They had some idea. BIL’s grandfather farmed on the same land. They restored the farmhouse that his grandfather owned and would lease the farmland out to other local farmers before starting their own farm. BIL was under a tremendous amount of pressure at his architecture firm and is a completely different person since he started farming (they’ve been at it for 15+ years). He even wrote a book about his transition from architect to farmer.
They live in a farm-friendly part of upstate NY, so they have a lot of support from the community. People want to buy meat and produce from local farmers, so farmers markets are well attended. That said, they realize they’re not going to get rich off of it, but they don’t care. Quality of life means more to them.
To get back to the original question, I think CC gives a skewed representation of what college students aspire to. Here there are a preponderance of high stats/high performing students and their ambitious parents. Exhibit 1 - an entire (and lengthy) thread devoted to kids with $100k salaries right out of undergrad (as a note - 99% of students don’t achieve this - including many students at “top” schools). As a result there is a lot of chatter about IB, MBB, FAANG and the majors (and schools) that might lead to employment there. I’m not so sure that most college students out in the real world are as tied into those majors as students here - and even among CC kids I’m sure there will be many who start out thinking CS etc is what they want and end up changing their minds. I think it is a shame that kids are supposed to know what they want at age 18 - it leaves little room for self discovery. Personally, I lament the pre-professionalization of college – at the same time I acknowledge with such a hefty price tag, many parents are looking for ROI.
I wonder how much of this relates to the in-real-life social milieu of CC-ers (students or parents) or whether there is a social media influence with respect to the career goals of doctor, tech guru, or investment banker.
I strongly suspect that there is a far, far, far higher percentage of full pay families on CC than in the rest of the U.S. The ability to have saved up $320k for college (while still having sufficient retirement savings, etc) probably indicates that families have had upper class incomes for a number of years (or perhaps upper middle class with aggressive savings rates). If students want to have a similar level of spending in their post-college lives, they gun for the highest income producing positions straight out of school. (Many students either don’t want to experience or don’t understand that their wealthy family members may have started their adult lives with a much more modest lifestyle and only obtained the bigger incomes in later years.) So these are students who were raised as part of the upper class and don’t want to fall below that.
But then there are the students who are not coming from upper class families who still are seeking the lucrative jobs. I wonder if the social media posts, where people are only sharing the “best” parts of their lives, are influential here. For instance, 30 years ago there was Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous but that was for “those” people who happened to make it on tv. But social media have people sharing about their fancy trips, luxury cars, expensive clothing and skin care products, etc. And intelligent people like the students who post here do the math and figure that if they want to live that kind of life, they need to earn a lot of money to do it. So students who would have been happy to become a teacher, or a speech therapist, or major in a humanities/social science and get a job that only needed a college degree have become far fewer as a result of the drive for high incomes.
This whole premise, however, focuses the upper class and those who want to be upper class. For many students, the possibility of being able to afford a place in a safe area (lease or own), have their own car, go out to eat a sit-down-restaurant, and to do all of the above without fear of anything being repossessed or their credit card bouncing (heck…even having a credit card or even better one of the preferred credit cards that gives cash back). Those students probably have more expansive views of possible careers, if those careers would help them reach that level of lifestyle.
Or simply that if you are full pay 320k, you do not want a job that is 50k/yr, unless you are really wealthy. Otherwise it is hard to justify paying 320k/4yrs. Lower paying choices were more possible 20 years ago when tuitions were much lower – tuition inflation was much higher than regular inflation. And regular inflation was higher than growth of middle class salaries. So the 320k sticker shock is quite a shock for middle class incomes that did not grow. So kids of these folks may want to not be in this situation again.
I don’t think choosing a major associated with high income closely follows parents income and/or full pay. Several studies have found a more nuanced relationship. For example, the article at Does Your Parents' Income Affect Your Choice of College Major? - The Atlantic suggests the following 5 majors have lowest and highest average parents’ income. Rather than income, there seems to be more of a correlation with lower income students being more likely to choose a major with a clear path to expected vocation – law enforcement → job in law enforcement, computer science → job in computer science, nursing → job in nursing. Majors associated with higher parents’ income often had less clear vocational paths. English major → job that may have little direct relationship to English.
4-Year Majors Associated with Lowest Parents’ Income
Law Enforcement
Education
Psychology
Computer Science
Nursing / Medicine
4-Year Majors Associated with Highest Parents’ Income
English
History
Visual/Performing Arts
Economics
Sociology / Political Science / Anthropology
Perhaps the relationship is more persons who like to hang out on CC and favor attending highly selective, private colleges also are more likely than average to be the type who emphasizes obtaining high paying and jobs after college, regardless of their parents income. This is correlated with seeking prestige. Persons who seek a prestigious name for undergrad are probably also more likely to seek a prestigious name for job after graduation (“elite” bank, “FAANG” tech, …)
I’d be interested to see how major selection at highly selective private colleges varies with income. Some Ivy+ type colleges publish surveys showing things like athletes being several times more likely to choose Econ major than the average student at that college, but I haven’t seen one that breaks down directly by income .
