Bill to mandate disclosure of earnings and graduation rates by major

[JHS]

<p>The problem I have with all these studies and services is that they do a terrible job of capturing actual career paths. Careers are long, and first jobs are short. Sure, there are some things to study that lead fairly easily to well-paid first jobs, and honestly I don’t think many people are ignorant of that. It’s hard to object to providing some data, but it’s so easy to misinterpret this data that I really question how useful it is. (And it is certainly being presented as if it were extremely useful.)</p>

[Pizzagirl]

<p>Well, to be fair, for people who are “in the box,” careers don’t veer from a predictable path. They just are so far in the box they don’t realize how the world has evolved.</p>

[romanigypsyeyes]

<p>I apologize that I haven’t read the whole thread and most of the links aren’t opening on my phone but I’m curious… don’t most of these surveys look at earnings the year after college and so on? How would that account for people like me going straight to grad school? And mid career, would you look at my undergrad majors and ignore the fact I got my MPH? </p>

<p>Logistically, I think these types of things are bogus.</p>

[ucbalumnus]

<p>

@Pizzagirl

It’s certainly wise to consider one’s employability, but nothing’s more pathetic than the parent who forces a kid who really hates X to study it / major in it / get a job in it. It reflects a fearful, scaredy-cat view of the world.

</p>

<p>It is even worse when the parent is pushing the kid into a major on a mistaken belief of good job prospects, or the kid is selecting a major on a mistaken belief of good job prospects (often the case with biology and chemistry).</p>

[Beliavsky]

<p>

@Pizzagirl

Well, to be fair, for people who are “in the box,” careers don’t veer from a predictable path. They just are so far in the box they don’t realize how the world has evolved.

My career has been in an entirely different field than the science in which I got a BA and PhD. Wanting students to know what the average earnings of (say) biology majors are after graduation does not mean I think all bio majors will follow similar paths.</p>

<p>My school sends out a class report every five years in which alumni provide updates on their personal and professional lives. I think it would be interesting if each entry listed the person’s major so you could see what careers people with different majors pursued. Kids could browse the books of their alumni parents.</p>

[Beliavsky]

<p>[Cantor</a> supports Rubio-Wyden salary disclosure act, criticizes funding for political science research | Inside Higher Ed | February 6, 2013](<a href=“http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/02/06/cantor-supports-rubio-wyden-salary-disclosure-act-criticizes-funding-political]Cantor”>Cantor supports Rubio-Wyden salary disclosure act, criticizes funding for political science research)</p>

[argbargy]

<p>Sounds like that means there will be a bill that advances to the Senate that Reid will have to take a position on. </p>

<p>It would be interesting to see the Bill scored. So far the estimates range from negative cost to so expensive that it would be both debilitating to the Federal government and all the schools.</p>

[blossom]

<p>I love the folks who want smaller government except when it involves imposing new regulations and costs on private institutions.</p>

[sewhappy]

<p>I love private institutions that jack up their prices by urging their customers to borrow money to pay for their products and then expect tax payers to bail out the mess that ensues.</p>

[sewhappy]

<p>Hmmm. I also know some theater majors - they are unemployed or going back for masters degrees in things like accounting and library science. </p>

<p>This notion of college being some sort of finishing school to make our kids interesting and polished is making me shake my head. This is why we are in our situation in this country - must import the professionals with capability to actually design and implement anything useful while our kids ponder their personal aesthetic and pile on school debt.</p>

[alh]

<h1>127 Blossom:

But every time a parent on CC points out that not every college is the same as every other, and that a kid who studies Art History at Williams or Political Science at Yale or Math at Princeton might well have better opportunities in academia (not in industry, and not in a corporate career, but in grad school leading to a doctorate) than a kid who studies Art History at U Mass or Poli Sci at Wheaton or Math at Farleigh Dickinson, we get excoriated for being elitist snobs who have no right passing judgement.

</h1>

<h1>164 skrlvr

</h1>

<p>Yes and no. It all depends on how central the department is to the mission of the university as a whole, the reputation of the department itself, etc.</p>

<p>You can search the web to see how universities close departments when money gets tight. Foreign languages are often the first to go.</p>

<p>You’d be surprised at the number of graduates for certain majors; physics, for example, has a hard time attracting students at the undergraduate level. Yet there is less pressure on a physics department than, say, a French department, to increase enrollment, given that often physics is seen as more ‘central’ to the mission overall.

