Would you attend Marquette again?

[reinko]

I was at MU from 1966-70 99-2003. The campus was in a sorry state - dilappidated buildings with broken windows cluttered the landscape, evolving state, but still fairly average. The winters lasted from late October to mid April. I was broke or almost broke pretty much all the time. Yet I can't even entertain the idea of going back and changing my choice. The friends I made and the experiences we shared are far too valuable to me to nullify them for a road not taken.

For Reinko

[Chicago_inferiority_complexes]

Room & Board fees at colleges are getting ridiculous. For 10K, you can rent a studio in decent neighborhoods....in Chicago. You'd have no problem in Milw. and could prob even get a nice 1 bedroom for that.

And that's for EIGHT months out of the year (3 months of summer off and 1 month of winter off). Add in another 50% to get to 12 months and you're looking at the true cost... about 15k on an annualized basis, to live in a dorm room the size of a closet and eat Sodexo's food.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I guess you aren't familiar with hou much nurses get paid these days.

About $65K I think, depends of course on the state, zip, etc.  My point was whether it's worth spending $42K per year (costs per MU) X 4 years = $168K..probably more like $175K with annual price increases vs going to another school that you can also earn that nursing degree and be all in with college costs around $45K total for 4 years.

As I stated earlier, it's up to the individual, but questions I would: does the MU nurse graduate make more, have a higher job placement, etc than someone at a state school with a nursing program?  If they are, then that should be factored into the equation.  If they are not, then the other intangibles that MU offers would have to be very important to me to justify the expense. 

[Benny B]

For 2011-12...
Tuition: $31,400
Room & Board: $10,370

Holy WTF, Batman!  No wonder these kids aren't attending basketball games.

[HouWarrior]

Thinking about again, if I were to do it over, I would attend Hawaii Pacific University, then after a year transfer to North Idaho College for a year, then transfer to the University of Idaho for a year, then transfer to Matanuska-Susitna College in Alaska for another year, then finally transfer back to the University of Idaho and graduate.

That was great. lol lol.
Only 2 caught on to this one though.
Hint: At these schools, even on the six year plan, one learns a rather odd rendition of the legend of Paul Revere's ride

[Ari Gold]

No question on my mind I would have gone to Marquette again. I would have done a few things differently though.
-I debate whether I would go for a different major, because my soph roommate and I had the same major and we bonded, except I use virtually nothing from said major. Maybe a few different classes my freshman year or just taken different classes at different times would have been a better use of my time.
- I would have studied at the LAC at some point.
- I probably would have interned in my field year or two earlier. Might have put me a rung up from where I am now
- I would have roomed with Marquette09, perhaps Warrior07 at some point.
-I would have sent my housing application in a week earlier or a week later, that way I might not have been stuck with my freshman year roommate.
-maybe been more active in a few other clubs, while not joining clubs I wasn't a part of by my soph year.

All things considered those are really minor changes in hindsight. I really liked MU

[jmayer1]

About $65K I think, depends of course on the state, zip, etc.  My point was whether it's worth spending $42K per year (costs per MU) X 4 years = $168K..probably more like $175K with annual price increases vs going to another school that you can also earn that nursing degree and be all in with college costs around $45K total for 4 years.

As I stated earlier, it's up to the individual, but questions I would: does the MU nurse graduate make more, have a higher job placement, etc than someone at a state school with a nursing program?  If they are, then that should be factored into the equation.  If they are not, then the other intangibles that MU offers would have to be very important to me to justify the expense. 

Under this theory then, nobody should really attend MU since you can get a comparable education in nearly every major for less cost somewhere else.

[ChicosBailBonds]

That was great. lol lol.
Only 2 caught on to this one though.
Hint: At these schools, even on the six year plan, one learns a rather odd rendition of the legend of Paul Revere's ride

A rendition backed by a number of historians and not backed by others.  Sort of like the discussion we had a few weeks back about history...it's not concrete and people have all kinds of interpretations.  It was fun reading a MIT, Harvard and BU professor back her interpretation (all of them right there in Boston) while other historians from equally prestigious institutions not back it...who's right?  Neither in my opinion because history can be made into what people want to make it into..."facts" with all kinds of grey edges to them.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Under this theory then, nobody should really attend MU since you can get a comparable education in nearly every major for less cost somewhere else.

Actually my "theory" stated one should evaluate the debt that you will be left with (i.e. Brewcity) and make a decision as an individual if it's right for you.  My "theory" also stated that if the intangibles, which have a value, make it worth that tradeoff then go for it.  I was there at MU for five years with multiple majors and minors (in fact one of my minors required more credits than either one of my majors...so it was like triple majoring).  None of my majors were a ticket to a good salary necessarily but I chose to go to MU over two more highly regarded schools here in California because of the intangibles.  I do, however, think my "theory" makes good financial sense in the balance of things.  If the intangibles don't make enough of a difference I would think a lower cost alternative (assumption is the schools are equal) makes more sense for a career type major (nursing, education, dental hygiene) than a private school.  For non-career type majors, I'd approach it a bit differently.

