Oh, I forgot to point this out.
The Onion did an in-depth study that concluded that going to a prestigious private school opened precisely 16.3 more doors in an person’s career.
So yeah, there’s definitely an advantage. That’s 16.3 less doors that you’ll have to open yourself.
I never heard of Blackstone before reading this thread. Our family has plenty of elite school grads (cousins, BIL, nephews, aunts, uncles, etc) but none are lawyers. and I don’t live under a rock.
This law firm means absolutely nothing to me…and I asked my peasant neighbors, and it means nothing to them.
And we live in a neighboring state.
Guess you have to be in the elite law school circle for this to matter at all. And If you are not, it doesn’t matter…at all.
To state the obvious, when it comes to new graduates people define “doing well” differently. Some people think that “doing well” for a 20-something means just plain having a job–any job–in this economy. Others think “doing well” means having a job you enjoy. Or maybe it has to be a non-menial job that you enjoy for it to be acceptable. Some think doing fine means having a well-paying job that you may or may not enjoy (and what “well-paying” is will also be defined quite differently depending who you ask). For still others it means landing a non-menial, well-paying job you enjoy that’s related to what was studied in college and for which one actually needed the degree to obtain.
I’ve observed that when some people put down the elite school experience by saying their kid graduated from an ordinary college recently and “see, he’s doing just fine,” when you listen to them go on about it, what they are actually referring to is this: he isn’t a bum, he actually does have a job, and he even pays them a hundred bucks toward room and board some months when he doesn’t have to fix his car or didn’t buy expensive concert tickets. We have a friend whose college grad is working part-time as a waitress and he thinks that’s fine because she’s young, can live at home, and seems to like it. His neighbor might strongly disagree, though. That could be because of values, cultural expectations, or just plain practicality. I can tell you it wouldn’t have been acceptable to me. We are family of very modest means, so once college is paid for, we really and truly MUST save for retirement. So yes, I wanted my kids to earn enough money to live securely on their own and pay off their college loans and do it with a job that they actually needed the degree to get.
“Doing ok” should probably mean being able to support oneself (without parental subsidy, including living in the parents’ house) for the time being with one’s job. “Doing well” should probably mean that the job has some virtue beyond that – usefulness for career development, being enjoyable, compensation level that allows for more than the minimum level of self-support, or some combination of these.
Has someone already pointed out that OP’s own experience proves the opposite point?
He went to Furman for UG and Harvard for law school. So, this proves that going to a not-top-20 (or even top-50!) undergrad makes no difference whatsoever. He most certainly did not get into Harvard law because he went to an “elite” undergrad. Exactly the opposite! Or is he mad about not going to an “elite” undergrad? Sorry, I did not read all the posts.
Also, many of us who went to great UG and law schools NEVER aspired to Biglaw and would rather claw our eyes out. Seriously. There is more than one definition of success.
Frank Bruni is right.
It doesn’t close doors, just makes them much harder to get into.
What it does is make access easier, but it doesn’t ensure anything. If you are admitted, want to go, and have the means, it would be nuts not to. If you don’t, it isn’t the end of the world, but I find the argument ridiculous that it is somehow better for your character.
"Has someone already pointed out that OP’s own experience proves the opposite point?
He went to Furman for UG and Harvard for law school. So, this proves that going to a not-top-20 (or even top-50!) undergrad makes no difference whatsoever. He most certainly did not get into Harvard law because he went to an “elite” undergrad."
Actually, the experience of millions of native and immigrated Americans also proves the opposite point, which I hinted in my earlier post on this thread. There are far more upper-middle-class and outright rich people in this country who did NOT graduate from elite undergrad institutions than there are those who did. This is why the perennial hysteria about the elites on CC is IRRATIONAL. The next time any adult from CC encounters IRL or online anyone whose motto is ‘Ivy or Bust,’ demand that the person articulate specifically what he or she imagines will happen if that goal is not reached.
The hand-wringing is a colossal WASTE OF TIME, but unfortunately such hand-wringers are rarely confronted about their misconceptions. We need a massive chart of wealthy individuals and their academic credentials so that we can flash it at a moment’s notice.
"No, that’s not what we’re saying at all… We’re simply challenging the meaning of “advantage” and what that word means to certain people. Your opinion of the best restaurant in town may not be my opinion of the best restaurant in town. Similarly, what you consider the happiest way to live life may not be what I consider the happiest way to live life. We all have unique interests and goals in life.
It has been proven time, and time again, that you do not need a degree from an elite top school to be both financially well-off, and/or happy in life."
This is true, however, you can say this about attending college vs. not attending college too, or even attending high school vs. not attending high school. There is really no level of education at all that is absolutely required to be financially well off or happy in life at all.
“He went to Furman for UG and Harvard for law school. So, this proves that going to a not-top-20 (or even top-50!) undergrad makes no difference whatsoever”
Anecdotes don’t prove anything. Additionally, it is true that you can go to a top business school from anywhere, but it is also true that the top schools take a very large percentage of their classes from the Ivies and MIT and Stanford.
He did not make blanket claims about all members of any group.
@thumper1, Blackstone is a PE firm (that is turning in to an investment bank), not a law firm.
@TheGFG, investment (risk) vs. return. If I don’t actually spend any money on tuition, then spending some time living at home finding himself is fine. If I drop $250K (or actually, it will be some even more gigantic amount in the future), then living at home finding himself is not fine.
