Princeton has finally overtaken Dartmouth

College Search & Selection
1

<p>Ivy League Schools Starting Median Pay Mid-Career Median Pay </p>

<p>Princeton University $58,900 $123,000 </p>

<p>Dartmouth College $54,100 $123,000 </p>

<p>Harvard University $57,300 $121,000 </p>

<p>University of Pennsylvania $59,600 $111,000 </p>

<p>Yale University $52,600 $110,000 </p>

<p>Brown University $49,400 $109,000 </p>

<p>Cornell University $57,500 $106,000 </p>

<p>Columbia University $54,300 $99,700 </p>

<p>Best</a> Ivy League Schools By Salary Potential</p>

2

<p>Cool story bro.</p>

3

<p>Here are the problems that I see with Payscale’s methodology. I’ll compare Cal’s $109K v UCLA’s 91K reported 50% medians according to the site.</p>

<ol>
<li>The site is dependent on the professions of the respondents to its survey. </li>
</ol>

<p>So for instance, in comparison between Cal’s database of 4,490 it shows these as the most popular professions listed in detail under Cal:</p>

<p>Sr Software Engineer
Software Engineer
Mechanical Engineer
Software Engineer
Architect</p>

<p>For UCLA, with 4,970 respondents it lists:</p>

<p>Sr Software Engineer
Mechanical Engineer
High School Teacher
Elementary Teacher
Electrical Engineer</p>

<p>Are high-school and elementary teacher professions that highly prevalent among UCLA grads with just baccalaureates? Even more so than Cal’s? Or are there just more teacher respondents among Payscale’s database for UCLA? </p>

<p>I think a person with just a bac degree from UCLA would probably most likely end up in some sort of business field, the same with Cal’s. Neither university doles out a great amount of engineering-based degrees, and those with non-tech bac degrees would probably settle in sales, advertising, where, a just a bac degree in history wouldn’t hurt one’s career advancement.</p>

<p>And certainly, Cal doesn’t produce many Architects in its grad classes. Those with Architecture degrees wouldn’t register as a blip in its alumni pool.</p>

<p>If you get a predominant amount of female responses then teaching might be higher-placed in the most popular professions for a particular university. </p>

<ol>
<li>I don’t think Payscale verifies the reported salaries.<br></li>
</ol>

<p>Unless I am incorrect, and Payscale does indeed ask for tax returns and W-2’s, then the site would be totally dependent on the honesty of the respondent. Could a graduate of a certain university inflate his/her salary - ie, would an Ivy-leaguer feel more compelled to over-report his/her salary over some other university because of ultimate name-brand?</p>

<ol>
<li> Again, the site particularly notes that these are just those with just bac degrees.<br></li>
</ol>

<p>Any atty, MD, engineer with Masters or PHD would be disqualified. The site does this to see how a university places its grads in the various vocations wrt salary based on its reputation. Noble, but there are too many inherent problems with the survey.</p>

<p>Both UCLA and Cal produce the largest shear amount of MD’s and attys of all the universities in CA and pobably the nation – large undergrad enrollments, 26K and 25K respectively, and highly pofessionally-based undergrad students pointing towards these careers. UCLA probably produces more attys based on %’s than Cal, and they are pretty even %-wise for MD’s. These students would be disqualified from the survey. </p>

<p>So for UCLA, I’m sure the most popular professions would be with maybe a flip-flop of the first two:</p>

<p>Attorney
Business-related profession
MD
Other health professions, nurse, DDS, Doctor of Pharmacy
Maybe teaching would be placed here</p>

<ol>
<li>Similar pofessions will vary because of geography.<br></li>
</ol>

<p>The site says itself, that there’s a > 10% bump up of salary for those who work in the Bay Area of California over the rest of the state.</p>

<p>So this is why San Jose State and Santa Clara University report significantly higher salaries within their own set of “peer” universities. </p>

<p>This wouldn’t be a fault of the Payscale site - the site is reporting the geographical bump-up of salary accurately, but there are mitigating factors to having a lower salary than working in places other than Silicon Valley or SF, mainly, housing, and living near your workplace.</p>

<p>Wrt Ivies, per your post, I think a lot of Ivy-leaguers settle in the Northeast, around NYC, and the professions there have significant bump-ups in salary.</p>

<ol>
<li> The site reportings don’t seem to be affected by economy.</li>
</ol>

<p>If you take the under- and unemployed, the median salaries of those with just bac degrees would decrease accordlingly. I’m sure Ivy-leaguers would be less affected by the recession, but they would be somewhat so. I’m sure you can knock a good $10K off of that median for most universities. </p>

<p>The bottom line of this post is, I wouldn’t worry about the money-making ability of Columbia grads. And a lot of universities including UCLA, Columbia, Cal, probably produce more grad-educated alumni, than those with just bacs.</p>

