[csa]

> Are they right?

Maybe

> Is it really important for their kids future to go to a top 70 instead of 130?

There are definitely rough cutoffs. Using your ballpark thresholds, yes, there can be a big difference in 70ish and 130ish in terms of opportunities. The big issue is whether the student will avail themselves of these opportunities.

> (I believe top 5 is worth almost any amount of money)

Oh, definitely not true unless the student avails themselves of the available opportunities.

At top 5, it’s only worth the money (assuming that you’re price sensitive) if the student does one or more things like uses the school alumni network, develops a robust network in school, works with top tier researchers, accesses unique learning opportunities, goes into fields that only pull from these schools (e.g., investment banking, consulting, etc.), tapping into the varsity athlete network, and other things like that.

If they just go and get a degree and then do whatever they were going to do if they had gone to State U, then it’s wasted money.

The classroom education at the top 5 universities is largely not that good. Smaller liberal arts colleges do a better job of classroom education, imho, if thats what someone is looking for.

> Is this based on college being a good time in their life and they are projecting that experience?

Maybe.

There’s probably a lot of intuitively knowing that it’s better to go to a good school without necessarily knowing what about going to a good school makes it matter.

> The attitude of my parents is to make sure the degree will lead to a job, and then find a local and cheap school to get that credential.

Smart, but very limiting if you have ambitions beyond being a middle manager.

> I believe there may be taboo class issues around this topic that are not vocalized.

Class issues, yes. Taboo… I’m not so sure.

[grandempire]

> unless the student avails themselves of the available opportunities.

I was imagining it in personal terms. I would have paid any amount of money for myself because I believe it would have worked for the reasons you mentioned.

> knowing that it’s better to go to a good school without…

That’s likely.

> but very limiting if you have ambitions beyond being a middle manager.

Say more. That kind of thing sounds worth paying for.

> Taboo

For example, someone might secretly think state school education was a waste of time, but not want to talk bad about their peer’s schooling. Or want their child to socialize with other well-to-do families.

[csa]

> Say more. That kind of thing sounds worth paying for.

I’m not sure what you have in mind.

I’m assuming “get a local and cheap degree that gets you a job” means going to a community college and a directional school (at best).

The whole mentality behind this thinking is “I’m going to be the best worker bee I can be”. Worker bees cap out at middle management. When you go to schools like this, you are surrounded by future worker bees, that will probably be your mentality, and that will almost certainly be your social circle. It’s hard to escape worker bee status in that context — possible, just hard and not probable.

Note that there isn’t anything wrong with being a worker bee. The world needs a lot of them.

Upper management, owners of big businesses, politicians, etc. are thinking about how to utilize worker bees to accomplish goals grander than “getting a good job”. It’s a very different way of thinking. It’s not particularly difficult, but it’s foreign to most people who aren’t surrounded by it.

Note that I am not referring to a flagship state school, which usually produces the majority of your local and state leaders (see below).

As a side note, this worker bee phenomenon is in play at elite schools as well. The worker bees get “good jobs” as analysts at investment banks, entry level positions at consulting firms, or (later) associate positions at good law firms. They do their worker bee thing, make the principals a lot of money, and then plateau / wash-out mid-career when they realize that they don’t have the social capital it takes to be a rainmaker. Some folks adjust and do well for themselves, but others don’t.

So to address your comment about being “worth paying for”, it really boils down to a few things. Does the student already have a lot of social capital that they will be able to build on top of? If not, are they socially capable enough to do the things they need to do (mostly build social networks that will let facilitate them being rain makers and/or power brokers later in life)? This is a lot to ask of a kid who is not already part of the upper-middle class or higher (e.g., the capital class).

If a student is just going to go to college, play video games in their dorm room, maybe roll in the hay a bit, and be an average student with a mediocre degree, then paying for a top 5 school (or even a flagship state school) largely is not worth it, imho.

> For example, someone might secretly think state school education was a waste of time,

As long as the “state school” is the flagship school or the A&M school, then this would not be a smart thing to think. Exceptions exist (e.g., UCLA), but these are largely known schools.

It all gets back to how the student utilizes the opportunities presented to them.

> but not want to talk bad about their peer’s schooling.

Probably a good idea in general.

> Or want their child to socialize with other well-to-do families.

Well, this is a smart move for building and/or maintaining social status.

That said, outside of the northeast corridor and California, the state flagship school probably produces waaaay more local and state leaders (business, political, etc.) than top 5 schools. I’ve definitely heard of people having limited access to their state power scene because they went to an Ivy instead of making the right connections at State U.

Edit:

Note that there are other scenarios that make elite schools good.

If you want to become an academic/researcher (I suggest not doing this unless you know someone who will give you the “inside baseball” version of being an academic), the elite schools give folks advantages that state schools don’t.

If you are in a STEM field and you want to meet other super smart and super motivated folks to work with in STEM later, then elite schools can be a good deal. But again, we are back to social networking.

If you want to go to an elite law school or certain grad schools, I actually recommend most people go to State U. For most majors, the effort required to be middle of the pack at an elite school will put you at the top of State U. A super high gpa and recs saying that you’re one of their 1%er students ever are worth way more than being merely above average (e.g., 70th percentile) in a pool of very motivated and intelligent people.

It’s rough listening to folks at Ivy graduations who busted their butt to get into an Ivy and do well (but not top of their class) moan about how they are ending up at the same good-but-not-great law school as their buddy who had zero stress before and during college. Note that the Ivy grad may be better prepared for law school (maybe), but one has to wonder if the stress, money, and effort were worth it.

[grandempire]

Thanks for your insight.