Curious about financial literacy of other psychiatrists ; )

[Merovinge]

---

Members do not see this ad.

The meta hasn't changed, it's parental anxiety that has changed significantly. These consultants do very little that can't be figured out by just talking to other parents (or these days, using Chat GPT). Consultants are alleviating parental anxiety, nothing more. And their results are mediocre. I have an uncle who's very wealthy (like lower end of mid 8 figures net worth). Was at a gathering he hosted where there were many parents of his similar socioeconomic background who were talking about college consultants they'd dropped 100k+ on and were raving about how helpful they were in getting their kids into great colleges. And the colleges were....Northwestern, Wash U, Tufts, Carnegie Melon, etc. All good school, sure, but if I was paying 100k+ for a consultant, my kids better be getting into Harvard/Stanford/MIT. They can't guarantee that because no matter how you slice it, there's a finite amount of things that can be done to maximize your chances of getting into a top school and those things are relatively straightforward.

All of the schools you mentioned are ranked top 20 (with the exception of Tufts) and sport 8-12% admission rates. I'm not sure if this is just due to some doctor's backgrounds (i.e. coming from money and always being top 1% academically), but it's a huge accomplishment to be accepted into a top 20 American university. Even with immense privilege, most kids are not getting accepted into top 20 universities. I cannot even begin to imagine how many parents would pay $100k to ensure their kid was accepted into a top 20 university. If you wanted to get your child accepted based on raw donation it would cost a factor of magnitude+ from what these consultants are charging.

 

[Atreides]

All of the schools you mentioned are ranked top 20 (with the exception of Tufts) and sport 8-12% admission rates. I'm not sure if this is just due to some doctor's backgrounds (i.e. coming from money and always being top 1% academically), but it's a huge accomplishment to be accepted into a top 20 American university. Even with immense privilege, most kids are not getting accepted into top 20 universities. I cannot even begin to imagine how many parents would pay $100k to ensure their kid was accepted into a top 20 university. If you wanted to get your child accepted based on raw donation it would cost a factor of magnitude+ from what these consultants are charging.

So two things.

One, those rates are misleading. For applicants who've checked off the normal boxes (high GPA, high SAT, rigorous high school load, reasonable ECs, etc), the acceptance rate to these schools is upwards of 50%. The odds of getting into at least one top 20 school is likely bordering on 99%, especially for applicants who are applying early decision to their top school. Wash U has a 25% admission rate for early decision applicants, similar to other schools which prioritize ED applicants. I have many, many friends from high school (public, nothing fancy) who got into all those schools and similar without going crazy. And yes, I know that college has gotten more competitive since then but I have plenty of family friends who've applied and gotten into similar colleges more recently and again, they're not doing anything exceptional. Take plenty of AP classes, get A's in them, score high on your ACT/SAT, excel in 2-3 extracurriculars, and make sure to do some type of volunteering-like activity.

The second thing is, what makes you think the consultant actually made a meaningful impact on college admission for those kids? The assumption you're making is that these kids would not have gotten into those colleges without the consultant. I don't find that plausible, especially for kids who are obviously coming from backgrounds where they're undoubtedly getting tutoring, test prep, etc.

Not even getting into whether, outside of the top 5-6 colleges, going to a top 20 college is worth it (you can see my previous posts on the topic).

 

[Merovinge]

So two things.

One, those rates are misleading. For applicants who've checked off the normal boxes (high GPA, high SAT, rigorous high school load, reasonable ECs, etc), the acceptance rate to these schools is upwards of 50%. The odds of getting into at least one top 20 school is likely bordering on 99%, especially for applicants who are applying early decision to their top school. Wash U has a 25% admission rate for early decision applicants, similar to other schools which prioritize ED applicants. I have many, many friends from high school (public, nothing fancy) who got into all those schools and similar without going crazy. And yes, I know that college has gotten more competitive since then but I have plenty of family friends who've applied and gotten into similar colleges more recently and again, they're not doing anything exceptional. Take plenty of AP classes, get A's in them, score high on your ACT/SAT, excel in 2-3 extracurriculars, and make sure to do some type of volunteering-like activity.

