral where someone is vouching for you.
I find there to be an inherent conflict in two oft-expressed platitudes on CC. The first is “don’t have a dream school.” And the second is “only apply ED to a school that’s your clear first choice.” Now, of course, a “clear first choice” is not exactly the same thing as a “dream school” (which is a very loaded term). But I think that the spirit of the “don’t have a dream school advice” is that for most students there are multiple schools that will meet any individual student’s academic, financial, career, and social needs. I agree with that! My two older kids eventually both realized that there were multiple schools that met their criteria, and I strongly believe this to be the case for nearly all students.
So, this leads me to disagree with the ED platitude about only applying ED to a “clear first choice.” If a student does their research and realizes that there are multiple schools that fit the bill, then I think it’s OK to ED to the one on that list where it might provide the biggest admissions boost. Lots of caveats here about the student having to really be OK with forgoing opportunities at the other schools that they like and also of course being 100% certain that the ED school will be affordable.
I do understand that this advice is generally given to push back on a CC poster who plans to ED to a school where it might confer the biggest advantage without regard for the student’s preferences. But, in the situation I described, I think it’s OK to ED to a school that isn’t a “clear first choice” as long as it’s in the group of schools that are most preferred by the student (and the school is for sure affordable). Obviously, my own experience is subjective, but this approach worked well for my two that are in college.
Thank you for this, and I agree with you. I had been trying to put my finger on what bothered me about the only ED to your clear first choice school advice, but struggled to idenfify it. I think you have articulated what didn’t sit totally right with me about this advice in a world where the odds can be so much better in ED and the admissions rates are also so low at many students top few choices.
This isn’t truly a platitude, but it’s a comment some parents have made in my neck of the woods that to me sends the wrong message about the value of education. Our state flagship is very affordable for many, especially with the automatic scholarships available designed to keep talent in state. They seem to bribe their kids with “ if you pick the cheaper school I will buy you a car.” That really rubs me the wrong way because to me it’s saying the parent doesn’t value options in education, and money spent on a tangible thing like a car is better than the long lasting, intangible value of a quality education. Not saying that the student can’t get a good education at a flagship, but cheaper isn’t always better. And it pressures the student to turn down what they might really prefer. A car declines in value and can be replaced. A quality education, peer relationships, faculty experiences, etc that may be gained at a more expensive but preferred school by the students a lifetime gift.
I feel like this is a platitude that rubs me the wrong way. D22 attends a local school that anyone can get into (or so I thought until her BFF was turned down). Financially, she could have gone anywhere; interest-wise, she just wanted to get her degree and start working (she’s an education major). While this school wasn’t where I pictured her, she is getting more (quality) attention and support (including job placement) from her professors than I, or her friends at more competitive universities, ever got. Knowing how hiring works for her position, she is at no disadvantage due to where she chose to go to school. I was almost ready to bribe her with a car to look at more schools (she was one and done), but now we will be able to help her with a new car and a (future) condo down payment with all of the money we saved. For a kid going into certain fields, the money saved will be more important to their future than some perceived, but not quantified, advantage.
It also goes for “you get more attention at a small school”. S23 is at a very large OOS flagship. He picked it over (very competitive) smaller private schools. He has had great access to professors and research opportunities, and is also receiving great mentorship.
I almost forgot about another platitude that tends to annoy me: “Find your people”. As in, you can “find your people” at almost any college. While it’s certainly true that you can find like-minded folks almost anywhere, I find that the prevailing culture of a school is important. Some schools have a large percentage of athletes, which can impact the vibe of the school. Some schools are more pre-professional in nature, which impacts the feel. Some are more nerdy, which again changes the dynamic. While there’s truth that many/most students can “grow where they’re planted”, I do think this idea that maybe overall culture is less important as long as you can find like-minded people is mostly wrong.
Yes, sometimes it is better to be a big fish in a small sea, but there is also something to be said for a larger quantity of like-minded or otherwise academic peers . Sometimes it’s easier to find them in a larger pool of them than a smaller pool.
It sounds to me like your kid really knew what she was doing, knew herself and what she wanted, and stuck to it despite what everyone else (including you to an extent) thought. And, her plan has worked out excellently for her both professionally and financially. That is fantastic! She likely will go far in life with such a strong sense of self and independence in seeing how to reach her goals clearly. From what I’ve seen, those qualities allow people to find fulfillment and satisfaction with their life much more than others who are chasing goals defined or promoted by others. It seems like you raised her well!
