Recruiters Preferring State School Grads Over Ivy? (employees, sample, interviews)

[cyberphonics]

Job Recruiters Prefer State Universities Over Ivy League Colleges - WSJ.com

This article is a few years old so I'm curious if anyone's seen any up to date comparisons on this subject but more so about what you think on the subject and some of the opinions/insights:

The Journal asked companies to rank schools that produce the best-qualified graduates—overall and by major. Recruiters made clear they preferred big state schools over elite liberal arts schools, such as the Ivies.

Claudia Goldin, a Harvard economics professor and lead researcher on a study tracking Harvard graduates' career paths, said, "We have none of the basic bread-and-butter courses that serve you well in much of industry." What's more, Ms. Goldin said, at Harvard, more than 55% of graduates went on to a doctorate degree, according to a recent survey, so they tend to stay in a first job for a short period of time—often a year or less.

State universities have become the favorite of companies recruiting new hires because their big student populations and focus on teaching practical skills gives the companies more bang for their recruiting buck.

Recruiters say graduates of top public universities are often among the most prepared and well-rounded academically, and companies have found they fit well into their corporate cultures and over time have the best track record in their firms.

While companies didn't rate Ivy League grads best overall, several did favor them in some specific majors.

Has it been your experience as employees/employers/students that graduates from state schools are more well-rounded and "better-suited" for hiring? Any thoughts?

[mdovell]

I'm sure Ivy are nice and all but frankly it becomes a bit of a paradox. Professors are not specifically tied into one school. I have personally attended public universities and yet many of my professors have taught in private...including Ivy league (MIT to be specific).

Does a professor *REALLY* need a university to teach? Sure if research requires labs that is one thing. A lecture hall is nothing special. I've seen libraries and high schools that had larger rooms than many universities.Smaller class size? certainly that is an argument but how much attention does someone need specifically as an adult?

[lmw36]

I'm speaking from a VERY small sample, but I work with a company who primarily recruits from top private schools, and a few public ones the recruiter is fond of. I was lucky to be in one of those public schools.

In terms of previous work experience (a lot of the private school kids never worked/worked very little before school, or during), being humble, relatable, and an efficient worker, I find the public school kids tend to be more easy to work with.

Sure you may have "bright" students from top private schools, however I have met many so far who could hardly plug a toaster in. Or they could design the toaster, but be unable to answer the phone out of social anxiety. Neither of these make you a bad person, but in terms of "well roundedness", which to me means a healthy balance of book smarts/street smarts/work ethic, I tend to prefer the public schools, IN MY COMPANY. Nobody slay me here, please.

[timberline742]

Originally Posted by mdovell

.including Ivy league (MIT to be specific).

MIT isn't an ivy league school

It is as good as one, or better in some fields

But it isn't an ivy

[grmi66]

This is just a sample of one, but a friend had to train a recent Ivy League grad for a position. Told me never again, the guy didn't gel with the rest of the office, thought his **it didn't stink, would not listen to any of the management staff and always had his eye out for another job. My friend canned him within 6 months because he had a horrible work ethic. Told me after that incident he would stick with tried and true grads from midwestern state colleges. Especially if they grew up blue collar or on a farm, said they were the best for his line of work.

[Indigo Cardinal]

I could see a 'reverse snobbery' going into effect here. Many recruiters want somebody who will have a proven work ethic, and I would imagine many people (myself included) would see the Ivy League school and immediately think, "Oh--rich kid, never had to work a day in his/her life." (There is the perception that the Ivies are mainly attended by the rich.) Public schools are more likely to have your every day run of the mill kids who probably had to have summer jobs as teens, do chores around the house in their families, etc--in other words, had to do for themselves (self-sufficient), had to pitch in to help out the family (learning to be a team player early on).

I've been the beneficiary of this 'reverse snobbery' with my background--I was in the Army, and probably 90% of my interviews, within the first five minutes, the hiring manager would say, "I need somebody who's willing to work very hard from the word go, and you're ex-military, so you're used to hard work."

I think recruiters may be thinking that the harder you had to work just to get the skills, the more likely you are to continue to work hard once you have them and are ready to offer them to the work force.

[jobaba]

Originally Posted by Indigo Cardinal

I could see a 'reverse snobbery' going into effect here. Many recruiters want somebody who will have a proven work ethic, and I would imagine many people (myself included) would see the Ivy League school and immediately think, "Oh--rich kid, never had to work a day in his/her life." (There is the perception that the Ivies are mainly attended by the rich.) Public schools are more likely to have your every day run of the mill kids who probably had to have summer jobs as teens, do chores around the house in their families, etc--in other words, had to do for themselves (self-sufficient), had to pitch in to help out the family (learning to be a team player early on).

I've been the beneficiary of this 'reverse snobbery' with my background--I was in the Army, and probably 90% of my interviews, within the first five minutes, the hiring manager would say, "I need somebody who's willing to work very hard from the word go, and you're ex-military, so you're used to hard work."

I think recruiters may be thinking that the harder you had to work just to get the skills, the more likely you are to continue to work hard once you have them and are ready to offer them to the work force.

You don't think you have to work hard to get into an Ivy League school?

Some of you have really weird, scary thinking.

[timberline742]

Originally Posted by jobaba

You don't think you have to work hard to get into an Ivy League school?

Some of you have really weird, scary thinking.

Yeah, I don't know if I was smart enough to get into an ivy, but about 10% of my graduating class did (good high school), and I'll tell you this... they all worked MUCH harder in high school on their schoolwork than I did. I dated a couple in HS and while in college, and the work ethic those people had was impressive.

[Indigo Cardinal]

Originally Posted by jobaba

You don't think you have to work hard to get into an Ivy League school?

Some of you have really weird, scary thinking.

I'll be the first to acknowledge that my thinking is likely in error. But there is a huge perception that the rich are the ones who largely attend the Ivies, and most people equate 'rich kids' with 'not really understanding the value of hard work'.

[tolovefromANFIELD]

So, the point of this article is that "these" particular recruiters prefer state schools because a big school is a.) meat market (lots of warm bodies), and b.) those schools teach conformism. Shocking!

Ivies and exclusive Liberal Arts schools were never those two things, and with god's willing they will remain so.