To each his own, but I want my kids to understand the decisions they make have financial consequences after they graduate and should be factored into any decision.

[HouWarrior]

I am struck by the number gauging college choice and benefits of a university education by costs, and/or job placement and earnings. Except for those attending the ITT Technical Institute, such, to me, is far peripheral to reasons/benefits of a university degree....college gave me the tools and basis for a rich, inquiring, and interested life, and the foundation for a lifetime of learning.
 
I'll concede a college choice may relavent to your first job placement, but thereafter, its relavance drops dramatically. The initial education tools you bring to work, are thereafter, measured by your skills and dedication to a talented application of them.

I realize this stirs the pot here...but is your thought of going to MU based on costs/jobs, or other, broader factors? I am respectful of both groups...but my view, personally, has little to do with the former.

Your thoughts(without killing the messeger-lol) ?

[Lennys Tap]

For Reinko

Glad that a similar MU experience was still available a generation later.

[GGGG]

I realize this stirs the pot here...but is your thought of going to MU based on costs/jobs, or other, broader factors? I am respectful of both groups...but my view, personally, has little to do with the former.

If the only reason you choose to go to one school over another is because of economic advantages, I have a hard time believing that MU gives you any benefit over a decent state university.  In Wisconsin, there are all sorts of programs at UW schools that would give you the same quality of education in a specific topic.  However I think a college education means more than that.

[Benny B]

I am struck by the number gauging college choice and benefits of a university education by costs, and/or job placement and earnings. Except for those attending the ITT Technical Institute, such, to me, is far peripheral to reasons/benefits of a university degree....college gave me the tools and basis for a rich, inquiring, and interested life, and the foundation for a lifetime of learning.
 
I'll concede a college choice may relavent to your first job placement, but thereafter, its relavance drops dramatically. The initial education tools you bring to work, are thereafter, measured by your skills and dedication to a talented application of them.

This maybe true for a slim minority of people who are either a) damn lucky or b) extraordinary performers... but generally speaking, college choice is relevant until you have a proven track record.  This could take 10-15 years - or longer - depending on your field of work.

There are certain professions where a poor college choice could haunt you forever.  For example -- how many Tier-4 graduates would want to work for Fulbright & Jaworski and how many actually do?

[marquette09]

- I would have roomed with Marquette09, perhaps Warrior07 at some point.

That's cute

[Bocephys]

That's cute

And a little stalkerish

[ChicosBailBonds]

I am struck by the number gauging college choice and benefits of a university education by costs, and/or job placement and earnings. Except for those attending the ITT Technical Institute, such, to me, is far peripheral to reasons/benefits of a university degree....college gave me the tools and basis for a rich, inquiring, and interested life, and the foundation for a lifetime of learning.
 
I'll concede a college choice may relavent to your first job placement, but thereafter, its relavance drops dramatically. The initial education tools you bring to work, are thereafter, measured by your skills and dedication to a talented application of them.

I realize this stirs the pot here...but is your thought of going to MU based on costs/jobs, or other, broader factors? I am respectful of both groups...but my view, personally, has little to do with the former.

Your thoughts(without killing the messeger-lol) ?

In my opinion it depends if the reason for attending college is to get access to a career or to earn an education.  Those are two different things in my view but important questions.

If your goal at 18 years old is to become a teacher and your heart is set on that path, then that appears to me to be a career path track that is chosen and finances should be considered in choosing a college and the debt that comes with it.  I'd apply the same standard to other majors that are typically career patch funnels right from college.

If, however, one attends college from a broader POV and isn't linked necessarily to a specific path, then the answer to me is a bit different.  I enjoyed the Jesuit foundation in teaching that so many of us received. 

I agree that your choice of college becomes less important as you add to your resume, but even 20+ years in certain businesses I still see hiring out there based on "he's a Harvard guy"..."he's a Stanford guy"...or whatever.  I'm amazed it comes up as much as it does.  I don't give a crap if he went to Kissimmee College because he couldn't afford a better school or had to stay close by to take care of his dying mother, or whatever...he can either do the job or he can't.  So in many ways I agree with you, but unfortunately don't see it always happening that way in reality as much as I would like to.

[reinko]

In my opinion it depends if the reason for attending college is to get access to a career or to earn an education.  Those are two different things in my view but important questions.

If your goal at 18 years old is to become a teacher and your heart is set on that path, then that appears to me to be a career path track that is chosen and finances should be considered in choosing a college and the debt that comes with it.  I'd apply the same standard to other majors that are typically career patch funnels right from college.