Agreed. For a student who has a clear career goal, and isn’t focused on things like IB or super high income, there is of course nothing wrong with how they choose their school. But if a student wants to find an active Goethe club (just as an example), it’s less likely to find many of those like minded peers at a directional U.
The reality is that about half of college students go to school within 50 miles of their home, for any of a variety of reasons. And that’s great. But if a student is looking for a certain kind of environment and feels it’s the best fit for them, I don’t begrudge them for that. To bribe a student with a car to decline a school that the student prefers to me sends the wrong message about education.
That also applies to the “you must complete 4 years of a language and take the most rigorous course load” platitude. It’s not always needed, depending on the student’s goals. For some kids, who may have an LD or a special interest that eats into the limited number of hours in a day, they won’t actually need AP courses and 4 years of language to get into a school that is a great fit for them. And in other cases, it may be more beneficial for them to become an authentic (or maybe even a spikey) candidate who has demonstrated intellectual curiosity or intensely focused interests outside of the realm of what is offered through AP courses or the typical course sequence.
It’s always best to do what’s best for the student. A student should always take courses they want and participate in extracurriculars they want, not what they think is good for their application.
Hence the disliked platitudes! On another thread we were discussing the damage that can be done to students when parents or schools push kids beyond their innate capabilities and sometimes the price the student pays is on their physical and emotional health.
I don’t mind the theory of randomly choosing one of the schools tied for your favorite for ED. I do have a couple concerns about the practice.
First, I think a lot of people are not REALLY picking the college where ED might make the most difference. Long story short, if you are unhooked, ED is most likely to make a difference when you are basically overqualified for the college in question, and they have a history of yield protection. But in practice, I think a lot of the kids hoping for an ED “boost” are hoping that happens with a college where they are not necessarily very strong candidates to begin with, which means they may get no such thing. Yield protection is a moot issue when the college would rather just reject you anyway.
Second, I think in practice a lot of kids say they are indifferent, may even believe they are indifferent, but it turns out they really are not. I have seen this every year when ED decisions come out, there are kids who are successful but suddenly they are thinking, wait, maybe I don’t want to just go to any school ranked in the Top N on US News, I actually now think I have a shot at the colleges I would prefer within that group. Or similar.
As usual, none of this is intended to rule out a kid truly picking a sensible ED college because they truly see it as just as good as any college on their list. I just think in practice, a lot of kids pick from a list of highly selective colleges only, and some are deluding themselves about how much that is likely to help them, and others are going to second-guess not being more discriminating if it actually does work.
I basically agree with you, but then I also think there is actually an answer sometimes as to what a certain college ideally wants to see in their successful applicants.
My general attitude is if your best high school experience is not what some particular college ideally wants to see, forget that college, find one that is looking for kids with HS experiences like yours.
But knowing some kids, or possibly parents, are simply not going to take that general advice, I feel like sometimes letting them know what their target college actually does tend to look for is appropriate. But I do try to at least mention the alternative approach for their consideration.
I mostly agree with this. Especially with your observation that ED will not provide an admissions boost to a student who isn’t already a strong candidate. I think there is a misperception (not necessarily on CC, but in general) that ED can transform a weak application into a strong one. It can’t. I also agree with your observation that ED is very helpful for a student whose stats make them overqualified for a school with yield protection. I do think there is one other instance where ED can provide a boost, and that is for students who are applying to a highly rejective school and whose stats are comparable to those that the school tend to admit. So, in this instance, the student isn’t overqualified, just “qualified.” And, for that student, applying ED might tempt the school to offer an acceptance that might not happen in the RD rounds.
I also agree with your concern about “buyers remorse.” As a parent, it’s something to really suss out with your kid before making the call to apply ED. If there’s any doubt about the students’ commitment to the school, just don’t do it.
This has not been my experience (though I admit very limited) with ED. Many of the kids I know who are unhooked are applying to highly selective schools where they are competitive, but there is a glut of very qualified students and their counselors do tell them they have a better shot in ED than RD at the school, though they could get in RD as well, but the odds are worse. That said, your second concern re buyers remorse can apply to these kids for sure. That said, if they don’t ED and get shut out of their couple most selective choices they can have remorse over not EDing as well.
To be clear, I am in favor of erring on the side of not ED if unsure which option to take, but it is nuanced as we all are acknowledging in this convo.