Academics, grad school...

[Chrispy]

TooColdUlrick, great post - MS degrees, especially two, may out-price someone without work experience - i even wonder if it is good to show you have two degrees on an application.

24 is young and you've got lots of time to get work experience. As for getting digits though girls don't care - they care mostly about what you've done with those degrees (i.e. where you're working).

There was this awesome article in Harvard Business review about MBA's and how it's the new "blue-collar" degree...very scary.

 

[comote]

That is a great post TooColdUlrick, I am not nearly where you are, I am just getting my phd This thursday. But I have already seen alot of what you are saying. I had alot of trouble finding a job, especially since I did have no experience. When I finally did, yeah it was at less than comparable graduates were getting 3-4 years ago but I was just happy to have found something at this point.
If I had a chance to do it over I would have worked for a while after my masters and gotten some real experience, then if I saw I needed the phd to get ahead I would have done that. I hope some of the other people here take your advice to heart.
As far as girls go, and the affects of being in grad school. I agree, anyone who knows any number of academic types understands that for everyone that goes on to be succesful and make huge money there are at least two more that go on to dead-end careers that are little improvements to working at McDonalds for a living. Even worse some end up never finishing grad school.
You are not a winner based on your past or your future accomplishments, you are a winner based on your present accomplishments.

 

[Yotsuya-san]

Whatever you do, don't flaunt your education. You get better results if you come off as smart by the way you talk (and I don't mean using Roget's thesarus) and the way you act. Basically, if the subject comes up, I might tell them what I do and what my educational background is but in a lot of cases such as at a dance club, why bother since few go to dance clubs to actually talk? In my case, I rarely bring up my education. It usually comes up due to people's curiosity about my occupation. But that's about it.

 

[CEF]

Im actually dating two girls right now who both have Masters degrees. I didnt find out about thier educations for at least a few hours of conversation. Its so true that they are easier to deal with. Way less drama. They are also much easier to talk to, you dont have to fluff them at all. I wish all girls were like that!

LP: I sympathize about the CS degree. I guess things havent improved since I got my CS degree. You can still count the amount of girls in your classes on one hand.... with two fingers cut off. I WISH I could have my university time back so I could have developed some more social skills as opposed to problem solving skills. I highly suggest you spend some time in those areas and join a co-ed something or other but I figure being here you probably have that angle covered.

 

[WestCoaster]

Don't flaunt it, but be proud

Honestly, since I changed careers I've done much better saying I work in higher ed than when I didn't. I'm proud of getting my master's degree and while it's not the first thing I bring up, I'm not apologizing for it. I'm not gonna hold back something important in my life for some sl-t at a club who is just an airhead who is going to get fat anyway. Why make concessions for dumb American broads? They're not worth it.

Frankly I want to date a woman who is impressed with a guy who sacrificed time and money to go to grad school to better himself, and is equally impressed with someone who is educated.

I do think it's best to enter the working world right after college instead of getting on the grad school track at 22, 23, 24 -- all of those people in my grad program were incredibly shallow -- however, once you get the master's, don't apologize for it, be proud of it.

We all have to learn to beat our chests a little more and quit making concessions for women who aren't worth it.

 

[stevera004]

I apologize for the tone of my earlier post.

 

[comote]

Originally posted by stevera004
I apologize for the tone of my earlier post.

Actually you have a very valid point. If you go around parading your accomplishments as if the world owes you something because of it you will get smacked right back in the face.

One thing we should all learn is that you can never really stop improving yourself if you want to stay succesfull and rise in your life.

I don't know how girls are but when someone starts going on and on about how great and succesful they are I am left unimpressed. I am more impressed by the person who doesn't brag much and then after the fact you find out they have accomplished some really amazing things.

At every point in your life no matter what I accomplish I hope that I keep asking myself, ok, what's next. Because that is the only way I will rise to the top.

 

[Le Parisien]

Originally posted by TooColdUlrick
companies will red-flag you for two reasons. not all, but a lot.