</p>

<p>State governments are looking to cut budgets. One way to do this is to eliminate whole departments at state schools. It is one of the few ways to get rid of tenured faculty. If you are going to judge the worthiness of majors with this sort of data, you can construct a pretty good argument for getting rid of Classics, French, Art History. Lots of people will support the idea these are pretty useless majors. However, when they aren’t available at state schools – higher education will become even more elitist. Because the elite privates are probably never going to drop these majors. And even if parents are willing to pay for the privates, we all know not everyone can get in. </p>

<p>When these majors are only available to a small segment of society, it may change society. Some may argue that change is positive. I am skeptical. I think we are probably better off with a population as broadly educated as possible.</p>

[blossom]

<p>Alh- I don’t understand your point. Some of the strongest departments in these disciplines are at State U’s- Classics at Berkeley, History at Michigan, etc. </p>

<p>I don’t really care that lots of people consider these majors useless. Lots of people think that vaccines cause autism and that AIDS is a Federal conspiracy to reduce the number of Gay, African American and heroin addicts in our country (they clearly missed the day that “correlation does not imply causation” was taught in an introductory course on Social Science Methodology at their local Liberal Arts college.)</p>

<p>Elite privates trim departments all the time- but since they don’t require a vote by a board of Regents or a public governing body, it happens quietly and off-stage. First the U announces an exciting new initiative to form an interdisciplinary program combining three related departments. Then the department chair becomes emeritus. Then those departments quietly get absorbed or eliminated and the faculty gets reassigned all in the name of intellectual inquiry.</p>

<p>I agree with educating the populace as broadly as possible. And it will be a sad day when Classics and Art History are only the province of the elites. Not sure what point you are making, however…</p>

[Pizzagirl]

<p>“I don’t really care that lots of people consider these majors useless. Lots of people think that vaccines cause autism and that AIDS is a Federal conspiracy to reduce the number of Gay, African American and heroin addicts in our country”</p>

<p>Exactly. Very well stated.</p>

[alh]

<p>Blossom: I agree some of the strongest departments in these fields are currently at State U’s. I believe most State U’s depend mainly on their state legislatures for funding. So the legislature may really be able to impact what the mission of the university becomes. If the primary mission of the university is to graduate students with good salaries, it is hard to justify some departments. And even if Berkeley is able to retain Classics, and Michigan keeps History – these are some of the most competitive schools in the country for admission. I have been thinking about this since the recent craziness at UVA. I don’t have any idea if it is a valid concern.</p>

<p>Probably it isn’t a valid concern … just where my mind goes when I see the type article in OP.</p>

[argbargy]

<p>

This notion of college being some sort of finishing school to make our kids interesting and polished is making me shake my head.

</p>

<p>Ah!</p>

<p>The logic is that if some people do want that to be the purpose of college they have to keep a lid on things, and therefor the other 90% of students cant have access to the data.</p>

[bovertine]

<p>

I love private institutions that jack up their prices by urging their customers to borrow money to pay for their products and then expect tax payers to bail out the mess that ensues.

I’d say the logical solution to that would be to stop bailing them out, not pass another law requiring assembly of a bunch of data that 90% of the same customers will likely ignore. Of course, we could wait for the “scoring” because we all know that is 100% accurate.</p>

[Pizzagirl]

<p>

I love private institutions that jack up their prices by urging their customers to borrow money to pay for their products and then expect tax payers to bail out the mess that ensues.

</p>

<p>Aren’t you sending your kids to two of those elite private institutions? No one forced your kids to go there.</p>

[ucbalumnus]

<p>

@alh

I agree some of the strongest departments in these fields are currently at State U’s. I believe most State U’s depend mainly on their state legislatures for funding. So the legislature may really be able to impact what the mission of the university becomes.

</p>

<p>The gradual defunding of state universities has led to many of them seeking other sources of funding – donations, increased tuition.</p>

[alh]

<p>

Governor Pat McCrory has only been in office for two weeks, and already he wants to dismantle some of the most highly-regarded education programs in the nation. In an interview January 29, he took aim at UNC-Chapel Hill, North Carolina’s flagship university and one of the best in the country. Specifically, he said, “I think some of the educational elite have taken over our education where we are offering courses that have no chance of getting people jobs,” referring to liberal arts courses. If someone wants to take a course such as “gender studies,” he said, “go to a private school and take it.”

</p>

<p>[N.C</a>. governor attacks higher ed, proposes funding colleges by graduates’ jobs](<a href=“http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2013/02/07/n-c-governor-attacks-higher-ed-proposes-funding-colleges-by-graduates-jobs/]N.C”>http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2013/02/07/n-c-governor-attacks-higher-ed-proposes-funding-colleges-by-graduates-jobs/)</p>

<p>

But as the Washington Post has detailed, Dragas had long held reservations about Sullivan and questioned whether she was willing to make cost-saving cuts to certain departments and programs – including Classics and German.

</p>

<p>[UVA</a> Teresa Sullivan Ouster Reveals Corporate Control Of Public Education](<a href=“HuffPost - Breaking News, U.S. and World News | HuffPost”>UVA Teresa Sullivan Ouster Reveals Corporate Control Of Public Education | HuffPost College)</p>

[geeps20]

<p>so the pro liberal arts crowd opposes this because many of the majors will show lower incomes??..It’s sad when a fact can’t be presented as such because somehow it offends someone.</p>