How commonly is college brand/prestige/selectivity an important "fit" factor?

There might be people who claim that but at the HYPSM-type schools where debt might be easy to justify, student debt is relatively low due to generous need based aid.

The issue I see quite a bit is the attempt to redistribute the brand value associated with schools like these to other schools in the same price tier, without the resources to provide exceptional aid, and without the attributes to justify the expense without appeal to prestige.

This is driven partly by schools seeking a halo effect, partly by college consultants who have found they can charge to curate lists of “hidden gems” and “life-changing” colleges, and partly by the disposable income of a fair number of parents. There’s also a small number of affluent HS students who want their college sweatshirt to convey something exotic and not ordinary.

I rarely hear academically oriented students irl list prestige as a driving factor. What I hear are variations of school academic strength, resources, opportunities, and cohort group. It just so happens those are most readily available at schools that the general public views (sometimes with admiration, sometimes with disdain) as prestigious.

4 Likes

For some career paths, this is an accurate assessment. For some career paths, the opportunities are absolutely better.

1 Like

Absolutely, but they are rare, quantitative finance, high level consulting, trading, but few others.

1 Like

I think it has a great deal to do with the overall feel of the school.

My BFF in high school was the daughter of the AO at our local college (a U Wis campus) so she and her family were very familiar with colleges and college admissions. She was going to study nursing and another campus was better known for nursing.

She came with our family to a game in Madison and never looked back. She’d never been to anything like that and loved it. Really, I never heard her mention another school after that day. Of course Madison is great and has a nursing school, but so do a lot of other places in Wisconsin. It was football. When the band played “If you want to be a Badger
” she was on board.

My own daughter was influenced by attending a football weekend at Wyoming. Lots of other things went into it (finances, academics) but that football weekend showed her that a bigger school has a lot more to offer (she’d wanted a smaller school). It was fun for her, a non-football person.

I liked watching a 3000 pound buffalo run up and down the field every Saturday.

Yes most may not choose for sports but tons do. I did.

The point was that the Midwest (as you’ve shown) and SE have a decided advantage over the NE in this regard.

Heck kids from the NE are headed south - schools like Coastal and App State- in addition to ACC and SEC schools.

Football is often a driver - the initial awareness builder in fact.

This is a reason so many overspend - it pays off in other ways.

1 Like

UCB, I think you have it backwards. Spelman (and Howard and a few others of the HBCU’s) have ALWAYS been seen as prestigious. And therefore, the “Anti-DEI” folks prefer recruiting/hiring there, because then the issue of race doesn’t even come up- a majority Black U on the recruiting roster means you don’t need to worry about your entire Dartmouth new hire cohort being white men from five prep schools all of whom play lacrosse. You’ve got “diversity” without even trying!!! Never mind that your Spelman hires are going realize they are the tokens from day 2 of their onboarding, and never mind that there won’t be a single non-white member of senior management, and that the only women and non-whites are in staff roles, not line.

But Spelman is a non-controversial recruiting target.

1 Like

I am personally familiar with those who, even with my prestigious degrees (Ivy league, T10 law school, federal court of appeals clerkship), will claim incompetence or DEI hire or whatever. But, my take is the group who would otherwise discount my competence is broader than that. In other words, the elite credentials mitigate but do not eliminate the bias against me based on what I see with friends, peers, colleagues.

The Spelman question is a more complicated. I’d argue that Spelman, Morehouse and Howard have their own prestige value. It is different than the T20 prestige assessment and can be more or less valuable depending on the context. So, someone who values prestige, in my view could indeed pick Spellman with prestige in mind. But the audience whose prestige impression they are thinking of is different. I do think there are many folks out there though that would question the “bona fides” of a black Spelman grad in a way they wouldn’t a black Yale, Princeton or Stanford grad.

2 Likes

Fair point. The definition is not clear. And we all clearly do not mean the same thing when we describe what is a “fit” characteristic. I guess the premise of the OP in this thread was that prestige/brand/selectivity could be a “fit” criteria. Seems you think it can’t be, which is a reasonable position that I won’t argue. I don’t think it changes the underlying point of my post much if it is a “fit” thing or a “desired attribute” thing. Prestige has value for certain people in selecting a school.

Lastly, I think you are conflating prestige and rankings. A lot of the prestige is not because of rankings. Most people I know from growing up don’t know a thing about rankings, but they know Harvard, Yale and the Ivy League as prestigious.

