I am a student at a lower ranked state school (University of South Florida) majoring in biomedical sciences who is think about transferring to Florida State University (Tallahassee location, top 50 nationwide in political science, top 30 in public policy analysis, at least according to USNWR) or an out of state top 10-50 college to major in political science. I am hoping to become a foreign policy analyst in positions where I can make the greatest impact–like senior analysis positions in top think tanks like CSIS or assistant positions to congressmen.
I was wondering if it is worth transferring to a “name-brand” school like American U (top 10 world wide in international studies), Cornell, UVA or the like. Do internship programs at places like the Brookings Institution put applicants from lower ranked schools much further down their list, regarding their education as lesser in some way? Will I be seen as educationally deficient upon graduating when competing with Cornell graduates if I stay at USF or go to FSU?
Input from people who have had a first-hand look at the evaluation of applicants to the said jobs and etc. would be especially appreciated, though I’d like to hear from everyone.
For 20+ years, frequently I would be asked to review dozens (sometimes 100+ resumes) to determine which approximately 10 candidates would be interviewed for initial placement and especially for promotion. It is VERY important to understand three key facts:
- The hiring manager and his senior director (me) can, perhaps, devote a minute (certainly no more than two) to each resume, and
- We are not experts in every arcane technical and managerial discipline; therefore, we are largely guided by perceived educational stature/u, and
- Seasoned professionals (third tier and above supervisors) tend to be 45+ years old (many are in their fifties and sixties); accordingly, newer universities have little real credibility with them (USF may be a fine school and Florida’s taxpayers may have substantially invested in its resources, but it was founded less than 60 years ago and was entirely unknown – probably outside of Florida – when we applied to undergraduate and postgraduate schools, 40 or 50 years ago).
Consequently, when we devote an hour to assess 50 or 75 resumes – and our goal is ONLY to find a few LOW RISK/HIGH PROBABILITY OF SUCCESS applicants to be interviewed – the opportunity for any USF student or alumni to be selected is essentially zero (of course, for internal promotions, this is not true and performance/reputation dominate).
You may feel this is horribly unfair and, clearly, you are correct. However, life isn’t fair and our mandatory objectives are solely:
- To not squander valuable time and to select the interviewees expeditiously, and
- To ensure all those who will be interviewed are very low risk, very high probability of success candidates.
Professional reputations are damaged by poor hiring decisions; accordingly, we are understandably quite risk-adverse. We simply can’t tolerate the Sector President reviewing an individual’s file, after he massively fouled up, and saying: “Who hired this guy? For God’s sake, he’s attended USF!”. His screw up would be equally severe if he graduated from UVa or Vanderbilt, but the unfavorable ramifications for those involved in his hiring might be less catastrophic: “You’re right, boss, he really did a poor job and he should not have been hired, but he’s a Penn BSME and we thought he was very well qualified.”
Finally, in my opinion, Florida would be better (generally more credible, with greater stature) than USF, but – candidly – not substantially so.
@screen8888, I’ve spent a good deal of time on this reply to assist – absolutely not to insult – you. I know it’s tough, but it is also an honest viewpoint from an individual with 45 years of actual post-Bachelor’s experiences.
If you stay at your current school, you really want to work hard to find summer experiences and anything possible on campus to enhance your resume. You can help offset going to a lower ranked school with strong experience, but you really, really need to be self motivated and hustle to find those experiences.
Top Tier is accurate. Newer schools that don’t have name recognition are not going to do you any favors when recruiting, particularly if you are recruiting out of state. The shear number of resumes being reviewed is going to be high. Schools that are fairly new to the game like USF aren’t going to get the attention that a Florida is going to get. And Florida isn’t going to get the attention that a private school like Northeastern is going to get. An Northeastern isn’t going to get the attention that a top private school like Northwestern is going to get. There is a hierarchy in name recognition and reputation that is giong to be important when it comes to hiring candidates.
If you’re recruiting in a particular region, remember that regional biases are going to be a factor. An Ohio State grad isn’t going to be looked at the same way in New York city as it will in Cleveland. Keep that in mind.
Private is not automatically better than public in the prestige race. Indeed, for your example, it is likely that each will be better known within its region; out of their regions, it does not seem like either has significantly greater prestige value over the other.
^ ^ ^
Absolutely correct: Berkeley, UVa, William and Mary, UCLA, UT Austin, Michigan, and so forth . . . few institutions – public or private – have greater stature!
However, note that school-prestige-consciousness, particularly for those with considerable work experience, tends to vary by industry, by specific employer within an industry, and by specific group or manager within an employer. In contrast to reply #1, my experience is that, when recruiting new graduates, employers have to select schools to recruit at, though not necessarily by the usual rankings (ranking/reputation in major, where major is relevant, and convenience of local schools are often important factors), while school prestige tends to fade away as a factor with experience. Of course, this is a field where technical questions in initial phone screens and actual interviews are common, so the reliance on indirect proxies like school prestige is less due to having a more direct assessment of the candidate’s skills.
But this is not the think tank industry or the political industry that you are looking at, so experiences outside of that industry may not apply. You may want to ask specifically about those industries, since assumptions based on other industries may not match those industries. In the political industry, political ideology may also affect which schools are considered prestigious (e.g. a conservative religious college of some Christian denomination may be highly regarded among religiously conservative politicians but have negative prestige with secular liberal politicians).