I try not to go into doors. I get all squished.
The tuition is a sunk cost, and it costs me little to nothing to have an extra person in my house.
In this economy, I’ve totally turned around my thinking, if my kids live at home for a while while actively looking for a job, and/or to save money, I’m ok with it.
@4kids4colleges, no, your post is not fully correct. As I’ve stated, I took a few classes at Furman and did one program there. I do not have a degree from there and was never a regular student; I never went through the application process for regular undergraduate admissions, for example. I took classes at several colleges. Plenty of people, for example, take summer school or study abroad classes through another university.
In addition, as I’ve also stated, my sole point is that if you don’t have an elite diploma, certain doors will close to you. Davos academia, the Forbes Elite Men list and some other things will be off-limits. That is not at all inconsistent with my own academic history.
Separately:
For those of you dismissing Goldman Sachs, Blackstone, etc., in part because they’re in NYC: take a look at their office locations, and you’ll see that elite investment banks and the like have offices in multiple locations. Same with elite law firms. For example, you can work at McKinsey in many places around the US and live in a small town (likely commuting to a major metro downtown, admittedly) and work at McKinsey.
In addition, Google the New York Times series about “does it matter where you go to college” (http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2010/11/29/does-it-matter-where-you-go-to-college) and there are some interesting facts in the series of articles. One of them, for example, reports that studies “generally” show a gain of 5-20% in salary solely due to graduating from an elite college versus a non-elite one, even if the student at both schools is otherwise identical. I believe that the effects are chiefly among historically oppressed groups, but studies do show that, at least according to the New York Times article. (No, that doesn’t mean that every single person from an elite school will show that gain.)
“For those of you dismissing Goldman Sachs, Blackstone, etc., in part because they’re in NYC: take a look at their office locations, and you’ll see that elite investment banks and the like have offices in multiple locations. Same with elite law firms. For example, you can work at McKinsey in many places around the US and live in a small town (likely commuting to a major metro downtown, admittedly) and work at McKinsey.”
Do you think we just fell off turnip trucks? Yes, we KNOW these companies have lot of offices. That doesn’t make us idolize them more. Btw I’m very familiar with the McKinsey setup as I routinely work with McKinsey people all over the country, many of whom work from home and use a satellite office if needed.
That still doesn’t mean that we idolize their jobs. I do some of the same stuff McKinsey does, in a small boutique firm that’s under the radar. That also means what I make is far more private. That’s a benefit.
MBB are in many places, true, but if you’re talking about banks/finance, Deutsche has their main trading operations in Jacksonville, Wells in Charlotte, and MS in White Plains, but for the most part, branch offices are tiny compared to NYC and backwaters.
But so many of you presume the student will go to grad school, so the undergrad degree is therefore not that important. But what if the student doesn’t have any intention of going to grad school from that start? Or what if he thinks he does and therefore chooses to save money by attending a lower-ranked school, but then changes his mind? What if after 4 years he feels plain burnt out from exams and papers and all-nighters? What if now he just wants to establish himself financially, get married and have kids before his future wife has to worry about fertility problems? Or doesn’t the concept of different versions of happiness include stopping one’s formal education after 4 years of college? The truth is that only 8.05% of the US population in 2012 had a master’s degree, and only 3.07% had a PhD. So placing so much emphasis on the prestige of your eventual graduate school rather than your undergraduate institution seems misguided.
GFG- agree with you in theory. Like everything else in life, there are trade-offs.
There are some fields where a Master’s degree is required (teaching in most states-- after a certain number of years in a classroom; all administrative positions in K-12 education, PT/Social Work) but where the prestige factor is minimal. There are some fields where the evidence is mixed- Actuary for one. The colleges with the top ranked actuary programs don’t correlate with the “usual suspects” of top ranked schools (although they are all fine colleges) but then again- I know many actuaries who didn’t “major” in actuarial studies (applied math/stats majors, econ majors with a heavy quant orientation) and I think the “prestige” of their undergrad degree helped them out, especially early on.
But I agree with your comment that planning out a 17 year old’s life as if it is 100% certain that he/she will end up in grad school is a mistake, if that means pushing your kid into a college which is an otherwise poor fit, assuming that that grad school will be a better fit long term.
I have lots of neighbors who believe “it doesn’t matter where you go” who have learned the hard way that this is true- except when it’s not. If your kid is a Chem major at a college with a sub-par Chem department, your kid will have options teaching HS chemistry (assuming he/she does the right Ed program, Master’s, etc.) Your kid is NOT likely to have great options at a pharma company, industrial chem company, etc. And it’s a tough slog getting into a competitive grad program out of a sub-par department (not that it can’t be done- but it’s hard).
Parents hear about kids who go from a “college I’ve never heard of” to a Fulbright and think “hey, that could be my kid”. But that’s their own ignorance. Mechanical Engineering at Missouri/Rolla? You may have never heard of it, but it’s a standout. U Delaware for Museum Studies? Parents who think that any and all flagships provide the same depth of networking and educational opportunities in every single field are mistaken.
So caveat emptor.
Thanks. Like I said, never heard of them before. So why are folks posting about where their employees went to law school?
There is no way that 3% of Americans have a PhD. That would be 10,000,000 people.
Wiki says “1,678,000 males had received a doctoral degree compared to 817,000 females”
And many of those doctoral degrees are not PhDs, but some kind of professional degree (such as EdD), I assume.