2 Likes

Why would anti-DEI people want even token levels of diversity?

Customers, clients, shareholders

These audiences don’t always share the perspective of the hiring leads. You can’t get away with an all white, all male organization these days no matter which party is in the white house.

I have a friend who is a partner at a big, global search firm. They were told "if you show up with a non-diverse team next time you pitch, you won’t be getting the contract. "

One of your biggest sources of revenue tells you to diversify
you are doing it. It’s not DEI, it’s survival in a competitive industry.

By your definition, that wouldn’t qualify as massive debt. There’s a reason why Princeton can be both a good deal and a bad deal.

I think desired attributes are indeed what I would define as fit. Those attributes are many, and rank differently according to the one assessing “fit.” They might include class size, who teaches labs and discussions, facilities, academic and non-academic clubs, location, weather, support for hobbies, sports, grind, outcomes, certainly budget, even campus architecture, to name but a few, as attributes that define “fit.”

Reminder that this is not the political forum. Please take the conversations about DEI and race in college admission there. TIA!

2 Likes

Not sure I follow you.

Last I saw, around 10% of Princeton students graduated with debt, and the average debt was <$10k. Currently, families making <$150k attend for free and families making <$250k pay no tuition. So, who exactly is racking up “massive debt” at Princeton?

I don’t follow what you mean that Princeton can be both a good deal and a bad deal. Do you mean for the family with >$300k income who would prefer to spend less?

Sorry I’m missing your meaning. My main point was that students at schools like Princeton generally are not incurring much if any debt; either they’re receiving significant financial aid or the family income and assets are sufficient to cover the costs. 90-95% of families would likely spend less on a Princeton education than the list price at their state flagship.

2 Likes

Yes, they go for almost nothing or they pay almost $400,000.

I’m not picking on Princeton. I simply used it as an example.

Many schools massage those numbers, for example by not including parental debt. Here’s an example from Princeton, but this story is hardly unique.

1 Like

Students who chose Princeton despite a too-high net price, like the one who wrote the opinion linked in post #194?

I don’t think it’s the binary picture you’re describing. Family contribution increases with income and assets, starting at a fairly high threshold.

In any case, isn’t the financial profile of a family paying full price at Princeton likely to be one that has sufficient assets to cover those costs?

Re: the Daily Princetonian editorial you linked, hard to conclude much without the student giving any indication of family resources. Princeton doesn’t include loans in their aid packages. Given what I know about the FA there, it’s more likely than not that the family assets were available to avoid loans.

2 Likes

We have people who come on this website and say - I am full pay but my parents will give me x $ - and I’ll take out the rest in loans because it’s a better school.

So yes some will desire to chase a name at any price.

There’s no question
so many schools have this reputation burnished - whether it’s prestige, great in a major (like Syracuse and sports journlism or ASU and Supply Chain), great sports, great greek life, etc.

If they have what you want - and Princeton has that high level name - people will do anything to get there.

How many do we have on here that sound like they’ll go into a great depression if they don’t get into one of five schools, etc.

1 Like

Perhaps, but we don’t really know if the net price was too high for that student.

If the net price was $15k/year, that suggests family income in the $200k range, or assets available.

If the EFC was higher than that, so was the family income or assets.

Count me skeptical that a school requiring a family making $200k/year to contribute less than 10% of income is causing massive debt for students.

People don’t want to liquidate their assets- I get it. And there are LOTS of people who don’t think they can cover what even a generous college like Princeton thinks they can cover. Sometimes it due to factors beyond their control, and sometimes it’s just an unwillingness to dial back their lifestyle.

I have a friend whose first kid was admitted to a somewhat generous school and to their shock, “They expect us to sell the beach house to pay for college”. I gently tried to explain that nobody expects anybody to do anything. But that if there are resources-- liquid or not- that FAR exceed a comparable household’s resources-- surely that is one avenue to tap. Next kid got luckier- parents insisted on the state flagship and the local branch of the state U system. Kid could pick which one. Chose the local branch and parents bought him a car since he agreed to live at home.

Kids graduating from places like Princeton with a large amount of debt are getting a very fine education- unwittingly- in financial planning.

5 Likes

So 
 did they sell their beach house to allow their child to attend?

1 Like