Interesting. I suspect there are many contributing factors, such as what types of criteria Princeton looks for among kids from different prospective majors. And what factors are most common among qualified applicants from different SES groupings. For example, lower SES admits may be less likely to meet the criteria Princeton is looking for as a prospective engineering major than high income admits. There could also be a higher switch out rate in engineering among students coming from HSs that had less AP classes and similar degree of preparation for core math-science courses.
Do we think that there is a lack of clarity as to what an undergrad psych degree prepares you for (if Data’s theory is correct)? Otherwise this seems quite anomalous with the actual job market. And I’m surprised that Accounting/Finance isn’t in the top 5. I think the last survey I saw of the directional/commutable four year colleges in my area showed nursing and accounting as the two most popular majors for first generation college students…
Thank you for sharing these graphs; I find them very interesting. It reminds me of the thread earlier this year when 25% of students thought the average American salary was over $100k/year. As 4/7 of Princeton undergrads are expecting to make a 6-figure income after graduation, the reasoning might be similar to those of the Wharton grads mentioned in the post:
I’m curious to know whether the students get the income that they expect, and how those incomes compare to people in those same region with the same major but from a less prestigious college. (For instance, how do the salaries of Rutgers grads in those same majors compare to the salaries of Princeton grads?)
For full-pay families who feel this way, is there an expectation (verbalized or implied) for the children to do anything for the parents as a result of the education they have been provided? For instance, a college friend’s family paid for him to go to an elite medical school, including all related expenses. But he expected and understood that when his parents were older that he would be expected to provide any financial support asked of him.
They expect these numbers because they have offer letters in hand spelling out exact numbers. Sometimes specific numbers also for the second year (what we call the first full year after the stub year).
I suspect lower – I’ve tried hard to find out, but could not. I think the quality of the outcomes is lower. I will know in 3 years time. I have a kid going to Rutgers now.
This is not an expectation. Should it become necessary, it is considered a highly undesirable outcome. But an expectation is that we may not have anything more to give. So you best make use of your education to become fully self-sufficient.
The third chart is not meant to be read as 4/7th of the kids expecting a salary of >100k – if you read the chart carefully, you will realize that that is an incorrect interpretation. You need the below chart to calculate the ratio you are interested in:
Taking out roughly 20% of the kids from the 30k bucket who are going to grad school, and rescaling, the >100k cohort is about 43%. I interpolate the 90k bucket.
~Half the kids who filled out the survey said they did not have a job lined up after graduation. Some of this group without a job lined up listed their “expected” income. Even among the groups that did have an offer in hand, some aspects of total compensation are likely unknown. For example, a college senior may not accurately estimate value of future stock options or size of his/her performance bonus.
As an example of a different source, the post-graduate survey for class of 2017 (didn’t see more recent one) at https://careerdevelopment.princeton.edu/sites/g/files/toruqf1041/files/resource-links/annual_report_2016-17.pdf lists the following salaries for Princeton grads . Half the class reports working in business/finance. And more than 2/3 are business/finance + CS. This is a very different distribution than the US averages, which were touched on earlier in the thread.
Business/Finance (49% of students) – Average = $73k
Computer/Math (18% of students) – Average = $111k
Sales (6% of students) – Average = $94k
Life/Physical/Social Science (5%) – Average = $41k
Management (5% of students) – Average = $64k
Engineering (3% of students) – Average = $75k
Education (3% of students) – Average = $38k
Legal (3% of students) – Average = $45k
Arts, Design, Entertainment, Media (3%) – Average = $55k
Healthcare (2% of students) – Average = $35k
Community Service (2% of students) – Average = $33k
Military (1% of students) – Average = $41k
Others (<1% of students)
During this same year, the two most common majors of graduating seniors were CS and Econ, fitting with above. However, there were also some others that are more surprising (to me). For example, International Affairs, Politics, and History all had high enrollments… higher than biology → med school or any engineering major.
A large portion of colleges provide some kind of public reporting of post-graduate salary survey that can be reviewed. Among those that don’t, CollegeScorecard tax reported earnings are often available. In Princeton’s 2017 survey linked above, the average was $72k. Rutgers reports at median of $60k in what I believe is 2019. Both colleges have a wide variation across different majors and industries, rather all students being at reported average/median. Breaking down by major may be awkward due to the different reporting formats.
I previously mentioned the 2 most common majors at Princeton were CS and Econ. CS and Econ were also among the most common majors at Rutgers, but Rugers has several other common majors that are not as common choices at Ivy+ type colleges. These different majors include nursing (351 students), exercise science (353 students), and psychology (474 students = 2nd most popular major).
If you read carefully, you will notice that the cohort that answered the question whether they had a job or not was 497 in size. And 53.5% of those said they had a job. That is 265 kids. The sample size of kids that answered the expected salary question is 325. Roughly 20% is going to grad school (which was in the same survey in a different chart). So 80% of 325 is about 260 kids. Close enough for government work.
