Where you go to college....for most it matters!

[Unregistered]

If i can find it somewhere there was a recent study showing that a large portion of successful female executives were former college athletes (although not necessarily all D1). Obviously it helps with time management, focus and drive, team work, hard work... The "dumb jock" stigma applies more to men than women, particularly football and basketball players.

Lots of articles - many not entirely scientific - support that theory. Certainly by the time you reach college athletics (if you reach it at all) you've shown you're dedicated, work hard, manage your time well (mostly), willing to make sacrifices (in college a social life often disappears for athletes). Obviously there's lots of successful non athletes as well. In my company they also favor former military guys - very disciplined, organized, focused.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...roles/2487665/

http://fortune.com/2016/02/04/women-sports-successful/

https://www.coachup.com/nation/artic...-were-athletes

[Unregistered]

Where you went to college helps with getting your first job after college, but after that it is just a footnote on your resume. Your work history becomes far more important to future employers. It would be interesting to find out if the time management skills, student athletes must develop, help them become more successful later on in their careers.

I started the thread and posted the link to the study. I don't know. Should I believe the guy who did the statistical research and published it or should I believe you and your one data point (your personal experience). Clearly you right? I mean you are the smartest guy you know.

[Unregistered]

Where you went to college helps with getting your first job after college, but after that it is just a footnote on your resume. Your work history becomes far more important to future employers. It would be interesting to find out if the time management skills, student athletes must develop, help them become more successful later on in their careers.

This sounds good in theory but the real world doesn't play out that way. It actually sounds like a myth lower-tier schools would perpetuate in order to convince students to go there.

The reality is the name of the school you went to impacts you till the day you retire. It starts with certain jobs not even being available. If you want to go into consulting or finance, it is virtually impossible to get there from anything but a top school. So you end up taking a lesser job and the rest of your career is on a different trajectory than a kid who landed at Goldman or McKinsey.

Later in life, your undergrad degree won't close doors, but people will look at you differently. It's subtle discrimination. Later in life, the kid who started at McKinsey or Goldman will see better opportunities, will get better calls from recruiters, and will be better networked.

Again, there are outliers. However, with a degree from a top school, you are swimming with the current but a degree from a weak school will mean you are swimming against the current the rest of your life. You may still get to the same place, but it will be a very tough swim.

I also don't understand parents who optimize for financial aid over school quality. Sure I don't want my kid graduating with tons of debt. However, life is easier if he graduates from a top school and gets a starting salary that's north of $75K and has some debt vs. graduating from a mediocre school and starting at $40K and not having any debt.

[Unregistered]

This sounds good in theory but the real world doesn't play out that way. It actually sounds like a myth lower-tier schools would perpetuate in order to convince students to go there.

The reality is the name of the school you went to impacts you till the day you retire. It starts with certain jobs not even being available. If you want to go into consulting or finance, it is virtually impossible to get there from anything but a top school. So you end up taking a lesser job and the rest of your career is on a different trajectory than a kid who landed at Goldman or McKinsey.

Later in life, your undergrad degree won't close doors, but people will look at you differently. It's subtle discrimination. Later in life, the kid who started at McKinsey or Goldman will see better opportunities, will get better calls from recruiters, and will be better networked.

Again, there are outliers. However, with a degree from a top school, you are swimming with the current but a degree from a weak school will mean you are swimming against the current the rest of your life. You may still get to the same place, but it will be a very tough swim.

I also don't understand parents who optimize for financial aid over school quality. Sure I don't want my kid graduating with tons of debt. However, life is easier if he graduates from a top school and gets a starting salary that's north of $75K and has some debt vs. graduating from a mediocre school and starting at $40K and not having any debt.