The second thing is, what makes you think the consultant actually made a meaningful impact on college admission for those kids? The assumption you're making is that these kids would not have gotten into those colleges without the consultant. I don't find that plausible, especially for kids who are obviously coming from backgrounds where they're undoubtedly getting tutoring, test prep, etc.

Not even getting into whether, outside of the top 5-6 colleges, going to a top 20 college is worth it (you can see my previous posts on the topic).

This is an inherently contradictory statement. How can the people who most want to go to a school have around 25% admission rates for ED but then you state that strong applicants have 50% admission rates. It is not the case that all kids will have all of: high GPA, high standardized test score, rigorous high school load, excel in extracurriculars, and have time to volunteer. Are you actually reading out loud what you are typing? You are describing the top 1ish% of college applicants.

I don't have any data nor am I sure anyone does on if the consultants are make meaningful impacts, I can see a world in which they and a world in which they don't. It is clearly the case that connections at universities can change your chance of admission and that some people do have a better view behind the curtain of what universities are actually using to judge applicants.

To say that outside of the top 5-6 colleges does not impact someone's life (which is leaving out the majority of Ivys and Ivy+ schools by definition) is certainly not supported by the data.

https://opportunityinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/CollegeAdmissions_Paper.pdf

 

[Stagg737]

It is not the case that all kids will have all of: high GPA, high standardized test score, rigorous high school load, excel in extracurriculars, and have time to volunteer. Are you actually reading out loud what you are typing? You are describing the top 1ish% of college applicants.

Not all kids will have this, but I think this is far more common than you’d think. It’s definitely NOT just the top 1%. Probably closer to top 10% of all applicants based on when I did admissions work. I guess that because probably 60-70% of applicants where I went checked those boxes. Checking all the things you list is the a minimum expectation for people applying to elite schools and desired for most solid schools. Many people apply to top schools thinking just a high ACT/SAT or a 4.0 is enough to get in, and it’s just not. That said having those should get you in to some top school if you apply to enough and know how to write secondaries.

Also, keep in mind top applicants are going to apply to multiple top schools. I applied to probably 15 schools way back when including Northwestern, Uchicago, WashU, Michigan, and John’s Hopkins along with some solid state schools (Illinois, Wisconsin, Purdue to name a few). Only places I got rejected were U Chicago and Northwestern and largely got rejected from Northwestern because I accidentally applied to their accelerated pre-med program. Had friends with worse apps than mine get accepted there.

IMO consultants are only worthwhile if a kid wants to get into a specific elite school and the consultant has knowledge of exactly what that specific school wants and a track record to prove it. Not every school looks for the same thing despite what many people think, and it can actually vary significantly even within different schools/programs at the same university.

 

[TexasPhysician]

To say that outside of the top 5-6 colleges does not impact someone's life (which is leaving out the majority of Ivys and Ivy+ schools by definition) is certainly not supported by the data.

https://opportunityinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/CollegeAdmissions_Paper.pdf

It is really hard to eliminate the confounding factor that the majority of those doing really well from the Top 10ish schools compared to large public state U isn’t because of the parents providing the biggest influence. The average parents of children from Top 10 schools have more connections and more wealth than average public state U parents.

Comparing my life to my ex-gf. I’m going from typical state U to med school then building a practice. Ex-gf family is wealthier by far. Despite much better standardized scores, gpa, and everything else than her, she ended up at a top 20ish private school with a name everyone recognizes. We end up at the same med school. Had our lives not been med school, she has $ and connections that I don’t. If she had chosen finance, she could have walked into a family job at $500K+ starting out. She could have barely graduated with a terrible gpa, and it wouldn’t matter. The job is hers. I couldn’t.

How much does this affect how top schools average much higher pay than state U? In Texas, graduating top 10% at a low-income high school, opens up automatic acceptance into Texas A&M. No connections and possibly no one in the family ever graduating college. What percentage of said kids end up at Harvard instead? I bet much lower.