4

<p>Until the schools report accurate numbers all this stuff is just utter crap. Anyone placing any weight on it is a sucker for another dotcom scam.</p>

5

<p>I think the Ivies do so well because of finance and consulting. So many of my brother’s friends from Dartmouth make well over 500K a year without graduate degrees.</p>

6

<p>Per Barrons:</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I don’t think this site is university condoned, sanctioned, commissioned… In fact, I would think that most, if not all, universities wouldn’t want anything to do with it, even for those universities the site props as being high-end wage-earners.</p>

<p>I’m a little confused at what Payscale does. I don’t think it’s like monster.com helping people obtain employment. Is there an analysis of one’s employment salary, something one can take to the employer? “Uhh, I make only $80K; I should be making $95K according to Payscale.” “Are you going to pony up, or am I going to have to turn in my notice of resignation?”</p>

<p>Admitone:</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Undoubtedly… But unless someone has his/her own firm, for someone to go to work for First Boston or Tenth Boston, or wherever, he/she is probably going for an MBA eventually to keep up with his/her coworkers.</p>

7

<p>Not really. In fact in finance an MBA often gets in the way. The high flyers never get an MBA.</p>

8

<p>… ‘gets in the way,’ per your quote:</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>The average MBA student pretty much interrupts his/her career four or five years in and is, what, 26-27 years of age?</p>

<p>That means, generally, suspending one’s career to take taht Harvard or Tuck MBA. Harvard, especially, seemingly, would require taht one have one master, and not work concurrently. So in a way, I agree partially with what you said about an ‘MBA getting in the way.’</p>

<p>But I would guess taht most ‘high flyers in finance’ have grad degrees, not necessarily an MBA, but most probably do have MBAs.</p>

<p>I would certainly claim that most MBAs earn more money than their non-MBA co-workers. One of the reasons why many go for this degree is to increase their earning potential. So we’re not only talking about the high-flyers but everyone in general.</p>

9

<p>well technically just comparing mid-year salaries princeton and dartmouth are tied.</p>

10

<p>interesting, someone chance me please?[Chances</a> at IVY s - College Confidential](<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=969457&referrerid=395882]Chances”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=969457&referrerid=395882)</p>

11

<p>

</p>

<p>the survey looks at median (not mean or spread), so your high flyer non-MBA finance geniuses are earning 123k 10 years out?! I’d be in tears if I thought the MBA were below me and then earned only 123k at 32. The survey clearly does not account for any such people. I still cannot fathom why alums with grad degrees are taken out.</p>

12

<p>As I said:</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I don’t know if anyone has ever quoted him or herself, but let me clean up what I stated here. I’m tending to post in a hurry, and I’m truncating my sentences. </p>

<p>I should have said:</p>

<p>But I would guess “taht” most ‘high flyers in finance’ have grad degrees, not necessarily an MBA, but most among those with these w/ advanced degrees probably do have MBAs. I would think this number would be higher, maybe significantly so, than those with just bac degrees. </p>

<p>Per confidentialcoll:</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>There’s certainly less error involved in reporting a median over a mean, and the site is seemingly trying to reduce as much error as it can. (I’m not explaining to you in particular; I’m just throwing out general stuff.) Certainly, if the site reported a mean salary for graduates of so-and-so university, it would hold itself to a higher standard. By essentially throwing out the top-end and low-enders it’s reducing whatever fluctuations and concentrations at those ends that might affect the means. It reports I think a +/- of 5%, which I think is still bogus. </p>

<p>The main problem I see with the site is I don’t think the respondent database can anyway reflect the graduates of any university, just by the site soliciting people for salary information within the vocations. It is hardly a “scientific” sample-size which would reflect the demographics, vocations, and finally median payscale of the larger alumni pool of a university as a whole.</p>

<p>I can see why it would want to throw out the effects of a grad education. If someone goes to Columbia undergrad and Harvard Law, no one in mind in particular, ;), would that graduate’s success compensationally(!) be attributed to Harvard or Columbia, the latter for which the site is trying to measure? But of course, Columbia had the rep to help whomever gain admission to HLS. So those schools with great grad placement like Columbia and UCLA would be entirely discounted.</p>

<p>The site reports that UCSB has a median salary of, I think, of > $100K and UCLA $91k. What the site doesn’t reflect is that UCSB does an extremely poor job of producing attys and MDds, as opposed to UCLA (or poor in comparison to UCLA).</p>

<p>I’m sure there are noble grads of Columbia who do choose to take a career in teaching at someplace like PS 58, instead of pursuing a more lucrative career path. But the survey is missing those Columbia grads who do go on to grad school and make loads of jack, to place it in the upper echelon of Ivies wrt compensation. Same for UCLA grads in comparison to UCSB and, say SJSU or some of the other UCs. </p>

