/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.10512177]

Is there really a difference in an Ivy league STEM education and the top #100 state universities?

[Anonymous No.10512215]

>>10512177
No, only the fact you were selected for an ivy matters

btw what's with the pic... that's not really the hiring process these days is it...

[Anonymous No.10512217]

>>10512177
Not at the undergrad level.

[Anonymous No.10512224]

>>10512215
It is if you have an undergrad degree. This is why you need to go into pharmacy (NOTE, able to be done with just 54 credits) or try to file for disability and just be a welfare king. I've done the calculations. You're better off collecting SSDI than getting a $50,000 job if your state provides section 8 vouchers for the disabled.

[Anonymous No.10512231]

>>10512177
Excluding really shitty schools, almost all of what you get out of education depends on what you put into it.

Entry into Ivy League schools is especially competitive, so students that get in are naturally more encouraged to make the most of it.

Besides medical professions, for the most part your alma mater doesn't factor that heavily into whether or not you get a job.

[Anonymous No.10512241]

Ivy League is so rich folks boast about being part of the Ivy League.

[Anonymous No.10512244]

>>10512177
ivy leagues are pretty shit for stem except harvard and princeton

[Anonymous No.10512323]

There’s a reason that powerful parents scrambled to get their kids into the Ivy League rather than a rigorous, practical school like Caltech or MIT.

Despite being an intellectually rigorous institution, Caltech does not graduate many future elites. Alumni go on to be successful in their academic fields, but don’t tend to dominate finance, tech or politics. An academic meritocracy does not reflect how the world actually works.

None of the parents involved in the recent college admissions bribery scandal tried to get their kids into Caltech or MIT, the sort of universities where students are generally expected to acquire skills relevant to a productive career. As it turns out, parents pay obscene sums to marshal their offspring into elite schools not for the sake of education, but to secure their offspring’s socioeconomic status.

Successful parents in the upper middle class can leave money to their children, but that doesn’t guarantee entrée into the social elite. The more reliable way for powerful parents to buy power for their children is through a name-brand, exclusive education.

Jared Kushner’s father famously secured Harvard acceptance for his son with a $2.5 million charitable contribution. A direct financial bequest of the same size to Kushner from his father would have been subject to a 40 percent estate tax. When deciding how to best allocate his progeny’s inheritance, Charles Kushner chose the tax-deductible one. Amortized over two kids, that university donation looks like an attractive investment indeed. When something is both expensive and of no practical value, it’s clearly intended as a means of wealth transfer.

[Anonymous No.10512348]

>>10512177
Everyone else here is going to give you a feel-good answer that your university doesn't matter, and they may even make a few logical points. I am here to tell you that people are retarded and that, yes, your university really does matter. It's the difference between doing product development at a high paying tech company vs. working on process control at a waste treatment plant. Certain companies only hire from certain universities, and you will have a very hard time escaping from that. If they don't recruit from your campus you are pretty much fucked if you want to work there.

t. fell for the cheap state school meme when could have gone to an ivy

[Anonymous No.10512352]

>>10512224
>you need to go into pharmacy
...so you can be replaced by an app in 5 years. terrific idea.

[Anonymous No.10512353]

>>10512177

The No. 1 company in last year’s Fortune 500 was Walmart Inc., with $500 billion in revenue. That would make its chief executive, Douglas McMillon, a pretty important and powerful executive, don’t you think? Can you guess where he went to college? The University of Arkansas. He has an MBA, too. From the University of Tulsa.

Second on the list was Exxon Mobil Corp. Its CEO, Darren Woods, went to Texas A&M. Third was Berkshire Hathaway Inc., run by the man many consider the greatest investor who ever lived: Warren Buffett. He spent three years at the Wharton School before transferring to the University of Nebraska, from which he graduated. He was then rejected by Harvard Business School. (He got his MBA from Columbia Business School, where he famously learned from the great value investor Ben Graham.)

Fourth was Apple Inc., whose chief executive, Tim Cook, is arguably the most important executive in all of tech. He went to a university better known for football than academics: Auburn.

[Anonymous No.10512357]

>>10512353


Are you sensing a pattern here? General Electric Co.’s Lawrence Culp went to Washington College in Chestertown, Maryland. Cardinal Health Inc.’s Michael Kaufmann went to Ohio Northern University in Ada, Ohio. AT&T Inc.’s Randall Stephenson went to the University of Central Oklahoma in Edmond, Oklahoma. General Motors Co.’s Mary Barra went to Kettering University in Flint, Michigan. (Kettering used to be the General Motors Institute before it was spun off from GM in the early 1980s.)

