This has been an interesting thread to read. I do agree with the post that said, “it depends.” It does depend. The only thing that makes “it depends” at all controversial is when people want to defend their own choices, at the expense of others’. Certainly some people–you see posts on CC all the time, from kids who say “I want to be an investment banker, what school should I attend?” as well as from parents who are focused on their kids’ future earnings–are going for the money, to the exclusion of all other factors. (I remember when the girl I used to babysit complained that her father would only let her go to Harvard if she did so as a “business” major, rather than an English major [never mind that Harvard doesn’t have a business major], because college was about earning a living, not about having a job you liked). It takes a certain amount of financial privilege to argue that college is about learning, about finding what you are good at, about the life of the mind; when your own history has been lived on the financial edge, that kind of argument seems irrelevant. But “earning a living” is not the same as “becoming a world leader in your field.” Mind you, I don’t think that getting on Forbes’ list of most powerful men (is it really men? Really?) is the end-all, but if that is your goal, yes, going to the highest-ranked school you can manage might help you. And not going to that school might hinder you. Can that hindrance be overcome? Certainly.
Two observations from my own life: I am on the local Democratic committee, and judges in my state are elected, so we have had any number of judicial candidates presenting their resumes for our support. Every one, so far, went to a lesser-ranked undergrad school, and a relatively local law school, but their work since graduation has been amazing. These are really smart, really compassionate, really hardworking people, and they’ve been quite successful in their fields. Are they the norm for their schools? Probably not. But they represent what can be accomplished through sheer dedication and talent. I do not know what they might have done had they gone to some elite school, but the argument that any doors have been closed to them is hard to buy. They might have had to work harder to open them, but that experience itself may have fitted them for the jobs they are pursuing.
On the other hand, my husband went to an Ivy (Cruz would call it a “lesser” Ivy), and he’s an example of a guy who had both native intelligence and the advantage of a great education, and he’s succeeded in every field he’s entered. Did the elite school open doors for him? Not in the sense of the name, or the network. But the education he received was truly excellent, wide-ranging, mind-expanding; it made him what he is today. I don’t know if he would have been as successful had he attended another school. He would have been different. That doesn’t mean he hasn’t worked as hard as anyone else, either–just going to an elite school doesn’t hand you anything, and I think some people think it does. To do well at an elite school means you’ve competed successfully with smart people, and if you do that in college you’re likely to continue.
The company he works for now hires the cream of the cream (yes, it’s finance-related), but they look for sheer talent. That smart people often come from elite colleges means that those graduates are well-represented, but getting in the door on the strength of your alma mater doesn’t mean you’ll get the job. But it’s true that a candidate from a less-well-known school might have to make a compelling case to get interviewed. There are no absolutes, is what I’m saying.
No guarantees, either.