Ask HN: Am I at a disadvantage for not attending Stanford, MIT, etc?

Pick someone you admire.

Do you admire them for their degree?

Do you admire them for their first job out of college?

If the answers are "No" and "No", then you probably shouldn't be worried all that much.

There are fields, times, and places in which one's academic pedigree opens or closes doors which are hugely relevant to one's career success. You are in a very fortunate field, time, and place in this regard.

P.S. Of all the people I admire in tech, the only one whose undergraduate education I'm aware of has no degree at all, and I only know that because he's sensitive about it and brought it up. Similarly, I'll bet you that probably 99.8% of the people who know me professionally, including everybody who has ever written me a check, could not tell you where I went to school.

I went to MIT for EECS and left on voluntary withdrawal after three semesters. There were two highlights of my application to MIT: 1. I was the first person to make online, real-time games for the iPhone (pre App Store with AJAX). 2. I held a full time developer job for two summers in a row, and part time two days per week during the school year between.

Once I got to MIT, I learned that my grades and SAT scores were below most of my peers. I had no "hook", and those two points above are really the only unique things I could attribute my success to.

The kicker is, I did those two things without MIT, and you could do cool things without MIT too. Nothing I did was particularly hard, they just took a lot of work.

You say you "don't have the option to attend MIT", but you're wrong. You don't have the option to start MIT with kids the same age as you. I'm willing to bet that if you went out and built some cool things, MIT would be happy to offer you admission. But don't build things because you want to get into MIT, build things because you want to build them, I promise they can tell the difference.

But this brings up an even bigger question. If you're able to build things that are so cool that they could get you into MIT, would you really still want to go to MIT to get an education? Or would you rather continue building cool things?

To answer your question more directly: No, your not at a disadvantage. You're in a different place, but you can still go wherever you want.

It doesn't really make a difference either way; it's not like you can change where you went for school. With that being said, I'm assuming you're defining "advantage" to mean being hired. If that's the case, you always have two steps to overcome:

1. Getting known

2. Proving yourself

The only part this may hurt you, is #1 - but that's easily overcome by attending conferences, and generally networking. If you missed CUTC (http://www.cutc.ca) this year, make sure to keep up to date with it and go next year. We had quite a few companies from software to consulting attend, with the primary motivation of recruiting. Typically the best students across Canada come (although Atlantic Canada is under represented), and companies have found it to be a very effective recruiting ground - since they actually get to meet students for minimal cost.

If you're graduating, you probably can't attend, but if you're looking for a full-time job and you're a good programmer, send me an email and I'll connect you to where I'm currently working (it'll be up to you to impress them).

I went to MIT, I can say that the only "real" advantage that I got from going there that I couldn't have gotten an a different school is that my Resume says I went to MIT - and that tends to get people to take a closer look at it if/when they might otherwise not.

I've found that for really good/talented people where they go doesn't matter as much as what they do and how deeply they explore the subjects. For me, the huge advantage to having been at MIT, is that all that hacking/discussion with peers was almost impossible to avoid. You almost can't help but work on cool, mind opening projects, and interact with people much smarter than you are.

But really - that opportunity is available no matter where you go to school. You might just have to work a little harder to find them. For the most part the best developers/hackers I've worked with didn't go to one of the "top top" schools - they worked super hard where ever they were and worked and learned outside of their normal curriculum, and in some cases that might even be better for them.

Career wise, I don't thing that having a degree from MIT has gotten me anything that I couldn't have gotten by having someone at a company say "you got to talk to her, she's really good." Just get to be good, do some cool things and you'll get noticed. If you worry that you're not getting exposed to the topics that you would at a place like MIT, you can always take a look at the books (or use OpenCourseWare) that they use to teach yourself a lot of the same things.

No it will not, the thing about those schools is not the degree it is the people. The value of those schools are that a lot of bright people are in them, generally with a lot of free time. There is an opportunity while at school to really work on something revolutionary and potentially launch it. It has nothing to do with the degree and everything to do with the environment. That is what universities used to be about. So the only thing you missed out on was an opportunity to possibly be at the spark of an opportunity so what life goes on.

I have a degree from the University of Phoenix, I have been a CTO at 3 companies and an executive at Marriott. One of the companies we sold to Hotels.com and the other we sold to the largest travel conglomerate in the world. I got the degree because when one of the companies I was a CTO at was acquired, the executives in the new company where required to have a degree. Some companies actually put artificial ceilings on promotions where one must have a degree. They don't care who it is from it just has to be a degree, kind of stupid but some times you just have to play ball. Anyways a degree is the last thing on the list that gets you a job, if it is the first thing then you should probably reconsider your employer because they care more about looking good than building quality software.

I got to where I am fixing problems, generating millions of dollars and saving people money, do that and doors open themselves. The only thing a degree did for me was make me a good public speaker. UOP makes you give a speech at the end of ever class. Toastmasters would have saved me a lot of money.