My ex-gf could have significantly skewed the data. Her entry salary could have been easily 5x times the average salary at state U year 1 and 25x a few years in. Elite families aren’t opening up their tax situations to help these studies.

Becoming good friends with someone similar to her in undergrad could also improve future outcome by opening jobs. A higher percentage of wealthy friends can lead to more opportunities. A physician friend of mine attended a family orientation at Harvard, and the father next to him was a billionaire.

Does the average Ivy League student end up on average more successful early on than the equivalent at state U? Absolutely. I’d argue that the name of the school or the education obtained actually provided no significant difference by itself. The family and creating bonds amongst powerful families is the primary factor - my hypothesis based on what I’ve seen.

 

[clausewitz2]

Speaking as someone who stumbled into a very name brand university in the early oughts with the most half-assed and haphazard application process imaginable (I had no idea what I was doing, applied to literally three schools), I am so glad I don't have to go through the process now.

 

[Merovinge]

It is really hard to eliminate the confounding factor that the majority of those doing really well from the Top 10ish schools compared to large public state U isn’t because of the parents providing the biggest influence. The average parents of children from Top 10 schools have more connections and more wealth than average public state U parents.

Comparing my life to my ex-gf. I’m going from typical state U to med school then building a practice. Ex-gf family is wealthier by far. Despite much better standardized scores, gpa, and everything else than her, she ended up at a top 20ish private school with a name everyone recognizes. We end up at the same med school. Had our lives not been med school, she has $ and connections that I don’t. If she had chosen finance, she could have walked into a family job at $500K+ starting out. She could have barely graduated with a terrible gpa, and it wouldn’t matter. The job is hers. I couldn’t.

How much does this affect how top schools average much higher pay than state U? In Texas, graduating top 10% at a low-income high school, opens up automatic acceptance into Texas A&M. No connections and possibly no one in the family ever graduating college. What percentage of said kids end up at Harvard instead? I bet much lower.

My ex-gf could have significantly skewed the data. Her entry salary could have been easily 5x times the average salary at state U year 1 and 25x a few years in. Elite families aren’t opening up their tax situations to help these studies.

Becoming good friends with someone similar to her in undergrad could also improve future outcome by opening jobs. A higher percentage of wealthy friends can lead to more opportunities. A physician friend of mine attended a family orientation at Harvard, and the father next to him was a billionaire.

Does the average Ivy League student end up on average more successful early on than the equivalent at state U? Absolutely. I’d argue that the name of the school or the education obtained actually provided no significant difference by itself. The family and creating bonds amongst powerful families is the primary factor - my hypothesis based on what I’ve seen.

I think almost everyone agrees the networking effects are part of what increases earnings, but top university degrees are social proof in and of themselves to a significant portion of the population. I spend a lot of time in immigrant/2nd generation circles and I cannot tell how you immeasurably different those individuals feel about someone with a degree from an Ivy versus myself with a degree from a good state school. There is a belief (in some circles) that anyone who can get the ivy degree is just inherently better than anyone else in the population regardless of virtually any other data that can be provided. Even as someone who came from an anti-1% bent as a kid/young adult and proudly have graduated with my public university BS & MD, I still stop and look longer at CV's when they have Ivy+s on them. Because I know real people who have gone to those schools, and frankly they are freakishly remarkable. I am sure there are people who have gone there that aren't freakishly remarkable, but there are a lot that are.

If your kid is Ivy+ material, it's pretty hard to argue you wouldn't do anything legal and in your power to help them get in. Anyone who is saying otherwise I want to re-post here after your children complete the college application cycle.

