Thats because candidates from the NE or NorCal equate going to Dallas or Houston with going to Siberia, from what I read here. 8->
@jym626, you are probably right. There is a large corporation moving their HQ from CA to the Dallas area. A bunch of their employees flew in to visit and apparently were rather surprised to see that there is a decent level of civilization here. They were pleased with the school systems and thrilled with what 500K will buy you in terms of housing.
Of course, they weren’t all that impressed with the heat. I will say positive things about this area unless it is July or August, and then I will say that I absolutely hate it here.
If you are suggesting that the students at elite schools today are less accomplished than those from 30 years ago, this is nonsense. They are much more accomplished. There are fewer legacies, and the “hooked” candidates have better qualifications than the non-hooked candidates of the past.
As @Pizzagirlsaid, PWM isn’t exactly the most prestigious division of an IBank (mind you, that isn’t necessarily a bad thing; as someone else on this thread said earlier, it’s sometimes more advantageous to be in an alleyway where there isn’t has much competition for an opportunity than on the highway stampeding with everyone else).
@monydad, in general, there’s more visibility at HQ. That’'s true for a company headquartered in Podunksville as well, where you probably would move up faster at Podunksville than at a branch office in NYC.
@SoCoDad, I’m not questioning your “spotty at best” impression. However, Hunt is right, there are fewer legacy students at all the elite colleges than ever before.
@Hunt, I can’t really think of any job that’s like that these days.
Certainly in the '50’s-'70’s, when there was an Old Boys Club and going to the right school got you in, no questions ask, while they didn’t even know that certain other schools existed.
Not these days, though (with certain exceptions). Those jobs that non-target schools kids have to fight hard to get aren’t just there for the taking by even the most targeted schools (athletes, those with family connections, etc. excepted).
“My only concern would be pressuring a child who was a natural high school history teacher to go to Wall Street, against her natural inclination and desires.”
If you only knew just how many students I see every year who are succumbing to parental pressure when it comes to college and career choices, and who are denying their natural inclinations…
You might cry.
I think Hunt is dead on with his chicken and egg comment. Yesterday I was at a bridal shower populated by a bunch of elite school graduates, most now in finance or law. We got competitive over a WORD SEARCH. The type-A, super ambitious person isn’t likely to turn down an Ivy for her state school, exaggerating the disparity in outcomes. Not to mention the fact that one major reason someone might turn down an elite school is cost, and wealthier people tend to have more connections and options before you even consider the effect of college name.
Beyond this, I agree with PG that it seems beyond silly to fixate on the very small number of doors that are arguably closed to non elite school grads. Plenty of people don’t want jobs in finance, and only a fraction of the finance and consulting jobs taken by Harvard grads are ones that would be totally inaccessible to a top student in a state school. And sure, I’d advise most people who get into an elite school and can afford to go to do so for a lot of reasons including pragmatic ones, but it just isn’t worth wringing one’s hands over the notion that only 97 of 100 possible paths to a rewarding and lucrative career are now open to you.
I’d also like to point out that there are plenty of instances in which being a big fish in a small pond can be an advantage. From a purely practical standpoint, while it is better to be at the top of the class at Princeton than at Rutgers, a lot of students might find themselves better off being a star at Rutgers than one of the herd at Princeton.
I find this bit interesting as up until very recently, international students were held to much higher academic standards for admission than their American counterparts. Especially at the elite/respectable colleges. This was certainly the case back when I was an undergrad as the internationals tended to have higher HS GPAs/SATs and more impressive ECs on average.
Only thing which remained somewhat constant was nearly all tended to come from wealthy/upper-middle class backgrounds unless they were one of the tiny few on a scholarship for lower-income international students. The latter tended to have more impressive stats and pre-college accomplishments than the other internationals.
It isn’t only or necessarily parental pressure. There’s also peer pressure from the prevailing campus culture.
I certainly noticed this at my STEM centered public magnet where many students were pressured by the prevailing campus culture to aspire to medicine, engineering, math/science PhDs, Pharmacy, Ibanking/finance, and biglaw.
Friends and a few relatives who attended HYPSMCC have also noted and sometimes taken along for the ride as a result of prevailing peer pressures. One in-law who is an HYPS graduate gave up a spot at a top 5 STEM PhD program at the last moment to work for BGC. She didn’t even consider organizational consulting until she heard about it being promoted positively from other classmates. She also came from a well-to-do family so it wasn’t about the money. With her, it was the competitive aspect and a feeling she can make more of an immediate real-world impact than working in a STEM lab doing experiments from which results and impact may not be felt for years or even decades.
The Harvard senior survey mentions that while a large portion go into finance and consulting immediately after graduating, the vast majority of those say they plan to switch to a different field. Only ~6% of Harvard seniors say they plan to stay in finance or consulting. Fewer than 1% plan to stay in consulting. So I’d expect the more typical scenario is using finance/consulting as a stepping stone for something else, or because they are not sure what to do after graduating, or because they didn’t get into some other field (or some other grad school), etc.
I agree, cobrat. Peer pressure is also significant among my students. However, somewhat easier to resist peer pressure if at least your own parents back your personal integrity. Almost a lost cause if you’re being asked to be heroic at that vulnerable age. Usually, an outside adult (such as self) is needed to be that validator. (Which I am often asked to be.)
Just wanted to point that out as from what I saw at my public magnet, campus derived peer pressure was just as bad and sometimes worse than parental pressure.
I suspect a lot of those Harvard, MIT, etc. grads going into I-banking and consulting are doing so because they are lured by the really big money offered by those jobs as opposed to the much greater uncertainties in academia and other fields. I think this is too bad–and it may even be a downside of going to an elite school, because it puts you in the way of this kind of temptation.
Most I bank jobs at this level are for two years.
Then the expectation is that you leave for grad school. I hardly think that a two year detour (with enough scratch for most kids to make a dent in their undergrad loans) is going to harm academia in a meaningful way.
Well, the issue is what those students actually do after making that nice money for a couple of years. I know a lot of idealistic people who were going to get big money at law firms for a few years, and somehow never ended up moving on to their “real” career.
And if the ibank/consulting firm really likes you at the end of the 2 years, they’ll fully fund any professional/graduate program you’re admitted in.
BCG fully paid for the in-law to attend a top 3 MBA program.
Look at things this way - what if someone wants to be an astronaut, which is a very selective, elite job? The elite schools that might lead to that kind of path are probably different than someone who wants to go into investment banking. The military academies might be the creme-to-la-creme of schools in that context. (Actually, they are, look down a list of astronauts and you’ll see that a great number of them went to a service academy.) But a lot of them come from other universities that range from University of Kansas to Oklahoma State to Purdue to William and Mary to Stanford. http://www.■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■/lists/list/alma-maters-of-astronauts/900/
Those are some of the older ones, but another thing I saw said that Purdue has had the 3rd most alumni become astronauts - after the Air Force and Naval Academies.
But aren’t there are too many phds? That is another reason students may choose to work in industry.
As you said Blossom, students may have no choice. Students look around. See the opportunities. See the opportunities in academia aren’t great and look elsewhere.
I was talking to somebody who runs a department in a STEM field that is ranked third in the United States. Some of her students go into academia. More would if the opportunities existed. She said there are too many phds.
Applicants are grouped into tiers but the tiers are larger than the tiers for IB. You can get into the grad program from a lower tier.
If you wanted to be an astronaut, would you take the route that produced the largest number of astronauts, a route that produced at least one astronaut, or a route that (so far) produced no astronauts?
I wonder where they recruit for their NYC and Chicago offices.