Short answer: The disadvantage is temporary.

I went to Carleton College in Minnesota. It does well in liberal arts college rankings, but it's not well-known. In fact, my Y Combinator interview began with pg asking me, "You're Canadian?" (He was thinking of Carleton University.)

Going to a school with name rec is certainly a plus. And if you're in the startup world, that goes double for MIT and Stanford—not only do they have outstanding CS and engineering programs, but they also have an extraordinarily entrepreneurial culture. If you tell a venture capitalist that you went to MIT, for instance, that's a strong indicator that you "get it" as an entrepreneur. It's neither necessary nor sufficient to get them to write a check, but it pretty much answers two of the questions every potential investor has: "Is this guy smart?" and "Does this guy understand how startups work?" If you went to a no-name school, you've got to find another way to answer those questions.

Just remember: Once you've actually done something, that defines you far more than what school you went to. I didn't lose my shot at Y Combinator because pg hadn't heard of my school; I lost it because my team hadn't built anything before. If we'd been Stanford grad students rather than University of Michigan grad students, maybe that would've helped. But you know what would've helped more? Having ever deployed an app worth using, or developed a popular open-source project, or written a book on a programming language (say, CoffeeScript).

In short: "Make something people want." Aspire to do something noteworthy enough that you can introduce yourself as "Hi, I'm the creator of so-and-so." At that point, no one will care which school you went to.

I'm not sure about Stanford, but much of the information that MIT would impart is available on-line for free. Cherry-pick the course offerings and fold them into what ever program you are currently attending. Ultimately none of the 'paper' will keep your job even though in those shallow circumstances it may get you a job. What you know and what you learn combined with what you make will be the key in your continuation as a developer. Think of it this way, it is almost a cliche that there are two ways into a job---one through the front door through HR and one through the backdoor through the people who you will actual work with. The second group seldom gives a damn about 'paper'---you take it from there :) @TrevorBurnham---I remember Carleton fondly although it was damn cold in the winter. Likewise certain people took a really dim view to physical contact in the common area when I came for a visit :)

The answer is yes, until you are accomplished as either a founder or a maker.

If you are going to work for yourself, you will be hampered by having no history and not having developed a well connected support network. You will not be given the benefit of the doubt, and it will be hard to get doors to open for you. That will change if you provide a product that investors can understand.

If you are planning on working for a larger company based outside of your region, you will have a hard time getting passed HR prescreens and manager resume shuffles.

If you are graduating, your best bet is either to head to Toronto or Silicon Valley and start your own company, or go to graduate school in hopes of taking an internship at Google, Microsoft, or IBM. After you have a single large company on your resume, you'll be fine.

Speaking as a UC Berkeley grad w/ many coworkers who weren't from UCB/Stanford (which is common in SV companies), having the school on your resume makes it easier to get noticed from recruiters, but it's just one of many factors considered to "get in the door".

I've seen more companies look for other publicly visible areas of code output: - Github/Stack Overflow/Quora - Blogs/social sites like HN, reddit at times - Open source projects

Internships or experience at well-regarded companies also helps a lot, and once you get through one of these avenues it's easier to keep the ball rolling and get introductions to the hot companies in our industry.

Of course, you still have to pass the interview, regardless of which university you studied in. =)

In my experience in the tech industry, experience counts much more than a degree. When I'm hiring, I ignore the education section. The industry is full of self-taught programmers who were programming since middle school. Most computer science freshmen came in already knowing how to code well and getting a degree is just a formality--a check box. In that case, why should their education even factor in the job market?

And if you don't have work experience to speak of, make something! A website, an iPhone app, code hosted on GitHub, etc, speaks volumes. In all honesty, I'm more likely to hire based on that than your resume.

People aren't going to wonder whether or not the CS program at your university is a joke if they haven't heard of the place. They just won't think about it.

They'll move on to wondering what you have done during your school years and beyond.

What do you have to show for your education? Just the piece of paper? Did you make anything while in school? Help any professors? Write any articles? Start any clubs? Contribute to open source projects?

Tangible evidence of being good is always better than intangible evidence. A degree is neat, but real-things-done is far better.

I graduated from Brown University in 1997, and I majored in Math, not Computer Science.

Every so often a "Is an Ivy worth it / what's my degree situation going to matter?" conversation comes up online, here's my take on your question.

In short, in my experience, it matters, in the following ways:

a) Social Networks. The social networks you build at an Ivy / MIT / Stanford / U of C will be more nationally useful. In any given city outside their zone, they will not matter as much as the local "good" University, though. For example, right now, I live in Seattle -- going to the University of Washington would have opened many more doors than my Brown degree does here. Harvard, Yale, Princeton, and to some extent Stanford transcend this dynamic, and are usually more valuable than even a pretty good local school; this is because the alums in town will tend to be significantly more influential.

b) Peers. IF (and this is a big IF for many who wonder about going to a given 'great' university that's not accepted them), you would have been an intellectual peer with people at your dream institution, you will have a correspondingly tougher time finding peers at the not-top-tier University. I have heard, many times, statements from second and third tier University attendees that their experience contradicts this; people are challenged, smart, etc. etc. at their local University. Out of curiosity for a while, I would interview transfers from other schools to Brown / MIT / Harvard, and 100% of the time they indicated that the other school was significantly less challenging, and offered far fewer peers.