1) you're 'overqualified' with two MS's at your age. they're thinking you're seeking employment as a stop gap, and you will be looking for the better job on their dime. when the better job does come, you bail and they have to incur the expense of replacing you. so they don't hire you in the first place.

and/or

2) two MS's at 24 is a professional student. you don't have full-time work experience. you can't unless you're an insomniac. HR people will probably resent it, and assume you're the "know it all" type. this, unfortunately is true for people your age (generally). true in work, true in DJ land.

TooColdUlrick, thank you SO MUCH for your invaluable insight, how much do I owe you for this ?

For the first point, me too I'm aware of my "over-qualification". But I'm really NOT a "degree collector", everything just happened "naturally". I was doing my French "diplôme d'ingénieur" (no such thing as Bachelor of Science if you are in the "elite" part of the system, too long to explain the whole French education system here though) which is equivalent to an Anglo-Saxon MS in engineering. But for the last year I had the choice to come to the States for a "double degree". This means that with one extra year (2 in the US instead of only 1 more in France) I will get my proper MS from my local American university in addition to my French degree.
They shouldn't reject people just because they are ambitious and they are over-achievers right? Ok I will admit that my standards are pretty high (for jobs, not girls ), I won't settle for less, but they can't just make assumptions like that and turn good candidates away right?

For the second point, what you mean by the "know it all" type? Do you mean those arrogant people who think they know everything when they actually don't know sh*t? Just because I'm young, so I'm also supposed to be blindly presumptuous professionally speaking?
The HR will resent my application because I have little working experience? Why? Everybody starts with zero experience right? Why should I have a worse reputation than most of the guys who just graduated with a BS or BA?

TooColdUlrick please shed more light on this for me, I know your time is invaluable, but I would be very grateful.

 

[TooColdUlrick]

Re: Don't flaunt it, but be proud

being proud of something and telling people about it are two different things. bragging is something different altogether. but the three; pride, informing, bragging, is a very fine line.

of course, i'm proud of those things. but it's really no one elses business, outside of business. it is always best to hold off on revealing ace's in the hole, when it comes to chicks.

if you hold off,

1) she will be equally, if not MORE impressed with these stellar facts. she will be more impressed if she likes you, THEN finds out about all of these great things. i say hold off as long as possible. the truth will be revealed. "Like" may very well turn into amazement and fascination.

2) she will be majorly impressed at your modesty. chicks (people) are attracted to others who do not boast about something that they clearly have the "right" to boast about. most dudes would brag about it, or at least look for the right opening to reveal it, merely to impress. chicks HATE that. PEOPLE hate it.

people who brag are insecure. project this in any way to a chick early on (or at any time) and you are T O A S T.

i recall talking with this HB7-8 early 20's mexican chick at starbucks a while back. within five minutes she had informed me of the following (without me ever asking):

my thoughts as she was telling me this, in parenths.

Her: I graduated from college at 20. (BFD)
Her: I speak four languages. (LIAR)
Her: I'm going to law school. (BFD)
Her: I lived in europe for three months. (BFD)
TooCold: nice talking to ya, bye.

what an enormous turn off. i just went over to another table and picked up a magazine. she was like, WTF?

 

[TooColdUlrick]

Le Parisien, don't panic...i said,

"companies will red-flag you for two reasons. not all, but a lot."

But for the last year I had the choice to come to the States for a "double degree". This means that with one extra year (2 in the US instead of only 1 more in France) I will get my proper MS from my local American university in addition to my French degree.

this is good--the French Aristocratic system of higher education, notwithstanding i did the same thing basically, two degrees for the price of one.

They shouldn't reject people just because they are ambitious and they are over-achievers right?

...but they can't just make assumptions like that and turn good candidates away right?

oh yes they can, and they do it all the time. i do it myself when i hire someone. for example, anybody with a Harvard MBA is automatically excluded. you heard me right. they're arrogant little fvcks and they don't know squat upon graduation.

in addition, over-achievers are always on the prowl for a new and better job. over-achievers tend also to be trouble makers in the work place. they tend to cause distruption, tension, and conflict, that is. again, not all, but that's the tendency. believe it or not, many people (fellow workers) do not like over-achievers.

