[karamazov]

Off topic, but if your son has the chance to go Harvard/MIT/Stanford, he absolutely should. The difference is primarily in the caliber of the other students, and it makes a world of difference to have such a concentration of talent in one place.

(Note that I'm not saying there isn't talent elsewhere, just that there's an incredible concentration of it in the top n schools.)

[kapilkale]

It doesn't necessarily make world of difference. When you compare students who attended top private schools vs. those who were admitted but attended state schools, they actually have equivalent incomes down the line.

What's likely happening is that really smart kids at good state schools end up finding the pockets of talent there anyway.

Pretty scary implications for the value of a Harvard degree.

source: http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2005/10/10/051010crat_atlar...

[johnrob]

To some degree, the elite universities are selling success to those already predestined for it. This is an end game state for any popular institution that accepts a subset from a pool of applicants. The battle to get in ends up being a significant source of the value creation.

Raising a venture round from Sequoia is probably a decent non-academic example of this. I would not be surprised if companies who turn Sequoia away are just as successful as those who are funded by them (although the former is probably a small data set!).

[gagaga]

The network you'll make at top-tier schools is IMO a lot more important than anything else.

[ericd]

Yeah, the difference in peers alone is worth the cost delta. Especially true if you go to MIT - the student body and culture there is absolutely wonderful. One of my favorite places on Earth.