 

[FlowRate]

I think almost everyone agrees the networking effects are part of what increases earnings, but top university degrees are social proof in and of themselves to a significant portion of the population. I spend a lot of time in immigrant/2nd generation circles and I cannot tell how you immeasurably different those individuals feel about someone with a degree from an Ivy versus myself with a degree from a good state school. There is a belief (in some circles) that anyone who can get the ivy degree is just inherently better than anyone else in the population regardless of virtually any other data that can be provided. Even as someone who came from an anti-1% bent as a kid/young adult and proudly have graduated with my public university BS & MD, I still stop and look longer at CV's when they have Ivy+s on them. Because I know real people who have gone to those schools, and frankly they are freakishly remarkable. I am sure there are people who have gone there that aren't freakishly remarkable, but there are a lot that are.

If your kid is Ivy+ material, it's pretty hard to argue you wouldn't do anything legal and in your power to help them get in. Anyone who is saying otherwise I want to re-post here after your children complete the college application cycle.

Agreed as far as I think the true top-20ish schools are potentially actually worth the cost (thinking of how physicians families usually have to pay close to the actual COA) for the various benefits they confer. Quality of education is the least of those differentiators. Otherwise go to the highest value undergrad possible (usually whatever in-state U.)

I also agree, having myself known hundreds of people who went to top undergrads (med school and residency cohorts), the credential is a genuine threshold/selection signifier. (Most are genuinely smart and talented humans.)

 

[Atreides]

I think almost everyone agrees the networking effects are part of what increases earnings, but top university degrees are social proof in and of themselves to a significant portion of the population. I spend a lot of time in immigrant/2nd generation circles and I cannot tell how you immeasurably different those individuals feel about someone with a degree from an Ivy versus myself with a degree from a good state school. There is a belief (in some circles) that anyone who can get the ivy degree is just inherently better than anyone else in the population regardless of virtually any other data that can be provided. Even as someone who came from an anti-1% bent as a kid/young adult and proudly have graduated with my public university BS & MD, I still stop and look longer at CV's when they have Ivy+s on them. Because I know real people who have gone to those schools, and frankly they are freakishly remarkable. I am sure there are people who have gone there that aren't freakishly remarkable, but there are a lot that are.

If your kid is Ivy+ material, it's pretty hard to argue you wouldn't do anything legal and in your power to help them get in. Anyone who is saying otherwise I want to re-post here after your children complete the college application cycle.

Not hard to argue at all. In fact, it's the reality that's far more widespread than you realize. There are different sub-cultures among 2nd generation immigrants. Ivy league degrees did not carry much weight in my parents' social circles growing up, nor in mine currently. I got into several Ivys and tier 2 schools (including all the ones I mentioned earlier). So did many of my friends. Almost all of us went to a state school instead. We came from well-off enough families that we didn't qualify for any need-based financial aid but not from rich families where dropping six figures a year on a college education was nothing.

In that peer group who went to a state school, we have several physicians, corporate lawyers, MBB consultants, CPA's, and people in tech. I don't think our paths would have been much different had we gone to Northwestern or Wash U or Carnegie Mellon instead. Ironically, one of the few of my friends who decided to go to a big name undergrad (Stanford for CS) ended up in a career path where neither his degree nor the prestigious undergrad name carry any weight (owns a BBQ joint, many of his employees don't even realize he's been to college).

I've interacted with plenty of people who've been to Ivy league and top tier undergrads, med schools, residencies, fellowships, etc, as well as reputable state schools. There's no group I'd say is "freakishly remarkable." Great, intelligent people across all of them, but none that I'd say wow me any more than equally great and intelligent people from other institutions. The Harvard and Stanford and Northwestern undergrads who went to med school with me weren't the top of the class.

I'm not blind to the benefits big name institutions have on CV's, and in certain career paths, those benefits can make an outsize impact. But those benefits rapidly diminish as you get down the totem pole.

 

[FlowRate]

MBB consultants

That's the most impressive to pull off from a random state U. But higher end TX, CA, etc. state schools are a different thing (not sure what state you're referring to.)

 

[Atreides]

That's the most impressive to pull off from a random state U. But higher end TX, CA, etc. state schools are a different thing (not sure what state you're referring to.)

ASU and Mizzou, so good schools but not talking about Berkeley or Ann Arbor or Chapel Hill level.