For the second point, what you mean by the "know it all" type? Do you mean those arrogant people who think they know everything when they actually don't know sh*t?

yes, those types as well as the know it all's who actually DO KNOW IT ALL. they are equally problematic in the workplace, in many cases. it's hard to be a really great "know it all".

The HR will resent my application because I have little working experience? Why? Everybody starts with zero experience right? Why should I have a worse reputation than most of the guys who just graduated with a BS or BA?

no, the HR people might resent you for being the over-acheiver and know it all type, as well as, a professional student, not because you don't have experience. it is a fact, the HR people are the weakest link in corporate america. they are LAME for the most part.

BTW, the HR people should be the LAST people that you talk to when seeking employment. literally, you should be talking to them, AFTER you have already secured a job.



no need to panic. you just have to be realistic. again, my point was that two MS's isn't better than one. the extra one sure won't help you with the ladies!

i am being careful to say "many" and "some" in this post. these are not absolutes. it depends on many things.

 

[Le Parisien]

I was joking and I never mentioned the ladies, I don't even mention what I study when I meet girls. Who would want to get to know some "loser" from nerdy Computer Science anyway?
Ok I'm talking about the college crowd. All they care (not always but usually) is your looks, your style, your game, NOT even your money as long as you have enough for the bars.

I'm not an overly "braggish" person in real life, but hey it's the Internet, gotta have some fun with it as long as I'm NOT making things up. By the way I speak almost perfectly 3 languages and I'm improving on a 4th one...

Again, I think different age groups have different expectations. Bragging (making false statements) is definitely BAD, but sometimes being a little assertive about your abilities can go a long way with the younger crowd.
I remember so well during my first year in the US, some of the older chicks (grad students) just thought I was some average stereotypical Asian dude, you know who has nothing special. Until once we all went to the local dance club, when they saw that I'm a damn good dancer and that I really know my stuff whether I'm break dancing, or grinding (with other chicks) and that I'm pretty smooth with other chicks, immediately I became the little pimp of the group. And my reputation has totally changed since that night.
After sometime, they realized that I wasn't "showing anything" infront of them because I'm not interested in them (don't like chicks older than myself) and curiously this made them like me even more.
My point is, sometimes it's NOT necessarily better to "hold off". In my case, I lost a whole year of major "social proof" since some of the older chicks are really HOT although I'm not interested in them.

Now back to the more professional topic. I agree that usually "overachievers" are "trouble", but this is simply because they think they can do better and get better, and they are usually right. We can make a parallel between HOT women/girls and the successful overachiever. They have more chance to be "high maintenance" and to being constantly looking for a better upgrade/better job. And they tend to be less accomodating, simply because THEY CAN.
But it doesn't mean that it's valid for every single person.

oh yes they can, and they do it all the time. i do it myself when i hire someone. for example, anybody with a Harvard MBA is automatically excluded.

This is kinda too extreme, don't you think so? It's like saying "if a woman/girl is really good looking, then I will never want to date her since she definitely will be a heartless b*tch."

Just my 2 cents.

 

[Yotsuya-san]

Now back to the more professional topic. I agree that usually "overachievers" are "trouble", but this is simply because they think they can do better and get better, and they are usually right. We can make a parallel between HOT women/girls and the successful overachiever. They have more chance to be "high maintenance" and to being constantly looking for a better upgrade/better job. And they tend to be less accomodating, simply because THEY CAN.
But it doesn't mean that it's valid for every single person.
This is kinda too extreme, don't you think so? It's like saying "if a woman/girl is really good looking, then I will never want to date her since she definitely will be a heartless b*tch."

Just my 2 cents. [/B]

The thing about overachievers is that many of them have very little life experience outside of studying or doing this and that because it makes them look more well rounded (i.e reading everything that's considered "sophisticated literature", or "speaking 6 languages."). Overachievers do this because they don't really know how to enjoy life's simple pleasures. Believe me, in social situations, you can spot them out. Slow, Stilted dialouge. Notice that in some other threads, talking slower is seen as better and more confident. Here is a case where they talk too slow, as if they don't know how to have a spontaneous convo.

