<p>The northeast isn’t necessarily more prestige bound. I believe there is simply a higher overall concentration of colleges. A large number of kids can have many choices and stay regional. And yeah, we have the Ivies. </p>
<p>My point about top scorers is that that alone is not the measure of what a kid can and will accomplish and its impact on others. If you take all the high scorers and somehow privilege them, a proportion still may not have the components that make people successful- at a job hunt, on the job or in life. So what do scores alone tell us?</p>
<p>Is this a question that comes up on the application? Or is one expected to stick it on one’s resume these days as a student seeking an internship or a job? My son would squawk like crazy, but if sticking “36.0 ACT, 240 PSAT” on his resume will help him land an interview, I’ll try to convince him to share his “secret.” What are your thoughts, interviewers?</p>
<p>I would think headhunters do not go on campuses to recruit since they are typically trying to recruit experienced people in the background using connections.</p>
<p>While it may be true that some elite-school proponents are dismissive and snobby about other perfectly good colleges and universities, it is also true that parents of kids who don’t attend an elite school–even if they weren’t rejected, but just didn’t want to attend–make dismissive remarks about top schools. And the general public also loves to rip the top schools apart.</p>
<p>For example, if I wanted to be offended, I could be by poetgrl’s last paragraph of 1291. It’s hard not to suspect there’s an implication that despite how much Stanford is admired (which she believes is too much based on the use of extra o’s in love), Stanford kids aren’t all that. You see, we all know that brainy kids tend to be socially awkward, so to find someone with people sense, the company had to hire a better-adjusted public university grad.</p>
<p>I’m not dismissive of top schools and I’m not one to vilify the financial industry, either, though being on the inside, I know how vilified it ought to be, sometimes. People around here don’t love stanford???</p>
<p>I think it’s a great school.</p>
<p>They still hired my sister for her “people sense.” That is literally what they said when they stole her from another company. Come work for us, we need your people sense.</p>
<p>I don’t know why this is insulting to somebody else.</p>
<p>At all.</p>
<p>As I said, good luck to your son, I’m sure he will find the right place.</p>
<p>To everyone else, please remind your kids who are looking for jobs that the first step might be taking a job they don’t love in order to get to the job they do love. (which can be a bigger issue, imo, than some of the other things we are talking about right now.)</p>
<p>The better one understands a complex system, the better one can effectively interact with that system. One doesn’t need the 100% correlation of a “formula” to benefit from a deep understanding of the critical parts.</p>
<p>Many companies ask for SAT scores and for any other relevant standardized test scores. In some disciplines they are used as a screen; in others, it’s a “nice to know”. Math scores below a certain point for a highly quantitative discipline are a red flag; Verbal scores below a certain level can also be red flags except where we see a TOEFL score. We recognize that a kid who took the SAT at age 16 or 17 and had only been speaking English for a few years at that point but now has the benefit of several years in college is likely to have a verbal proficiency inconsistent with their older score.</p>
<p>My company has several proprietary tests we use for certain roles. The math test is harder (much harder) than the SAT. The verbal test is significantly harder than most tests I’ve seen. I had a PhD in English from a top 10 program score below the threshold. That was a sad day. But the tests are straightforward- no trick questions- and are just designed to support a students claim of proficiency in certain areas.</p>
<p>Put “people skills” in it. And other aptitudes and achievements beyond “good stats.” I’m afraid some of all this sounds like a chance-me post. Not singling anyone out, but not all offers are systematic or about hierarchical standing alone.</p>
<p>No one has yet asked D1 about stats, but they have clearly examined her experience, level of responsibilities and interpersonal skills.</p>
<p>Really? I don’t think the general public much cares, one way or the other. I don’t think the general public devotes more than 0.00001% of their brain cells to thinking about which colleges are elite and which aren’t, what they should think if they hear someone went to an elite school, and so on. Beyond “oh, he must be smart.” And then they move on.</p>
<p>Mine can be, if you’re just getting to know him. Doesn’t quite grasp the idea of smalltalk, answers open-ended questions narrowly, and is plenty content to let others do most of the talking but with the occasional quip tossed in. He could be a great interview subject or a horrible one, depending on the interviewer and the specific nature of the questions.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And consider how vague that can be. Isn’t listening to others a virtue as a “people skill”? Yet to impress an interviewer, one generally needs to be an active self-promoter – just give me an opening to twist the question in such a way that it makes me look great!</p>
<p>Yes, there is a formula. Go to a college- any college- and surround yourself with people who are smarter than you (professors, other students, grad students.) Demonstrate the ability to go deep (i.e. your major) and also be broad (take things outside your comfort zone). Force yourself to write- lots of writing- by taking courses that require it. Do well academically, thereby showing that you take your life seriously and want to apply yourself in a meaningful way. And also have a life outside the lab or library- do something useful with your non-classroom or study time. Read a lot. Become an interesting person by showing up when Tony Blair is giving a talk at the political union, or when the Dalai Lama is speaking on faith or by attending art openings at the campus museums or ushering (or performing) in chamber concerts on campus. Attend a poetry slam even if you hate poetry, and go to a campus basketball game occasionally even if you hate basketball. If you have a choice between a summer job editing a professor’s book or fact-checking for a monograph vs.hanging out at the beach getting a tan, take the job.</p>
<p>This is just for getting hired in corporate America- so no, this advice doesn’t hold if you are applying to med school or want a job in Academia.</p>
<p>No, you don’t need a 4.0. But surrounding yourself with dumb people so you can always be at the top of the pack is not a great strategy. It’s fine to join a fraternity and have fun-- but not if your only interest outside partying is the recent passage of keg laws in your municipality.</p>
<p>Out of curiosity, has this been a recent trend? </p>
<p>Back when I was about to graduate from college, asking for standardized scores…especially SAT/ACTs was limited mainly to the organizational business consulting and the most elitist sectors of the financial industry. </p>
<p>Most other places seem to care mainly about your work experience, skillset, interview performance, where you graduated from college, degree earned, and cumulative undergrad GPA. </p>
<p>However, the last seemed to mainly be used to screen out those who had a cumulative GPA of < 3.0 as that was viewed by many as a red flag a given college graduate lacked the work ethic and/or the intellectual capacity/curiosity to succeed for the given entry-level job.</p>
<p>Poetgrl, you tied the event of your sister’s hiring by a firm in Palo Alto, to the fact that people looooove Stanford. Isn’t it a bit odd to suggest those two things are connected in any way? Why isn’t her hiring just an isolated event based on her unique qualifications? Mentioning Stanford being there, suggests the company tried but couldn’t find people sense locally among Stanford grads, right?</p>
<p>Work, too, actual work experience can trump the internship, sometimes. Kids who get work study should maximize that opportunity and a kid who isn’t involved in research should try to find some kind of paying part time work if possible.</p>
<p>It’s a thing people don’t say, but work is work.</p>
<p>ETA:
</p>
<p>I mentioned stanford because this is a college website and because many of those she works with love stanford the same way I love UNC-CH. Schools that inspire love and director’s cups.</p>