PonyFans.com

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/27/upshot/getting-into-the-ivies.html?smid=tw-nytimes&_r=0

top colleges are admitting fewer American students than they did a generation ago. Colleges have globalized over that time, deliberately increasing the share of their student bodies that come from overseas and leaving fewer slots for applicants from the United States.

Suppose this is also true of SMU. Greater % of international students vs. 20-30 years ago.

Also interesting...
...there is still scant evidence that the selectivity of the college one attends matters much. Students with similar SAT scores who attended colleges of different selectivity — say, Penn and Penn State — had statistically identical incomes in later years, according to research by the economists Stacy Dale and Alan Krueger.

tristatecoog wrote:...there is still scant evidence that the selectivity of the college one attends matters much. Students with similar SAT scores who attended colleges of different selectivity — say, Penn and Penn State — had statistically identical incomes in later years, according to research by the economists Stacy Dale and Alan Krueger.

Have to think there's some self-selection there that could impact this- a lot of kids from Ivy League schools want to go save Africa, be a foreign service officer, work on Capitol Hill, become a social worker, etc. which obviously don't pay that well.

Personal anecdote- One of my next door neighbors growing up went to Yale and Columbia MBA and then went and founded some charity in South America. I told him he was [deleted] crazy at the time and he's living in some hut six months out of the year now and couldn't be happier. Different strokes for different folks I guess.

That being said, if I'm hiring for a selective, well-paying entry level position out of college, I'm taking the Penn student over the Penn St. student nine times out of ten.

tristatecoog wrote:http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/27/upshot/getting-into-the-ivies.html?smid=tw-nytimes&_r=0


Also interesting...
...there is still scant evidence that the selectivity of the college one attends matters much. Students with similar SAT scores who attended colleges of different selectivity — say, Penn and Penn State — had statistically identical incomes in later years, according to research by the economists Stacy Dale and Alan Krueger.

I'm not surprised. Just for illustrative purposes, let's say at penn 7 out of 10 kids could have 1500+. At penn st that may be only 1. That one kid will likely be the best in his class and be provided with the best penn state has to offer. Very likely that he would do just as well as the Penn kids. Every university has some top kids. The difference in schools comes down to the overall volume.

It would be hard to find a industry or business segment that isn't global in scope these days-universities are no different.

Texas was sixth most represented state at Penn for the class of 2017. Funny that just one student came from nearby West Virginia. All but North Dakota sent someone to Philly for an Ivy League education.

http://www.admissions.upenn.edu/apply/i ... ss-profile

Many schools like getting foreign students because they pay the full cost of tuition.

Digetydog wrote:Many schools like getting foreign students because they pay the full cost of tuition.

Ding ding ding

From mi amigo who went to a top three Ivy and Stanford GSB after reading the NYT article. He's now at a Fortune 50 company.

"I don't recall the percent of international students at [top three Ivy] while I matriculated; however, I'm certain that Stanford GSB had basically reached their international limit at around 35%. They had no desire to grow the international segment beyond that number. My guess is that the tight correlation between international students and higher socioeconomic status creates an inherent limit for those students, assuming the university is striving to address all points of diversity.

I'm currently surrounded by peers who attended less prestigious institutions; and after the first year or two on the job, I doubt I'm receiving any preferential treatment due to my alma mater. My degrees make me more of a spectacle than a sui generis employee destined for the CEO seat.

That is simply my experience, working at the same company since graduation. I think the power of the Ivy brand comes into play when you start looking for a job outside of the company in which you work. It's a powerful signal; yet it loses it's luster soon after being hired anywhere."

From mi amigo who went to a top three Ivy and Stanford GSB after reading the NYT article. He's now at a Fortune 50 company.

"I don't recall the percent of international students at [top three Ivy] while I matriculated; however, I'm certain that Stanford GSB had basically reached their international limit at around 35%. They had no desire to grow the international segment beyond that number. My guess is that the tight correlation between international students and higher socioeconomic status creates an inherent limit for those students, assuming the university is striving to address all points of diversity.

I'm currently surrounded by peers who attended less prestigious institutions; and after the first year or two on the job, I doubt I'm receiving any preferential treatment due to my alma mater. My degrees make me more of a spectacle than a sui generis employee destined for the CEO seat.

That is simply my experience, working at the same company since graduation. I think the power of the Ivy brand comes into play when you start looking for a job outside of the company in which you work. It's a powerful signal; yet it loses it's luster soon after being hired anywhere."

Didn't an immigrant UTD alumnus give a huge amount of money to endow business school- worked out well for them-something like 15 million

Tristatecoog: "... the Ivy brand comes into play when you start looking for a job outside of the company in which you work. It's a powerful signal; yet it loses it's luster soon after being hired anywhere."

Absolutely agree!

I hate to say it, but I think it does make a difference. We have intern and hiring programs, and over the past decade we have found certain institutions that turn out students who perform better with a stronger skill set and with more performance growth consistancy than others. All of these institutions are "familiar" name schools (not all of them but the list is short and pretty familiar). It is not a perfect barameter but it has been uncomfortably accurate over the years, hence they seem to get the first look.

Greenwich Pony wrote:I hate to say it, but I think it does make a difference. We have intern and hiring programs, and over the past decade we have found certain institutions that turn out students who perform better with a stronger skill set and with more performance growth consistancy than others. All of these institutions are "familiar" name schools (not all of them but the list is short and pretty familiar). It is not a perfect barameter but it has been uncomfortably accurate over the years, hence they seem to get the first look.

Do your top performing schools also have a low retention rate or is your company a destination place that people don't want to leave? In my last job, Wharton MBAs exceeded others in terms of rate of advancement but they also left more frequently. Same was true of other "Top 10" MBA programs. You may be willing to take that risk if a few break through.