Overachievers are used to being spoiled and catered to since childhood. Once they give someone an excuse to put them in the gifted or honors class, that means that they don't have to interact with a diverse set of people. And these gifted types tend to have quirks and eccentricities that rub normal people the wrong way. They may not realize they're doing it because they haven't had to spend so much time interacting with the average joe. Glad I was never labled gifted or special. It's just like forcing a child to wear a sign that says: "I am different."

 

[TooColdUlrick]

Originally posted by Le Parisien
But it doesn't mean that it's valid for every single person.
This is kinda too extreme, don't you think so? It's like saying "if a woman/girl is really good looking, then I will never want to date her since she definitely will be a heartless b*tch."

Just my 2 cents.

you mean excluding Harvard MBA's out of hand? i work with these types all the time--i know the market.

largely, they are primadonnas, who expect a pay package that far exceeds their skills. so i have 20 resumes, 18 of them are MBA's from "lower" ranked schools. two of them are from Harvard.

why should i consider the HBS MBA who demands $120k plus bonus, when i can easily get a non-HBS who will take $60k plus bonus?

moreover, the quality is, on average BETTER than the HBS people. at HBS, they don't "teach" you anything. it's all case study's. you don't even have textbooks. do you know how many HBS grads who can't even calculate Net Present Value properly? now i have to train them!

worse still, nobody flunks out of HBS (and Stanford and others), except for a handful of troublemakers. everyone who is accepted into the program gets the MBA, no matter how dumb they are. HBS boots about a dozen people per year. the only thing hard about it is the volume of reading.

i actually have had freshly minted HBS clowns come in and tell me how i should be running my business! me, with 15 years of experience, a Phd under the belt, and 8 years of teaching THEM!

re-read all of the above very carefully and draw an analogy with hot women. HBS grads are "hot women" who get a "free" MBA and demand "special treatment" and higher "pay" because they are "prettier". why waste time on them when i have 10x the pool of more "qualified" applicants, who are much less likely to blow up on me? (e.g. equally as "pretty" but without the hassles).

interesting, huh?

the only difference between the HBS's and the hot women, is that with the former, i've got MONEY on the line. i can't (won't) afford to take the risk. it's as simple as that. so, wipe them off the table.

as for the hot women, i don't wipe them off the table necessarily. i don't have anything on the line, so there's no reason to.

 

[Le Parisien]

TooColdUlrick:
Very good explanation, now I know the insider's story about Havard MBA graduates...

Yotsuya-san:
Looks like we don't share the same definition for the word "overachiever". To me an overachiever is NOT a nerd, an overachiever is someone who "overachieves" in pretty much "everything".
An overachiever in my book is someone who's (much) better than the average person academically, but also in sports, has better than average social skills (being popular), is good at something (singing/dancing/painting...) and has this leadership sens, etc etc... Oh I almost forgot: and who is also very successful with the ladies.
I don't know if it's me or it's the American culture, but why would a "good student" necessarily be a nerd, why would a "jock" necessarily be "dumb" and bad at academics?

Maybe I've been brainwashed by the French elitist education system, but my whole life I've been told that a truely "good student" is a student who's good at "everything". And they are referred to as "the elitle of the nation".

 

[Yotsuya-san]

Originally posted by Le Parisien


Yotsuya-san:
Looks like we don't share the same definition for the word "overachiever". To me an overachiever is NOT a nerd, an overachiever is someone who "overachieves" in pretty much "everything".
An overachiever in my book is someone who's (much) better than the average person academically, but also in sports, has better than average social skills (being popular), is good at something (singing/dancing/painting...) and has this leadership sens, etc etc... Oh I almost forgot: and who is also very successful with the ladies.
I don't know if it's me or it's the American culture, but why would a "good student" necessarily be a nerd, why would a "jock" necessarily be "dumb" and bad at academics?

Maybe I've been brainwashed by the French elitist education system, but my whole life I've been told that a truely "good student" is a student who's good at "everything". And they are referred to as "the elitle of the nation".

Le Parisen,

I don't think it's possible to be good at everything. I don't even think it's possible to know even a little about everything. There are many things that are going to be inaccessable to each of us, that we are not meant to understand because we're not part of the club. Be that club race, gender, nationality, age, religion, personality, physical appearance or whatever.

