- It matters where you go to college, plain and simple. Graduates of the most-select colleges often earn more than graduates of less-select public universities, who are employed at higher rates than those of community colleges, who get more calls from potential employers than graduates of online universities. A world where "44.8% of billionaires, 55.9% of [Forbes's most] powerful women, and 85.2% of [Forbes's most] powerful men" attended elite schools is not a place where college doesn't matter.
As someone at the beginning of the college process, I've been getting so many mixed messages about this. Is it what you do with your education over where you get that education? Will you do better if you graduate at the top of your class at a state school or in the bottom of your class at an Ivy? Is your alma mater an omnipresent tag to your identity (and résumé) or is it just four years of your life?
I have no idea what to think about this anymore.After all, elite schools aren't taking a random sample of high-school students and churning out success stories. They're accepting people who are already on the road to success,
I must say I find that slightly terrifying. the truer thing is that their lives have already been shaped decisively by the sum of their own past decisions—the habits developed, the friends made, and the challenges overcome. Where you go to college does matter, because it's often an accurate measure of the person you're becoming.
So it does matter....but it also doesn't really matter? I agree with this from a "finding the right fit" standpoint, but what happened to the theory that the admissions officers aren't determining your fate? If it's a measure of the person you're becoming, aren't the admissions officers the ones holding the measuring tape?
The Economist published an article recently that draws a different conclusion. In their analysis, the subject you choose to study has a greater bearing on future income than on where you receive your degree. Let me say this. I'm at a point where I sometimes get to hire people. I personally don't care even 1% where a potential candidate went to school. (I think mainly consulting and financial firms care the most; most jobs aren't in finance and consulting; finance and consulting are mainly run by thieves and charlatans anyhow.) If their resume looks good enough based on school and experience, I want to talk to them, and I want them to talk to me. Personality matters in the real world, and it can get you really far, provided you're also competent and committed to your craft. Below, kleinbl00 offers good advice when he says, "...expand your learning and grow as a person." I would argue that all learning is good learning, even if the topic seems to be unrelated to the topic at hand in the immediate sense. The world is rife with convergences, analogies, crossroads. Having the most expansive knowledge lets you see the problem from angles that you might not otherwise consider. This is a skill, and it's one that college can help you develop, but that you need to own personally if you wan to develop it. Get skills. Get to know people. Do a good job. If you do these things, it won't matter if you have a Harvard logo on your degree.
I'd put it somewhere in between. I'm just leaving the college process and what I'm finding is that in everyday situations it doesn't matter where you went to college. However, the part that they don't tell you much about heading in is that where you go affects what doors are open to you. Certain companies (in engineering at least) are much more keen to hiring from certain colleges, and that can affect a persons ability to get into an entire industry or geographic location of the company. It's an omnipresent tag if you keep finding yourself in situations where the person holding the keys either went to your college or holds it in high esteem.Is your alma mater an omnipresent tag to your identity (and résumé) or is it just four years of your life?
Well, fuck me for trying to save money and going to a state university, I guess. Really, though, this whole article is comparing relative earnings from college graduates, but digresses from the intent of the saying, "It doesn't matter where you go to college, just as long as you go." Going to a public university may not net as much future income as a more selective university, but it's certainly preferable to no college at all, which is the entire point of the original saying. I'll be the fourth person in my family to even go to college, and I'll be damned if it doesn't make a difference. He also seems to be contradicting himself and/or misrepresenting the quantitative facts in a few places. To say that the type of people who would go to Princeton will do as well at any other university does not indicate that the student's choice matters (i.e. "where you go"), but that the college's decision on whether or not you're the type of individual who will succeed at their university is the real deciding factor. Essentially, the differences of education don't matter as much as the characteristics of the student, which to me seems to contradict the title and first few paragraphs entirely. He says, "It does matter where you go!" from one side of the mouth, and, "It doesn't really matter, as long as you're the type of person to worry about where you go." through the other. Furthermore, saying that about half of all billionaires attended an elite college is a useless comparison without further data about how many of the other half attended college, what level of education the attained, and other relevant factors. The Forbes's most powerful men statistic seems significant, but it makes me wonder about why there's such a gap between Forbes's most powerful men and women in terms of how prestigious their universities are.
Simply put: If you have the juice to go to Princeton, you will always outcompete the people who lack the juice to go to Princeton. That does not mean you are smarter. That does not mean you work harder. That does not mean you are a better person. It means your daddy has more money than other daddies, his friends have more influence than other daddy's friends, and that his coattails are longer and more cushy than the coattails of other daddies. Forbes, for their part, calculate that 30% of the billionaires on their list inherited their money. External audits estimate that more than 60% of the 400 were born with $1m or more. Piketty, in Capital in the 21st Century, put the number even higher.To say that the type of people who would go to Princeton will do as well at any other university does not indicate that the student's choice matters (i.e. "where you go"), but that the college's decision on whether or not you're the type of individual who will succeed at their university is the real deciding factor.
Wow. That's encouraging. But is he right? Have there been other studies done?College acceptance and future success are both reflections of an obvious but often overlooked variable: the person you're becoming in your late teens. After all, elite schools aren't taking a random sample of high-school students and churning out success stories. They're accepting people who are already on the road to success, connecting them with peers and alumni in successful jobs, giving them a degree that signals to employers that this person has the potential to be successful, and then basking in their eventual success.
students who attended more selective colleges earned about the same as students of seemingly comparable ability who attended less selective schools.
We may be talking about how long after college you will need to do the projects you hate before you can do the projects you want. Then again, I went to Binghamton. Now that I live in Los Angeles, it's like saying I went to some school in a place. However I'm also 40, so instead they ask me about version control and server automation.
Money is definitely not the key to happiness.