Now, a counterpoint -- for a while, I was a member of the Young Entrepreneur's Network. Simplified member qualification: You had to own a majority of a business with more than $1mm in revenue to join. I met roughly one hundred fellow CEOs in this group for the couple of years I was in it; only one had an Ivy league education. I met no 'name' MBAs in this group.

The next step up, Young President's Organization has, I'm told, a few more MBAs, but I didn't qualify, so I can't confirm this.

To kick ass at business, you DON'T NEED TO GO TO A GREAT SCHOOL, in fact, in general, awesome success at real-world business ownership is contraindicated by an Ivy / top-tier education.

Of course, here on HN, we know that success fundraising an angel round in Silicon Valley is highly correlated with having a great technical degree, but it's even more highly correlated with executing in an awesome way.

If you want to do a great job starting businesses, learn to execute, and go crazy, don't worry about the rest.

On the other hand, if you want the network, intellectual challenge, and peer group and are sure you'll be unhappy anywhere else, there's a simple solution:

a) Get all A's at your current university

b) Start applying to your chosen university; reach out to professors doing interesting research, and work the admissions group. "I'm having trouble finding researchers at my University who can give me enough interesting work in X area, Professor so-and-so and I have corresponded, and I'd like to transfer." This speaks so much more than high school grades/SATs... Believe me. A recommendation from a professor that you're 'topping out' with would also work nicely. They'll want to help, in the best case.

The slightly less rock-star version is: crush your undergraduate, crush your test scores, do good senior year research, find some good grad programs, crush your GREs, and go to the grad school you want to go to. That's where you're going to spend a long time if you're serious about academia anyway.

On the other hand, if you can't get those kind of results at University of Newfoundland right now, I think you should relax -- you would not do well at MIT. I promise you. Put it out of your head, and go kick ass at business; it's significantly easier than excelling in academia at MIT.

I was wondering how the good universities from across the Europe (particulary from UK) are being perceived in US. Places like Edinburgh University for example, even though they are very good, are way lower in ranks than the american schools.

The same funny thing happens with the technology intitutes from eastern europe. Some technical degrees are horribly demanding and produce some great engineers, but still are very low in the world-wide ranks.

Yes, there is a "club", and no, you are not part of it.

This will hurt you for a few years. But, it's really only about what you are about to achieve: become a great developer, build amazing things, and nothing else will matter. Can you be the best? Ignore the degree and try.

Degrees, in the end, are just like floaties: they guarantee you won't drown, but they don't win Olympics.

FYI - the most incompetent engineer I've ever worked with went to MIT. Plus, college is about a lot more than learning technical skills. One of the very true things about life is that they guys who make A's in college make good professors. But, the guys who make B's make a lot of money ... for the guys who make C's.

You are only at a disadvantage if you don't make the most of your time.

I am still in school and while all the interviews I have had for internships tested my school knowledge the big question they always asked was... "What have you done?".

They want to make sure you are capable of getting things done and that is really what matters.

i'm was born on a humble family, away for a major city and don't even have a degree in CS. Started on development on a time where i [hardly] had access to the internet on a 56k modem and only got my own pc at like 20y old (i'm 30) and [decent/broadband] internet access at like 25.

If your goal is a major job and your attended school isn't cutting it, there are better ways that an MIT degree and awesome/very rewarding jobs on that path. Open source development for example. Companies like Google and others, pick up talents that contribute to open source projects. That also allows you to build real world experience and exponentially improve your skills, because a major pitfall is believing that a degree in CS is an end, instead of just another step on the way.

It may be easier for an MIT or Stanford graduate to get into the field just through the university's reputation and contacts that they have, but after 2-3 years in the industry, I really think your work will show your credentials better than your alma mater.

If it appears that you need/want a better education/etc, come to UW.

We've got a killer CS/Math program (one of the best in Canada?), and there are pink ties autographed by Bill Gates in the Math department.

Doesn't really make a difference past your first job. GPA is the same unless you're trying for a government job. The most common thing I'm asked these days is what's on my github account.

Yes you are. But you can beat it. I didn't go to a good school. In fact I went to an awful school. But I am an engineer at good start up in the Valley and doing very well.

Are you in the Bay?

Yes, relatively speaking you are at a disadvantage. Absolutely, you are highly advantaged because you live in a prosperous country and attend an accredited university.

Yes. But it's a disadvantage you can overcome.

Yes. But so are 99.9% of the rest of us. Get on with it.

By the way, it's not the education that's better.

College dropout here and I'm doing just fine. School matters naught if you're smart.