<p>Remember that the mix of majors at different schools varies – this may affect employers’ views of the schools or the student outcomes (placement rate, average or median pay) if you are just looking at entire schools in comparison to each other.</p>
<p>I forgot to point out most privates don’t have things like accounting, nursing, insurance, personal finance, textile, retailing, “exercise & wellness”…etc. Accounting and nursing recruiters are not going to mention Harvard even once. Yet, the survey seems to be a lot about the number of mentions. No wonder the large schools are doing so well.</p>
<p>Sam, I challenge you to work at Starbucks. You have one week to learn how to make every drink on the menu. Good luck. The idea that an SAT score gap of 200 points translates well to on the job performance is laughable. Social and leadership skills are more important.</p>
<p>barrons, is it really that “challenging” for you to see the flaws of this survey?</p>
<p>You don’t even understand what it measured. It was not the rate of hires but the QUALITY of the hires in the view of the companies for the positions they recruit. Now if they do not recruit at a place it won’t be ranked. Every survey has issues but this one provides useful information too for the vast majority of students not going into Ibanking. The number of hires was not important other than you had to have a minimum number to be ranked.</p>
<p>I didn’t say anything about “rate of hires”. You didn’t get my point, let alone what I understand and what not.</p>
<p>I suggest you read or reread this part. It makes crystal clear what they were looking at and why. Now if the employers were all NYC Ibanks you would get another result. But the US is far bigger than NYC and manyhave no desire to go there.</p>
<p><a href=“Job Recruiters Prefer State Universities Over Ivy League Colleges - WSJ”>Job Recruiters Prefer State Universities Over Ivy League Colleges - WSJ;
<p>
</p>
<p>When I was a hiring manager we didn’t hire anyone who was average. At the company I worked for you couldn’t get an interview if your GPA was less than 3.25 no matter where you went to school (I hear these days it’s up to 3.5). The higher your GPA the better your odds. Secondly, with undergrads we didn’t travel to go get them. In Chicago we interviewed at Northwestern, DePaul, UIUC, Indiana, Notre Dame and Wisconsin. In Boston it was Harvard, BC, BU, Northeastern and a handful of smallers. If a kid from Wharton walked in I’d listen, but no company spends money to go interview undergrads hundreds of miles away and then move them from one side of the country to another, not when there are perfectly fungible options in our own back yard. </p>
<p>Grad school was different, there was an approved list and much of the initial work was done by corporate. Are undergrad IB, top-tier consulting/accounting and certain engineering jobs different? Sure, but that’s a small sub-set of the jobs people get.</p>
<p>barrons,</p>
<p>What I said aren’t all that different from what you wrote. The main difference is I take this survey with a huge grain of salt and offer the caveats while you want to promote it much more than I do.
vs
</p>
<p>
vs
</p>
<p>According to the article:
vs
I doubt pursuing PhDs was the reason they change jobs so quickly and that 55% is way higher than PhD production data we’d seen elsewhere (LACs are usually the top producers with rates of 15-20% for the top ones). As I mentioned, I suspect that they got bored faster. But regardless of the reason, at least some, if not many, of them have a harder time to retain Harvard grads.</p>
<p>Most firms are not hiring many people to work in personal finance or any of those other majors you tried to make seem trite except accounting. Did you see a ranking for any of those? I did not. Here are the major business areas ranked–no nursing or retailing or gym instructors. </p>
<p>[School</a> Rankings by College Major – Job Recruiter Top Picks - WSJ.com](<a href=“School Rankings by College Major – Job Recruiter Top Picks - WSJ”>School Rankings by College Major – Job Recruiter Top Picks - WSJ)</p>
<p>barrons, </p>
<p>Until you have the actual list of the firms and their respective ratings, I wouldn’t be so sure.</p>
<p>The second link you posted mentioned “health care” which could include hospitals that employ nurses or it could include firms that recruit certain number of other health-related majors such as nutrition or health sciences that private schools don’t offer. It may then be lumped into business/economics. How do you know “finance” doesn’t include insurance (mentioned in the second link you posted), a field that public schools offers but privates don’t? How do you know business/economics doesn’t include retailing? Also, a lot of times, “finance” and “accounting” are used interchangeably. “Financial analysts” in corporates are often accountants and list understanding of GAAP as one of the requirements.</p>
<p>If you read the methodology they are not including doctors/nurses–just people that run healthcare companies. I believe the same would apply to retail. Lots of people work at Target HQ and they hire many business and financial analysts–not floor people. Certainly there are some overlaps in job titles etc but in a large survey you still get a good picture–better than the US News rankings.</p>
