RML Rankings

[RML]

<p>

I’d agree that “Payscale” is at best, overweight (and really isn’t “Employer Opinion”) - it’s just too hard to correlate across multiple degree types and how are graduate studies accounted for?</p>

<p>For an extreme example, John goes to Occupational College, and after 2 years, gets a certificate in HVAC, and gets a journeyman position for $40K, while Joan goes to Harvard, takes a undergraduate degree in Anthropology after 4 years, and joins Americorps for a $12K stipend. So, which school is more prestigious?</p>

<p>To continue the example, 5 years later, John is a union guy, making $80K a year, while Joan is in her last year of medical school and (still) makes “nothing.”</p>

<p>And what if she chose the Peace Corps or some other low-salary service as a “career”, something a Harvard grad is probably more likely to pursue than an Occupational College grad. If you normalize to specific degree types, (say Business Admin, Accounting, etc) to specific companies in specific locations (say Investment Banks in NYC), you’d get closer, but then you’d have geographic bias built-in.

</p>

<p>If you would say that each and every one at Harvard and Occidental would do exactly just like you said, then payscale must really be a distorted data. However, I think payscale, though I’m not really supporting it that much, does not reflect your example. Look at how your given examples perform at payscale:</p>

<p>Harvard University $60,000 $126,000</p>

<p>vs</p>

<p>(give me a school)</p>

[alam1]

<p>^ lol at Warrenhui’s ignorance</p>

<p>Ofcourse most people go to university to ultimately land a job, preferebly a high paying one. What I (and some other CCers) are saying is that Pay Scale does not do a good job in quantifying a value of a college’s certificate. I will stress this again. Columbia degrees are more prestigious than Notre Dame degrees and will help you more in the job market. According to the pay scale, howwever, this is not true. Squiddy made an excellent point. There are too many variables to quantify prestige and people should just stop attempting because it spreads misinformation and contributes to lay people’s perception of colleges (which as we know… is extremely unreliable… just look at the “Average People’s Opinion” poll used by RML). RML, thanks for trying but please, for the sake of at least slowing down misinformation and ignorance, try not to come up with rankings by mixing questionable (sometimes unrelated) data. It does more harm than good.</p>

[RML]

<p>

you used US NEWS rankings as 50 % of your rankings and fairly reasonably reproduced the US NEWS rankings.

</p>

<p>The USNews ranking contains a wealth of information, when looking at US colleges. However, how they have derived the final result at is when there is a problem. I think they put too much weight on some nonsense matters such as alumni giving rate and stuff. </p>

<p>Anyway, this ranking is just for school prestige.</p>

[alam1]

<p>^ No, this ranking is not for school prestige. If anything, it serves to show how misinformation spreads. Prestige is not quantifiable. Do people not understand this?</p>

[noimagination]

<p>Payscale does not adjust for the cost of living in different places.
Payscale does not factor in students seeking higher degrees.
Payscale does not include stock options.
Payscale fails.

Payscale is important because it takes into account that some professions (higher paid ones in banking, medicine, and law) are more desired and sought after than other profession such as pure sciences. For instance, I know of many students would study biology if gone to a non-top public school such as University of Minnesota and would study econ or government at an Ivy.

Which might say something about why the US is crumbling (literally). But I digress…</p>

<p>I don’t particularly like the counselor ranking either. If there’s one thing CC has taught me, it’s that most counselors have no clue about what they are doing.</p>

<p>EDIT:

You go to a prestigious university to land yourself good job.
Going to uni is like an investment, the higher you get pay the better the investment.
It’s all about how much your piece of paper (the cert) is worth in $$$$
if it’s not why dont we all just go to CC or not bother with college at all

I just don’t understand this mentality. Many on CC make it seem like one is either a minimum-wage hotdog stand worker, struggling artist, or millionaire financier. There is a difference between obscene wealth and very comfortable pay…</p>

[RML]

<p>

That’s very shallow.