Lack of clarity on the value of stock options, if it even exists, is second order. Certainly the very high salaries that are 300k and above are likely all cash offers. It is only the 150k-250k range that will likely have a stock component. Even here the company makes an effort to put a dollar number in the offer letter. They won’t say 120k base + 352 shares of our company + 17k bonus. They say 120k base + 25k in RSUs + 17k in cash bonus.
Biology is not the only major that feeds into pre-med at Princeton. I personally know a Comp Lit major for example. There are bio chem majors, chem majors, chem engg majors, Ecology and Evolution Biology majors etc that go into medicine eventually.
Yes SPIA is a large major at Princeton. It is not a surprise. It generall feeds into IB, Consulting, Law School, Policy, Govt etc.
CS is a plurality, but not a majority. The currentgraduating senior class declared around 200 CS majors out of a 1350 class – so about 15%. They do a variety of things. Not all go into software engg jobs.
497 * 53.5% is 256, not 265. 256/325 = 79%. This calculation assumes 100% of persons who have a job choose to report their salary in a newspaper senior survey. The actual total will of course be less than 100%, with a biased selection in who chooses to report. This makes a minimum of 21% reporting future “expected” salary without a job offer and a maximum of 47%. While the specific % within this range is unknown, it is clear that many reporting “expected” salary do not have an offer in hand.
It sounds like you may be also assuming that 100% of kids attending grad school do not have a job offer, yet still choose to report their salary. This is obviously not accurate.
Many tech positions that are <$150k include a stock component, and that stock component can include more variable sources than RSUs, particularly at smaller companies that do not trade on a public exchange. Stock value also often depends on future stock performance, which can be highly variable, as we have seen in recent months.
There is also going to be a group who doesn’t put this kind of effort in to filling out a long newspaper survey with ~100 questions and instead just lists a number that may be a rough estimate, a hopeful expectation, or something else. In short, I wouldn’t take the newspaper survey as gospel, especially if the numbers are very different from other sources, such as Princeton’s post-graduate salary survey as reported by the college and CollegeScorecard.
Biology is not the only pre-med major at almost any college with a large number of pre-meds, but biology or related majors (human biology, nueroscience, …) are usually by far the most common choice. What makes Princeton unique is a much smaller portion of biology related majors than almost any Ivy+ type private non-tech college I am aware of. Econ, CS, and Biology are usually all among top 4 (government / poli-sci is often 4th one) at Ivy+ type private colleges. In contrast, biology is nowhere near top 4 at Princeton.
Princeton has a public database that lists job title without salary. The overwhelming majority of 2021 CS major grads at Princeton appears to have 2 possible job functions - either work in software engineering or work as an analyst. Rather than job function, the variation more appears to be in company. 3 companies employed 5+ reporting Princeton CS in 2021 – Microsoft, Facebook, and Capital One. And another >50 companies employed <5 Princeton CS grads.
=497*0.535 = 265.895
There could be many people not reporting – clearly roughly 1350 - 497 did not respond at all to the survey. I am certainly not claiming that a 100% of kids with a job will respond to the survey.
Thinking that there is bias in who chooses to respond already assumes facts. I have no idea who responds. One hopes it is a representative sample.
It is silly to report an expected salary without an offer. That assumes an even greater level of enthusiasm to respond to the survey. You think it is clear that people report without an offer in hand. To me that conclusion is clear as mud :-). An informal sampling of kids that I know of indirectly (one step removed) suggests that at least the CS/Math kid numbers are in the right ballpark in terms of proportions. As an example I don’t know of any CS kid that has an 80k offer. I am sure there are some – I’ve not heard of any.
Yes, 4970.535 ~= 265. The point was the calculation assumes 100% of the 4970.535 ~= 265 persons participating in the survey who reported having a job offer chose to report their salary. The actual total will not be 100%. In any college newspaper I have ever seen that asks anything to do with income or salary, some filling out the survey do not choose to answer the question asking about their income/salary. Even if 100% did report, there would still be a notable portion reporting “expected” earnings who did not have an offer in hand. Any way you work the numbers, some college seniors who state their “expected” income for the following year do not have an offer in hand.
I am really puzzled why you feel so strongly about it. I find it bizarre that someone would put a number down without knowing what that number is. Remember, this is an anonymous survey. People on campus are seriously humble – in fact the stronger kids may be humbler. To claim a salary when you don’t have an offer is not in character.
It’s a survey question asking college seniors “expected” future earnings in the following year. Students who do not yet have a job offer are allowed to state their “expected” future earnings. There is no requirement in the survey question that students must have an offer in hand to state earnings expectations, so there is no violation of character.
As stated in the original response, it’s simple math to show that some students are reporting future “expected” earnings without a job offer. One does not need to rely on feelings about a shared character among all of Princeton’s students when one can compare the total number of students in each group.
You made a statement that the students “have offer letters in hand spelling out exact numbers.” My initial reply suggested this is mathematically false since the number of students reporting “expected” income is larger than the number of students reporting having a job lined up. I feel strongly about this claim being questioned.
I am puzzled why you seem to have such strong feelings about the Princeton newspaper survey, in spite of conflicting information.