<p>Add that, again, that the site’s demographics of each university is extremely skewered (or should be skewered, lol) because it can’t possibly have a ‘scientific’ bent or description to its survey, I think the site is off significantly in its survey at least for some universites, and probably notable error on all. Add partly, too, because economic effects are not included.</p>

<p>All in all a very bad survey that has some university grads taking it as gospel - Cal grads love this survey, lol - when as someone said should just be deemed as a 'dot-com scam."</p>

13

<p>

</p>

<p>and this is exactly it, a school with better placement into grad school, or a school who simply has its better alums select to go to grad school is punished.</p>

14

<p>But Columbia doesn’t have better placement at top grad schools than Dartmouth or Princeton. </p>

<p><a href=“WSJ in Higher Education | Trusted News & Real-World Insights”>http://wsjclassroom.com/pdfs/wsj_college_092503.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

15

<p>For MBA</p>

<p>Businessweek [Highest-Paid</a> MBA Alumni: University of California - Berkeley (Haas) - BusinessWeek](<a href=“http://images.businessweek.com/ss/10/05/0524_mbapay/38.htm]Highest-Paid”>http://images.businessweek.com/ss/10/05/0524_mbapay/38.htm)</p>

<p>Starting Pay
Berkeley-Haas - $110,000
UCLA-Anderson - $100,000</p>

<p>after 20 years
Berkeley-Haas - $185,000
UCLA-Anderson - $165,000</p>

16

<p>I know your post was meant for confidentialcoll, but you’re citing a survey that was done, what, seven years ago? </p>

<p>I don’t think WSJ continued “commissioning” that survey because: one, I think it felt it would be too volatile after so many after the top, and two, it probably felt taht it was too exclusive to what it deemed as the most prestigious grad schools.</p>

<p>So if I may answer for cc, I"m sure Columbia would be above Dartmouth and Princeton some times, other times not.</p>

<p>Michigan only registered decently highly on the list because it was a huge feeder to its own law school.</p>

<p>Wrt to UCLA (and Cal), besides having large grad classes – WSJ overstated UCLA’s; divide UCLA’s undergrad at that time of, say, 24k, and divide by about four one should get around 6k or maybe a bit > grads – there are plenty of lower cost and prestigious grad schools in CA that would attract a Bruin (or a Bear) over going primarily back east or midwest. Was Stanford the only school represented from the west with its l and b school?</p>

<p>There are around eight or nine med schools in CA, that a UCLA grad might consider over Harvard and whatever other prestigious m-schools WSJ included in this list. </p>

<p>And another Surprise: According to this survey by WSJ, the majority of prestigious grad schools are back east.</p>

<p>I’m sure a lot of people tore into WSJ for running this survey. The vast majority of highly successful grad educated alumni in the country and world didn’t attend any of these prestigious l, m, or b schools. </p>

<p>Another surprise: Ivy league universities supply a great amount ot Ivy League grad schools.</p>

<p>So bottom line: very, very bad survey, bad methodology, too exclusive.</p>

17

<p>Do you know what a Cost of Living adjustment is? </p>

<p>Graduating from a school and living in a high income/high expense area VERY frequently results in lower net free cash for the graduate. Any comparisons based on wages alone need to be adjusted for this.</p>

18

<p>Are you aware of housing prices in the Bay Area v those in So Cal and the rest of CA?</p>

<p>The East Bay is considerably cheaper than, say, Silicon Valley or SF or Marin. But places like Fremont are > $1M for a tracty 2,000 sf modest home.</p>

<p>Try getting a 1500 sf house in the most middle-class neighborhood of Silicon for < $900K. </p>

<p>Try getting a 1000 sf house in SF for < $1M.</p>

<p>As I noted before, there’s a large bump-up of salary for attys, MBAs, in the Bay Area of CA. </p>

<p>Add that Payscale is dependent on respondents to the survey and under UCLA it listed highly high-school and elementary teachers. One doesn’t primarily go to UCLA to become a teacher. </p>

<p>One cannot have a scientifically based survey that reflects the alumni pool as a whole by soliciting respondents. It’d be like taking a Presidential poll by calling people on their cell phones (this was actually done!).</p>

19

<p>… or give an example of middle-class neighborhood in Silicon Valley as being Sunnyvale.</p>

<p>You might be able to get a 800-900 sf house in Palo Alto for ~ $800-900K.</p>

<p>I don’t think there are any houses in Los Altos for < $1M. </p>

<p>And you can make your $100K salary work for an average house in Los Altos Hills or Atherton, ~ $2.5M.</p>

<p>Good luck, RML…</p>

20

<p>^ Irrelevant. A lot of Stanford grads don’t stay in Palo Alto, do they? </p>

<p>Anyway,</p>

<p>University of Southern California (USC) $50,300 $99,400 </p>

<p>University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) $50,700 $91,600</p>

<p>lol</p>