Your post is only accurate in certain professions. Its not everyone's desire to be a finance major and work on Wall Street. If your child wants to be a teacher, spending 65k a year on a private education and going into debt is ridiculous

[Unregistered]

I started the thread and posted the link to the study. I don't know. Should I believe the guy who did the statistical research and published it or should I believe you and your one data point (your personal experience). Clearly you right? I mean you are the smartest guy you know.

i agree with the other guy-you are a pompous azz

[Unregistered]

This sounds good in theory but the real world doesn't play out that way. It actually sounds like a myth lower-tier schools would perpetuate in order to convince students to go there.

The reality is the name of the school you went to impacts you till the day you retire. It starts with certain jobs not even being available. If you want to go into consulting or finance, it is virtually impossible to get there from anything but a top school. So you end up taking a lesser job and the rest of your career is on a different trajectory than a kid who landed at Goldman or McKinsey.

Later in life, your undergrad degree won't close doors, but people will look at you differently. It's subtle discrimination. Later in life, the kid who started at McKinsey or Goldman will see better opportunities, will get better calls from recruiters, and will be better networked.

Again, there are outliers. However, with a degree from a top school, you are swimming with the current but a degree from a weak school will mean you are swimming against the current the rest of your life. You may still get to the same place, but it will be a very tough swim.

I also don't understand parents who optimize for financial aid over school quality. Sure I don't want my kid graduating with tons of debt. However, life is easier if he graduates from a top school and gets a starting salary that's north of $75K and has some debt vs. graduating from a mediocre school and starting at $40K and not having any debt.

This is all well and good and an easy decision to make if it's Harvard/Stanford vs UCONN. It becomes a more difficult call when the choices are Fordham or even Colgate vs UCONN. (for example)

[Unregistered]

This sounds good in theory but the real world doesn't play out that way. It actually sounds like a myth lower-tier schools would perpetuate in order to convince students to go there.

The reality is the name of the school you went to impacts you till the day you retire. It starts with certain jobs not even being available. If you want to go into consulting or finance, it is virtually impossible to get there from anything but a top school. So you end up taking a lesser job and the rest of your career is on a different trajectory than a kid who landed at Goldman or McKinsey.

Later in life, your undergrad degree won't close doors, but people will look at you differently. It's subtle discrimination. Later in life, the kid who started at McKinsey or Goldman will see better opportunities, will get better calls from recruiters, and will be better networked.

Again, there are outliers. However, with a degree from a top school, you are swimming with the current but a degree from a weak school will mean you are swimming against the current the rest of your life. You may still get to the same place, but it will be a very tough swim.

I also don't understand parents who optimize for financial aid over school quality. Sure I don't want my kid graduating with tons of debt. However, life is easier if he graduates from a top school and gets a starting salary that's north of $75K and has some debt vs. graduating from a mediocre school and starting at $40K and not having any debt.

Lots of generalities that don't always apply. Once you have a few years of work under your belt then what you do in the workplace determines you trajectory. Countless successful people did not graduate from top schools. Graduating with little debt sets people up to perhaps start their own successful business earlier, or attend a top graduate school (which matters much more in business, law and medicine), or afford a home in a better town where you make better social and professional connections. In many professions having loads of debt can be crippling. Career choices shouldn't be driven solely by financial considerations. People should chose a career that they are passionate about and can thrive in. A career in finance isn't something most people aspire to.

You should aim for the best school you can comfortably afford keeping in mind what your professional interests are. You should also aim for the best programs in that area of interest. If you want to be a nurse attend the best nursing school you can afford etc.

[Unregistered]

I started the thread and posted the link to the study. I don't know. Should I believe the guy who did the statistical research and published it or should I believe you and your one data point (your personal experience). Clearly you right? I mean you are the smartest guy you know.

I have worked with multiple recruiters, interviewed and hired many individuals for multiple fortune 500 companies. Once your professional work history can stand on its own, it is more important to see what you have accomplished, within your career and proven yourself. As long as you have a degree, the higher the better, where you received that degree from is really anecdotal. A nice talking point, but that is all. Perhaps there are certain specialized career fields where it would matter, such as graduating from MIT and working for NASA, but for 99% of the jobs out there, it really just helps to land your first position or two. While I know many people more intelligent than myself, you are definitely not one of them.