In order to be good at something, one has to accept being deficient or ignorant at many other things just by neccesity. Notice that the great charismatic leaders aren't the cerebral, analytical thinkers. They have others to do the heavy handed intellectual stuff while they neccesarily focus on what it takes to be a leader. Example: We all know Mr. Spock is stronger, smarter (and a better movie director) than Kirk but that doesn't mean he'd make a better captain. Just like there's no reason to think that Kirk shouldn't be captain because he'd probably suck at Spock's job.
In today's rat race, your average man on the street is far too worried about keeping up with the reality of family, bills and mortgage. So, really, you're not going to be any sort of idealistic "Rennaisance Man" unless you can afford to live without any responsibilities or obligations. This is often translated as not really having a life and this is the sort of existence that the gentry used to have as they didn't have to work for a living. I think whatever "life" you choose to lead (whether your'e a college professor or a cop on his beat) is the best teacher and I don't really intend to define overachievers as nerds. What I've seen more of is these coddled, pampered "special students" who have yet to be disillusioned by the notion that some people are going to be unimpressed by them, not out of jaded indifference, just because sometimes, the little, seemingly mundane, everyday things in our lives tell more about someone than what they can put on their resume. And sometimes that makes for the more stimulating conversation.

 

[true|hockey]

why should i consider the HBS MBA who demands $120k plus bonus, when i can easily get a non-HBS who will take $60k plus bonus?


This was exactly what I was thinking, salery negotiations. My friend without a degree got a job in the IT frield over guys with 15 years in the work force, simply because the company knew they could pay him less, and without his degree as leverage, it would be harder for him to ask for more money.

 

[gentleman193]

HBS

I worked for one and he was . . . dumb. BUT he knew everyone, the VC studs included. That is your value if you hire one. That, and their willingness to lie to anyone about anything. Just keep them away from the spreadsheets.

The other secret is: you can pay them half what they are asking right now. So long as they can *tell* ppl they get 120 they will take 60 and change. Heck, maybe you can let them sleep out back in the guesthouse and have 'em do some household cleanup for the rent.

But you are a Ph.D. Truth is, MBAs are dumb. You're not hiring high wattage brainpower here. It's grunt labor. Use 'em and lose 'em.

<crunch>

whoops, think I just squashed one! damm

 

[Livingitup22]

I find this discussion very interesting, since I'm formally underqualified for my current job. Technically, the position was supposed to require a BA and 3 years experience, while I had no prior experience and am a semester short of my bachelors.

Nor am I an academic star. My Grades are stellar, but two years of JC followed by a public university..well, Ivy Leauge I ain't. What's really amusing is that I managed to beat out 43 other applicants, some of whom appearantly thought their MAs entitled them to a job. My boss occassionally ribs me about my lack of qualifications. When he comes up with an idea that I think is a little off the wall, he likes to remind me that if he "thought conventionally, you wouldn't even be in on this discussion"

But anyhow, back on topic, most MAs, especially the dreaded MBA are becoming less and less valuable. And TooCold is correct about human resource professionals; they can be absolutely brutal to applicants who rub them the wrong way.

 

[Tao of Steve]

My interest with this post is more with the social (ie meeting women and general lifestyle) aspect of grad school.

to be in your late twenties - mid thirties and 'still be in school' and limited income, may be low status. As well, it is a socially isolating type of work etc.

but it gives great personal freedom (make your own scheduale), if you in social sciences, you can really develop intellectually and learn quite a bit about the human condition, and it is far more intersting than sitting in an office doing redundent work.

 

[Ricky]

I am finishing up my second masters, but all my degrees have been in engineering and science, both which tend to have low numbers of women involved.

However, my degree now puts me in a hospital setting, so more hotties are nearby.

In the end, grad school is a great experience. Wouldn't say I meet more hotties than before, but definitely not less than engineering undergrad either where there weren't alot of women.

The real goal should be to create social opportunities to meet alot of the young women be they undergrad or grad. As long as you refuse to discount yourself as being to old, you will be fine. Alot of the chicks will go out with you regardless of age.