If, however, one attends college from a broader POV and isn't linked necessarily to a specific path, then the answer to me is a bit different.  I enjoyed the Jesuit foundation in teaching that so many of us received. 

I agree that your choice of college becomes less important as you add to your resume, but even 20+ years in certain businesses I still see hiring out there based on "he's a Harvard guy"..."he's a Stanford guy"...or whatever.  I'm amazed it comes up as much as it does.  I don't give a crap if he went to Kissimmee College because he couldn't afford a better school or had to stay close by to take care of his dying mother, or whatever...he can either do the job or he can't.  So in many ways I agree with you, but unfortunately don't see it always happening that way in reality as much as I would like to.

+1, especially the bold

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

If the only reason you choose to go to one school over another is because of economic advantages, I have a hard time believing that MU gives you any benefit over a decent state university.  In Wisconsin, there are all sorts of programs at UW schools that would give you the same quality of education in a specific topic.  However I think a college education means more than that.

That's kind of where I'm at with it.

I don't think MU has a great cost/value equation when you look at $$.

But, I think there is some huge long term value in the friends and relationships I built. Certainly those relationships could have been formed at other schools, but I like the quality/integrity of the people I've met at MU.

You are who are who you hang around with.

With that said, if I had it to do over again, I'd go to UofA. :-)

[HouWarrior]

There are certain professions where a poor college choice could haunt you forever.  For example -- how many Tier-4 graduates would want to work for Fulbright & Jaworski and how many actually do?

Odd example--, respectfully, here, I disagree..College undergrad choice means little at law school. (Certainly, a quality law school matters.) I went to MU undergrad, and coincident to your example, in law school, I was recruited by F&J, and my first law job was with an F&J breakoff firm, (including the no. 1 and 4 ranked grads from UT law). With all of them...My MU undergrad was never a hindrance  ... except that the ND club of Houston president was my boss-yuck.....and during FB season, I remained mute during talk of UT, ND, Stanford, Vanderbilt, and Rice FB. lol

[Benny B]

Odd example--, respectfully, here, I disagree..College undergrad choice means little at law school. (Certainly, a quality law school matters.) I went to MU undergrad, and coincident to your example, in law school, I was recruited by F&J, and my first law job was with an F&J breakoff firm, (including the no. 1 and 4 ranked grads from UT law). With all of them...My MU undergrad was never a hindrance  ... except that the ND club of Houston president was my boss-yuck.....and during FB season, I remained mute during talk of UT, ND, Stanford, Vanderbilt, and Rice FB. lol

Allow me simplify the question... how many Tier-4 law school grads work for F&J percentage-wise?  1%?  0.1%?  0.01%? 0.0%?

My point is that your choice of undergrad definitely affects your opportunities after college be that career or graduate/professional school; by extension, making a poor choice can (and does) prevent many people from even getting a foot in the door in their field regardless of how competent or stellar they may be.

Further, most employers will look at your highest degree.  An undergraduate degree from Harvard may be great, but if your JD was granted by Concordia Online School of Law or your MD was granted by Universidad de Guatamala-Aguablanco, you just wasted a lot of money on schooling.

[Jacks DC]

Odd example--, respectfully, here, I disagree..College undergrad choice means little at law school. (Certainly, a quality law school matters.) I went to MU undergrad, and coincident to your example, in law school, I was recruited by F&J, and my first law job was with an F&J breakoff firm, (including the no. 1 and 4 ranked grads from UT law). With all of them...My MU undergrad was never a hindrance  ... except that the ND club of Houston president was my boss-yuck.....and during FB season, I remained mute during talk of UT, ND, Stanford, Vanderbilt, and Rice FB. lol

I had a similar experience - went to MU undergrad (had okay grades), went to law school in Texas and really focused.  Got an offer from a wall street firm and worked 5 years in New York.  MU undergrad was definitely not a hindrance and if anything I can't tell you how many people all over the country have asked me if I knew Dwyane Wade.  People don't sit around reading academic rankings, but they do sit around watching college basketball. 

[HouWarrior]

Allow me simplify the question... how many Tier-4 law school grads work for F&J percentage-wise?  1%?  0.1%?  0.01%? 0.0%?

.

You've changed up your assumption/question  to hold on to your point..and as you changed it up..part of it now works. You first referred to college choice...as material to F&J. As both I and poster Jacks DC note, our Marquette undergrad and our going to law school in Texas did not inhibit our carreer paths. Likewise MU is just fine for consideration/admission by law schools (I've never had any admission rejection, from any college, or law school), and an MU undergrad notation doesnt hurt your law school resume, including with F&J.

Your change up no longer refers  to college choice ...but to now supposing one attends  a Tier 4 law school...(Note-- I already conceded earlier the level of law school is important)...but except for probably TSU, and maybe St. Mary's,  there arent any tier 4 law schools in Texas. I dont know anyone that attended either, and I doubt any MU'er ever went there.