[Unregistered]

http://www.thecollegesolution.com/do...-to-employers/

http://time.com/54342/it-doesnt-matt...go-to-college/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.c6186f0351e3

[Unregistered]

I have worked with multiple recruiters, interviewed and hired many individuals for multiple fortune 500 companies. Once your professional work history can stand on its own, it is more important to see what you have accomplished, within your career and proven yourself. As long as you have a degree, the higher the better, where you received that degree from is really anecdotal. A nice talking point, but that is all. Perhaps there are certain specialized career fields where it would matter, such as graduating from MIT and working for NASA, but for 99% of the jobs out there, it really just helps to land your first position or two. While I know many people more intelligent than myself, you are definitely not one of them.

Fair enough. However that 1st job or two out of college does help set the trajectory for future earnings. Many consultancies will only hire graduates from top tier schools (e.g. Ivy, Chicago, G'town). These firms are a launching pad for future well paying industry jobs.

[Unregistered]

http://www.thecollegesolution.com/do...-to-employers/

http://time.com/54342/it-doesnt-matt...go-to-college/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.c6186f0351e3

This is a much more comprehensive article...
https://www.wsj.com/articles/do-elit...ons-1454295674

[Unregistered]

Fair enough. However that 1st job or two out of college does help set the trajectory for future earnings. Many consultancies will only hire graduates from top tier schools (e.g. Ivy, Chicago, G'town). These firms are a launching pad for future well paying industry jobs.

I never meant to imply that starting with a higher salary wouldn’t pay dividends by maintaining that higher pay percent later on. It is an interesting concept. If you can leave an Ivy League School without much debt, it would be worth going that route. If you would be loaded down with debt, when you graduate, then probably not. With reading the last posted article, I see my experience may have been a bit skewed as I work in the IT/Tech and Finance arenas and your pay, starting out, is not generally determined by what college you went to.

[Unregistered]

I never meant to imply that starting with a higher salary wouldn’t pay dividends by maintaining that higher pay percent later on. It is an interesting concept. If you can leave an Ivy League School without much debt, it would be worth going that route. If you would be loaded down with debt, when you graduate, then probably not. With reading the last posted article, I see my experience may have been a bit skewed as I work in the IT/Tech and Finance arenas and your pay, starting out, is not generally determined by what college you went to.

I work in biotech and most of sr mgmt on the commercial side comes from McKinsey/Bain type consultancies. These firms almost exclusively select from Ivies/top 25 schools. Not saying it's right..it just is...

[Unregistered]

This is a much more comprehensive article...
https://www.wsj.com/articles/do-elit...ons-1454295674

Really good article. Thanks for posting. I think kids who have absolutely no clue what they want to study have the tougher choice. If you're very focused and pretty certain on your major then you can make those more rational decisions. But if you haven't a clue you need to make sure you're at a school that offers a broad spectrum of majors and does them well. That's where paying a little more (within reason) may be beneficial, or simply attending a quality large state school like UCONN. There's also the very real risk that you may change majors - happens ALL THE TIME. Some schools are highly specialized in certain areas (example Bentley or Babson for business). But what if you get there and decide you hate business?!

[Unregistered]

Really good article. Thanks for posting. I think kids who have absolutely no clue what they want to study have the tougher choice. If you're very focused and pretty certain on your major then you can make those more rational decisions. But if you haven't a clue you need to make sure you're at a school that offers a broad spectrum of majors and does them well. That's where paying a little more (within reason) may be beneficial, or simply attending a quality large state school like UCONN. There's also the very real risk that you may change majors - happens ALL THE TIME. Some schools are highly specialized in certain areas (example Bentley or Babson for business). But what if you get there and decide you hate business?!

What the WSJ didn't touch on was the the debt side. While it's great to get a 12% higher salary coming out of top tier school, you are also potentially saddled with $200,000+ college debt. Your disposable income is much less than if you went to a quality state school