<p>Look, none of this changes the fact that graduates from Ivies/top tier universities are drawn to a small handful of “elite” destinations. Of course you will see these recruiters rank students from here more highly - recruiters will simply encounter and be exposed to more large state school grads at your average F500 firm, whereas they will encounter fewer Ivy grads in entry level F500 job.</p>
<p>Even if the 2 Harvard grads in a F500 entry level job that a recruiter meets are great workers and are absolutely brilliant and creative, I’d wager that if a firm had 50 grads from ASU, 40 of whom were good workers and 10 of whom were really bad, the recruiter would probably rank ASU students higher simply because they know more good workers from ASU than they know from Harvard, regardless of what the proportions might actually say.</p>
<p>The only places were a recruiter might meet lots of Ivy League grads at work is where there really is a preponderance of Ivy grads: high tech, finance, consulting, and other destinations like Teach for America. </p>
<p>Fun fact: at Brown after graduation, 22% of students go to grad school (not necessarily PhDs), 11% volunteer / travel / do fellowships. The rest go to work: the top employer by far is Teach for America, followed by Google, Goldman Sachs, and Microsoft. This is not the makeup of Penn State / ASU grads.</p>
<p>Furthermore, any ranking that places Purdue, Virginia Polytechnic, and the University of Maryland above MIT in the engineering category is worthless.</p>
<p>If you rely on these rankings, then if you want to go into business and if you are admitted to both OSU and Harvard full-ride, then you ought to choose OSU because that will maximize your job opportunities, right? <em>sarcasm</em></p>
<p>I’d wager that has nothing to do with any facts presented. Your sarcasm is why many firms do not want those type of grads. Smug and elitist. Does not work in most companies. BTW TFA, Google, Microsoft hire plenty of major state U grads too.</p>
<p>[Bill</a> Gates surprises students as “stand in” professor (Oct. 12, 2005)](<a href=“http://www.news.wisc.edu/11679]Bill”>Bill Gates surprises students as “stand in” professor)</p>
<p>[Teach</a> For America Announces the Schools Contributing the Most Graduates to its 2011 Teaching Corps | Teach For America](<a href=“http://www.teachforamerica.org/press-room/press-releases/2011/teach-america-announces-schools-contributing-most-graduates-its-201-0]Teach”>http://www.teachforamerica.org/press-room/press-releases/2011/teach-america-announces-schools-contributing-most-graduates-its-201-0)</p>
<p>[Press</a> Release - Teach For America Announces the Schools Contributing the Most Graduates to Its 2010 Teaching Corps](<a href=“http://www.teachforamerica.org/newsroom/documents/20100714_Teach.For.America.Announces.the.Schools.Contributing.Most.Graduates.to.2010.Corps.htm]Press”>http://www.teachforamerica.org/newsroom/documents/20100714_Teach.For.America.Announces.the.Schools.Contributing.Most.Graduates.to.2010.Corps.htm)</p>
<p>
That’s quite funny, because I don’t attend an Ivy League institution, nor do I attend a private university, yet you have leaped to the conclusion that I must necessarily attend one because of any perceived smugness and alleged elitism in my attitude - a crass over-generalization if any ever existed, and one that really does not help your arguments.</p>
<p>The fact that you assumed I go to an Ivy League institution simply because you believed I had a smug or elitist attitude only reveals the irrational bias against Ivy League schools that underlies your arguments.</p>
<p>I think half of you people are missing the fact that when an employer recruits at colleges A, B, C and D (and not E, F, and G) - they aren’t saying that they believe A, B, C, and D are necessarily “superior” to E, F and G or that equally great students couldn’t be found at E, F, and G. They’re just saying that they need to pick a certain number of campuses because they can’t interview everywhere and they need to have some sort of criteria. And “it’s nearby and I don’t have to pay for relocation costs” and “the graduates have done well so far” are as good as any. </p>
<p>And really, no one cares or should care “what i-banks and management consultants do” other than those students who want to be i-bankers and management consultants. It’s irrelevant to the vast majority of college seniors seeking jobs, and those firms / industries don’t have some special “this is a good college” blessing to bestow where they go. They are just 2 of many industries.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>To the extent that Ivies or other top tier schools funnel students into a tighter and tighter band of certain destinations, the worse it reflects on those schools and the more boring and uniform they become. I personally find it interesting when I get my alum newsletter and see all the different things people have become / are doing. I can’t imagine anything more boring than reading updates only about a handful of fields, and I would be very disappointed if my alma mater devolved into that.</p>