Perception of Academic Schools in IB
Wanted to get input on the perception of purely academic schools / programs in investment banking. Schools that have a lot of very smart, but academically oriented students that don't place too much into banking. Something like a MIT engineering, Chicago economics, CMU computer science etc. What are your experiences with students from these schools?
Could also add Johns Hopkins and Cal Tech to this list
Is this a troll question? Obviously they’re considered very good. Chicago and MIT are in a different league than CMU though....
Edit - CMU comp science is solid but I have seldom come across anyone from that program interested in finance for obvious reasons
What's the perception of Chicago / MIT?
Dude - very solid
I feel like high schoolers and undergrads on these forums ask these stupid questions with obviously clear answers just to have their egos stroked. MIT engineering and Chicago economics are pioneers and leaders in their field. That's a fact and not "perception". Next question will be "I played QB for the Green Bay Packers. Is that considered elite?"
I don't know about CMU, but MIT and Chicago place fine if you're set on banking. In terms of numbers, Chicago probably places the most of the three and has a larger proportion of more typical "finance types".
If you're asking how these kids are "viewed" by people in the industry, I don't think your coworkers/bosses are out there thinking you're smarter just because you went to MIT/Chicago/CMU. Mostly because outside of a hiring context nobody really cares where you went to school. If it does come up, it's only going to be in relation to your producing great work ("I knew I could depend on the kid from Harvard" type of thing).
In short, I think the answer is that people think these are smart kids, and that's the end of it.
Why in the world are you on this forum if you’re at Chicago studying econ/ mit comp sci? You are literally the leader of your field and should be focused on furthering your development in that field - Banking is far less lucrative than your current path.
Only a portion of students at these schools are cut out for research work, and an even smaller portion are actually interested in it long-term. At the undergrad level, I also wouldn't imagine there's too big a difference between Stanford/Cal and MIT engineering and Harvard/Princeton and Chicago econ (also, note that even at the phd level Chicago's program hasn't been top-notch for quite a few years now--relative to the other top schools, that is). There are of course slight differences in pedagogy, but I highly doubt that scholarships/phd placement percentages are very different across the programs (it's probably even the case that Harvard/Stanford continues to lead the pack in terms of undergrad placement into scholarships/phd programs).
tldr; I think you shouldn't overestimate most college students' academic inclinations/ambitions, and shouldn't overestimate the difference in quality between top undergrad programs.
Cum nobis natus quia laboriosam ipsa. Deserunt at ullam et laborum ullam qui. Quasi libero pariatur quae ducimus mollitia iste. Porro officiis cumque impedit et quo.
Voluptas est maiores nulla quae. Temporibus voluptas iusto iusto architecto est eveniet. Rem eius sequi autem pariatur qui ea. Ratione magnam sint molestiae praesentium eveniet neque veritatis. Non vel rerum impedit qui ab voluptatem rem.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...