Obviously, if you want to revise away from MU comparisons,  and kick it down to a presidential candidate level, like the Palin collegiate resume, or the Bachman resume of attending Winona State, or to your Concordia Online Law...you'll have any logical person concede this level impacts matters...but the question is why? Why would two Marquette grads be taking school levels down to lower levels neither of us attended to try to prove a point that a truly low ranked school can hurt. It doesnt apply to us or to the points made, about MU.

My sole point is and remains an MU undergrad doesnt hurt when one has law 'school success, as I and Jacks DC were lucky enough to enjoy. An MU degree is a quality degree...we neednt walk in the muck of an online school...as we'd all concede the University of Phoenix isnt quite MU.lol

[WarriorDoc]

Forgot to put my two cents in since I created this topic.  It's been pretty interesting reading all the posts. 

I actually just graduated from the CoBA.  If I had the same grades in high school I'd definitely do MU again.  But I'd agree with many that if I had better grades I'd go to a school with a tighter alumni base and more renown (Georgetown and Boston College comes to mind...).   

Still though, I'm extremely glad to have gone to a school that has some spirit (visiting my friends at UW-Eau Claire or even...UWM was horrible.  It's like the students hated the school) and a decent sport for everyone to rally behind. 

[Benny B]

You've changed up your assumption/question  to hold on to your point..and as you changed it up..part of it now works. You first referred to college choice...as material to F&J. As both I and poster Jacks DC note, our Marquette undergrad and our going to law school in Texas did not inhibit our carreer paths. Likewise MU is just fine for consideration/admission by law schools (I've never had any admission rejection, from any college, or law school), and an MU undergrad notation doesnt hurt your law school resume, including with F&J.

Your change up no longer refers  to college choice ...but to now supposing one attends  a Tier 4 law school...(Note-- I already conceded earlier the level of law school is important)...but except for probably TSU, and maybe St. Mary's,  there arent any tier 4 law schools in Texas. I dont know anyone that attended either, and I doubt any MU'er ever went there.

Obviously, if you want to revise away from MU comparisons,  and kick it down to a presidential candidate level, like the Palin collegiate resume, or the Bachman resume of attending Winona State, or to your Concordia Online Law...you'll have any logical person concede this level impacts matters...but the question is why? Why would two Marquette grads be taking school levels down to lower levels neither of us attended to try to prove a point that a truly low ranked school can hurt. It doesnt apply to us or to the points made, about MU.

My sole point is and remains an MU undergrad doesnt hurt when one has law 'school success, as I and Jacks DC were lucky enough to enjoy. An MU degree is a quality degree...we neednt walk in the muck of an online school...as we'd all concede the University of Phoenix isnt quite MU.lol

Ugh... I should know better than to try to argue with an attorney; I'm married to one.  Give an example of your point, and they'll return fire by attacking your example whilst completely ignoring the original point.

Let me just sum my position by saying that I completely disagree with your earlier assessment that the relevance of your college choice drops off dramatically after your first job placement.  This might have been generally true in years past, but considering that the majority of last month's graduates will be looking for their second job within 3 years, I would say that college choice will still be very much relevant (i.e. not "dramatically" less relevant) well past their first job placement.

If you want to get into an argument over the connotation of "dramatically," I'm game... it's the Friday before July 4th weekend and I'm stuck in the office with nothing to do.

[HouWarrior]

Let me just sum my position by saying that I completely disagree with your earlier assessment that the relevance of your college choice drops off dramatically after your first job placement.  This might have been generally true in years past, but considering that the majority of last month's graduates will be looking for their second job within 3 years, I would say that college choice will still be very much relevant (i.e. not "dramatically" less relevant) well past their first job placement.

If you want to get into an argument over the connotation of "dramatically," I'm game... it's the Friday before July 4th weekend and I'm stuck in the office with nothing to do.

No arguments, here, sir.
The Independence Day holiday...is a good time for full respect to your independent thoughts and views on the continuing importance of college choice in job placement, in general(after all,our only diagreement was spurred by your F&J example--which I beat to death, and is now deceased--lol).
Others have chimed with you in support that college choice (MU vs Harvard--example) continues importance , well after the first job placement. If any MUer has lost out on a second or third job because MU was his college...well...as Chicos noted thats just reality, and I also agree with him..thats just plain sad such employers are such shallow fools. I've worked with Ivy Leaguers who hadnt learned yet how to fully perform in the workplace, even after their second or third job placement. That Ive been lucky enough to work and succeed in meritocracies...doesnt mean my experience translates to that of others.
I cant wrap my head around why any work experienced MU grad wouldnt compete fully, on resume, with anyone else, from any school, anywhere..but if its so..it must be so.