Already a member?
Welcome to Brazen Careerist!
Emily Ma is using Brazen Careerist to share ideas. Join now to become a member and start networking with Emily Ma and other professionals just like you. Learn more.
Brazen careerist
Where ambitious young professionals connect and grow
Email
Print
The economic crisis has claimed a lot of victims. Companies have failed. Jobs have been lost. Health insurance taken away. Now it looks like the next victim will be underprivileged college students.
When I was in high school, applying to college was all about getting into the "best" school. Money was on the back burner. If you were smart enough, you could get scholarships. If you weren't, there was this wonderful thing called "financial aid". Loans could cover the re
For more timely, relevant, and engaging articles,
subscribe to Brazen Careerist.
- How To Find a Writing Partner Who Can Help You Achieve Your Goals and Make More Money
- The Anti-Stalker’s Guide for Converting Online Contact into Real World Collaboration
- Continuing Education: Extending Learning Beyond Your Campus Years
- A New Kind of Business Mover and Shaker
- Why You Might Be Better Off Without a Job After College
Comments
05.06.09
This is really good post that brings up a lot of important points. So many more valedictorian types are going to state schools. I don't think that's even a new phenomenon, I saw it when I was graduating high school too, but it's definitely more prevalent now because of the recession.
One thing that is a shame is that the schools that will really lose out here are the non-elite private schools. Elite schools will always have demand because of the prestige, and state schools and community colleges will always have demand because of the affordability. But I wonder what the future holds for non-elite private schools, like small private liberal arts colleges - hardly anyone I know is choosing schools like that anymore because the pricetag just isn't worth it.
05.06.09
I guess a follow up question would be, will it matter that our "elite" universities are populated by the wealthy? I think it's a sign of the future that schools like Stanford and Harvard have started using major student aid for households making under 100,000 a year. I also wonder, were Stanford and Harvard ever worth the price tag? I've seen good people go to good schools, but also good people go to state schools. I'm not sure it changes who you will be after you graduate. I know right now, at our age, everything seems very college-centric. But in a few years, no one will really care where you went to school, whether that was the state college down the street or the elite top-ranked college on the other coast.
05.06.09
I think that trade school attendance will pick up, as college becomes less affordable. And this isn't necessarily a bad thing. It's generally cheaper, and it's application to real jobs is often more direct. Employed electricians can make more money than many college grads with a liberal arts degree.
05.06.09
The bias against state schools depends on your region, and has always been based more on perception than on reality. Education is what you make of it, wherever you go to college.
"At the end of the day, the average student from the elite university will still be smarter than the average student from the state school"
On what basis?
05.06.09
@Nisha Chittal: I agree that this isn't necessarily a new phenomenon, but it does seem to be an accelerating trend.
@Miles: Where people go to school shouldn't matter if we are willing to accept there is a demographic shift taking place at these "elite" schools.
@Jason Simon: I've heard augments in favor of trade schools. The key seems to be how good the chances of being employed are after graduation.
@KateNonymous: On the basis of incoming test scores, GPA, etc. No, it's not perfect, but it is the closest thing to an objective indicator that exists.
05.06.09
Too bad there's not an exit indicator that equalizes for the networking aspect--which I think is, for most people, the only real advantage of going to an "elite" college. That would probably be more telling. There's a difference between how hard it is to get into a school, and how hard it is to stay there.
05.06.09
If any recruiter is using the school someone attended as a criteria to include or exclude a candidate, then they are in no uncertain terms a douche bag.
The things that differentiate top performers from good performers are primarily those things that can't be taught: enthusiasm, passion, interpersonal skills.
05.06.09
@ Jimmy. Recruiters routinely use schools as a criteria and it's called "cost-effective". If a company can go to their select favorite top schools and recruit everyone they need that's a lot cheaper than casting a wide net and recruiting at every school.
Could they get some good candidates by going to more schools? Sure. However, do they get good candidates by going to a few top schools? Yes, they do. So what's the ROI on going to more schools when they don't need to?
Now, yes someone can network in and if a recruiter uses a schools as a sole excuse for not considering them, than that's silly. That may be what you mean but it also seems like the goal of your post was more about using the word "douche bag".
05.06.09
@Dead Hedge, although I adore the term douche bag, the goal of the post was to point out that poor recruiters use the crutch of weighing the value of a school based on percieved reputation. In our industry, college fairs are not where we recruit our fresh grads, we see that as high cost low return versus leveraging technology to reach a wider audience for less money. Having built two very successful college recruiting programs, I have never let anyone in the organization apply any bias based on school into our recruiting. It resulted in some pretty heavey shouting matches (CEO's are proud of their schools), and three threats to "have my job".
05.06.09
A recent article about Harvard Business School looking at changing their MBA program in light of recent failures of companies ran by their graduates is also big news that higher education is in need of an overhaul.
Article here: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/education/article5821706.ece
This is alarming considering the Harvard MBA program is so elite and expensive.
I have a friend attending Harvard for his PhD and the only reason why he is doing it there is because he wanted to put it on his resume that he has a degree from an Ivy league school. Would he have accomplished any less if he did his work at a state school? No. Would he be more successful? Probably not.
I've always thought you go to school for the connections and network that you can establish while you're there. The education is necessary. Unfortunately, there often is a huge price to pay for these connections...and for us middle classers, that price can be a deal breaker.
05.06.09
Edit for above post: The education is SECONDARY.
05.06.09
@ Jimmy, I am glad that you were able to combine your love of the term "douche bag" with a very good point about how technology can be more cost effective than limiting the number of schools.
05.06.09
Hey Rob,
I liked this post, even though it was a hard subject to write about! I wish that schools would focus more on helping kids learn instead of making money.
The truth is, they are a business just like everyone else. They have have budget cuts too. I'm at the University of Minnesota and we have had a salary freeze and a hiring freeze for quite some time now.
Do you go to school at NYU?
Got Something To Say?
Got Something To Say?
Not a Member? Brazen Careerist is a career management tool for next-generation professionals. Set up a free account today to comment on this post and start sharing your ideas. Learn more.
Login to view your networks!
 |
 |
|
 |
|
