I have listed the top 30 below, and I was surprised, especially by Marietta. I may have to check that one out for my youngest.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Clarkson University
Colgate University
Washington and Lee University
California Institute of Technology
Carleton College
Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology
SUNY Maritime College
Stanford University
Rice University
Worcester Polytechnic Institute
Polytechnic Institute of New York University
St Mary’s University
Manhattan College
Marietta College
Virginia Military Institute
Harvey Mudd College
Georgia Institute of Technology-Main Campus
Tufts University
University of Rochester
Stevens Institute of Technology
Missouri University of Science and Technology
Michigan Technological University
Bradley University
Williams College
University of California-Berkeley
Harvard University
Carnegie Mellon University
Brown University
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
Drake University
In any case, it is not surprising that schools with lots of engineering and CS majors do well on this measure. These overall school financial ROI rankings really do not mean much when financial ROI is based more on major than school (beyond the school being a recruiting target for high end finance and consulting).
For example, 2014 biology majors at MIT found a mean pay level of 39,656, a median pay level of $37,000, and a range of $30,000 to $70,000, according to https://gecd.mit.edu/sites/default/files/2014GSSSurvey.pdf . This is considerably lower than for other majors. A prospective biology major would be mistaken if s/he thinks that MIT will magically make his/her post-graduation prospects a lot better than other schools.
I am not surprised by the well known stem schools, I am surprised by some of the liberal arts schools, and lesser known schools(at least by cc standards).
It may also be that many of the “surprising” colleges are small, so that small sample sizes in PayScale (and whatever else) lead to a large error in the data.
^^not to mention that Payscale, by definition, is not “data” since the plural of anecdotes is not data. And anyone that bases a college choice on ‘anecdata’, well good luck to you.
Some liberal arts schools like Colgate, Carleton, and Washington & Lee have extremely devoted alumni networks which promote the hiring and advancement of their graduates.
Oh look, another thread about how Harvard isn’t the best school in America for everything. Can we just drop it? Some schools are better than others at things. Like Harvard, which is better than every other school at getting Nobel winners and Presidents.
Well, the original article only listed the top 18, so Harvard wasn’t there. Not that stopping at 18 makes any sense, but at least in that context the headline makes sense. Obviously like many headlines, it is there more to attract people to read the article than for accuracy or plausibility. It was the OP that went on to list the next schools, which did include Harvard.
I listed more schools for those who didnt feel like parsing thru the article. I still think its an interesting article given the fact that it takes into account a few more parameters than some of the more popular rankings. It seems everyone takes US News as the gospel, and it has proven more than once that colleges finesse their numbers to climb on that list. Just thought it was interesting, and would generate discussion. Some folks take this way too seriously.
There’s just nothing new here, IMO. It tells me that if you want a high paying job, major in engineering. My son is one of the relatively few engineering majors at Harvard, and based on his internship opportunities so far, he’ll have no problem getting a great job when he graduates. I’m sure that will surprise no one.
Obviously, it is not which college you graduated from but also which major. It would be a lot easier for small schools with primary focus on engineering (e.g. Michigan Tech) to get on this list than a 6 times larger university with a very strong engineering school that is ~20% of whole campus. So this kind of ranking is totally useless. It should be sorted by school/major to make any sense.
No. If you want a high-paying job, choose parents inclined toward engineering so that you inherit the same propensity and don’t happen to have other abilities.
You can’t simply “major in engineering” if you are either not inclined toward that by ability or not interested in that by preference. You will not excel in any field in which you are not engaged and capable.
I really agree with this article. Ivys may look good and all, but it sure doesn’t secure you a job. Most Ivys are in fact liberal arts focused schools, and unless you intend to be a professor, its really not a viable career as of right now.
On the other hand, industries such as computer science and engineering are growing as technology advances, and so finding a job in these fields are becoming easier and more high paying, since the constant demand for people who are proficient in these.
They list the raw data, so you can look at original measures not found in any report I’ve seen. For example, you could compare among colleges with similar major distribution, grads of which colleges are most likely to list the skills that employers value on their resumes. Or if you predict earnings based on major, skills learned in college as listed on resume, test scores of incoming students, and various other factors in the report; the predictions are usually quite close to accurate. For example, while Caltech earnings were very high, they were within 2% of predicted value. Some posters would probably be surprised that the report does not suggest colleges with the top prestige reputation are getting a boost from the employers liking the college name. Instead Harvard earnings were actually 4% less than the model predicted. Some of the colleges that best exceeded predicted earnings were (only listed larger colleges, with what I expect to be a better sample size):
SUNY Maritime – 30%
East New Mexico – 25%
Colgate – 18%
Berkeley – 17%
New Mexico State – 16%
Cal State: San Bernadino – 16%
Rutgers – 16%