Of the CEOs of the top 20 companies in last year’s Fortune 500, exactly one — Amazon.com Inc.’s Jeff Bezos — went to an Ivy League school (Princeton). And that’s not all. We tend to think of the founders of technology companies as having all gone to Stanford University (or dropping out of Harvard University). And yes, many of them did. But Michael Dell went to the University of Texas. Steve Jobs dropped out of Reed College in Portland, Oregon. Marc Andreessen went to the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. So did Larry Ellison, though he never graduated.

[Anonymous No.10512358]

>>10512323
>the recent college admissions bribery scandal
very few of those universities were ivies tho

[Anonymous No.10512369]

>>10512177
>ctrl+f jew
>0 results

Yes, maybe 30+ years ago. Compared to MIT or CalTech they're non-starters. You're going to see their value increasingly diminish as people realize that top-tier scholars are being shunned for not being jewish.

>but that's just for admittance, he's asking about the quality of education

Yes, it'll trickle "up" into professorship positions, lowering their standards.

[Anonymous No.10512371]

>>10512177
About 100k in student loans. That's about it.

[Anonymous No.10512377]

>>10512352
If you are a Pharm tech, yes. If you are a PharmD, no. Legal protections ensure the longevity of pharmacists and physicians long after alternatives have been devised.

[Anonymous No.10512400]

>>10512217
people always forget this, i've known so many people that shit the bed in HS and go to a mediocore uni, ace everything there and then transfer to ivy league graduate schools

[Anonymous No.10512402]

>>10512353
>>10512357
Who gives a fuck?
Maybe they succeeded DESPITE having gone to those universities.
What's more important is:
>WHERE DID THEY SEND THEIR CHILDREN?

[Anonymous No.10512409]

>>10512377
>Legal protections ensure the longevity of pharmacists and physicians long after alternatives have been devised.
you just can't be this naïve.
also: don't lump physicians in with pharmacists; physicians are in a completely different class, and much more powerful in every way.

[Anonymous No.10512411]

>>10512177
>school in 90-100
>calls it top #100

[Anonymous No.10512429]

1 - Someday you will have lots of co-workers.
2 - You will neither know nor care where most of them went to college.
3 - If you do happen to find out where they went, it’ll usually be because they’re jerks.

Maybe a Harvard diploma will give a graduate an easier shot at landing a first job out of school. Maybe. But that’s really the only advantage, and it doesn’t last long. Once you’ve landed the job, you have to perform. If you don’t, your Harvard degree isn’t going to be worth the parchment it’s printed on. And if you do perform, nobody is going to much care that you went to the University of Central Oklahoma.

What you get out of your education is what you put into it. That is especially true when you enter a university because you are usually on your own for the first time. You can make your own decisions about whether to attend that early morning class or sleep through it. Every school has excellent teachers; if you’re motivated, you’ll find them. The qualities you exhibit in college — ambition or laziness; attention to detail or sloppiness; success-oriented or content with mediocrity — will likely be the qualities you bring to your life after college. They will matter a lot more than where you went to school when you were 18.

[Anonymous No.10512452]

Go to state school. It’s way cheaper. You’ll also be more succesful. The Ivy league is a ball busting, pressure cooker. The amount of effort you’ll put into an Ivy league degree to be average for your class, would put you near the top of your class at state school. You won’t have to clamber over massive numbers of elite, over achievers for undergrad reasearch positions and internships. Not to mention your gpa will be higher. Also, if you go to your state school, you can put off abandoning your family and highschool friends for another four years. Going to state school is also an advantage if you want to work in your home state when you graduate. A plurity of potential employers and coworkers will have also gone to the same state university, which will give you a leg up socially.

[Anonymous No.10512468]

No, because in STEM everything you're taught, you have to teach yourself and find a way to use that knowledge. Ivy is for the social aspect (meeting important political figures and fucking their daughters). Also, diversity.

[Anonymous No.10512480]

>>10512429
/thread

[Anonymous No.10512489]

>>10512177
>ITT: infinite levels of cope
Remember OP, No pickles on that burger

[Anonymous No.10512679]

>>10512429
this, plus thanks to the internet you have access beyond what is normally taught

[Anonymous No.10512703]

>>10512429
I work at a large tech company with lots of extremely smart people. The only times where someone went to college comes up is
-Someone is travelling to that area and they recommend a good place to get food
-We are talking about how shitty the weather is and someone says where they went to college had shittier weather

I have never, not a SINGLE time heard anyone reference any kind of program they were in, specific school, etc. to relate to something work related.

[Anonymous No.10512714]

>>10512177
There isn't a difference in education. However there's a difference in opportunities, classroom sizes, alumni network, and professors.

[Anonymous No.10512716]

>>10512429
Then how do you explain this?

[Anonymous No.10512775]

>>10512323
and they say capitalism is meritocratic
>>10512716
The employability of a single institution doesn't say jack shit about the global tendencies.