</p>

<p>No; its’ not. I believe what he was saying is very practical and truthful. </p>

<p>I think what some people are contesting at is the way the data are gathered by payscale. I have minor issues with payscale too. But that’s only what we have. To say that you won’t aim for HYPSM or Berkeley or Duke and the like because you’re not after of a high-paying, worthy jobs in the future is a big sarcasm.</p>

[RML]

<p>

^ No, this ranking is not for school prestige. If anything, it serves to show how misinformation spreads. Prestige is not quantifiable. Do people not understand this?

</p>

<p>prestige can be quantified, thus the PA. What do you think that is? That is a PRESTIGE rating.</p>

[RML]

<p>

Columbia degrees are more prestigious than Notre Dame degrees and will help you more in the job market.

</p>

<p>Your source please.</p>

[RML]

<p>

Payscale does not factor in students seeking higher degrees.

correct</p>

<p>

Payscale does not include stock options.

maybe</p>

<p>

Payscale does not adjust for the cost of living in different places.

but most graduates of these schools - as these are the best of the best schools in America - tend to find jobs in big cities where the pay is substantially higher. I think the flaw of payscale is when it did not break the programs down by majors. Engineers earn more than English or History grads do.</p>

[alam1]

<p>I did not mean that literally. Ofcourse, it can be quantified but not well… not accurately. That is the point I am trying to make. People have the general idea that Harvard is more prestigious then Penn but by a factor of what? by how much? 15 times more prestigious? Prestige ratings attempt to put numbers where numbers are not useful.</p>

[confidentialcoll]

<p>

Payscale does not factor in students seeking higher degrees.
-correct

</p>

<p>and this renders it an inaccurate measure of degree value. What we’re looking at is college students 5 and 15 years out of college who have no masters and professional school degree. So what we might be looking at is just colleges which have students who prefer to work vs. go to professional school, universities who have students not intending to go to professional school will do better on payscale, and this does not mean that their graduates are doing any better than competitors’. </p>

<p>A huge value in getting a prestigious undergrad degree is to get into a top med/law/business school within a few years and then do well in life (which is the case for the vast majority of students at top schools). and schools with large proportions of students who go into these fields are hurt by payscale, because they are omitted from the salary calculation.</p>

[momof3sons]

<p>RML,
Perhaps this thread should be titled, “The Most Prestigious UNIVERSITIES in America.” These are not prestigious colleges. Prestigious colleges are places like Williams, Swarthmore, Amherst, Pomona, etc.</p>

[noimagination]

<p>

but most graduates of these schools - as these are the best of the best schools in America - tend to find jobs in big cities where the pay is substantially higher. I think the flaw of payscale is when it did not break the programs down by majors. Engineers earn more than English or History grads do.

The COL in Austin is different from Minneapolis which is different from New York which is different from San Jose.</p>

[Alexandre]

<p>RML, PayScale is not a proxy for Employer opinion. If it were, employers would have a higher opinion of RPI, Lehigh, Santa Clara, WPI, Colorado School of Mines, Manhattan College and several others than they do of Columbia and Northwestern. I uinderstand your need to include some sort of employer opinion ranking/rating, but PayScale is not the way to go. There isn’t an employer opinion ranking that I know of that gives a good overall picture of employer sentiment.</p>

[grk1020]

<p>Why do you think your methodology misses smaller LACs like: Amherst, Vassar, Middlebury, Wellesley, Pomona, Williams?</p>

[the_prestige]

<p>[USNWR</a> Avg Rank + WSJ Feeder + Revealed Preferences + National Merit Scholar Per Capita Rank](<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/2885267-post115.html]USNWR”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/2885267-post115.html)</p>

<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/228347-usnwr-07-91-avg-rank-wsj-feeder-revealed-preferences.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/228347-usnwr-07-91-avg-rank-wsj-feeder-revealed-preferences.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

[Descartesz]

<p>Arguing on your own terms with respect to the market-driven view of prestige, you really have to adjust for regional differences in COL. You are foolish if you don’t take these into account when considering where to take a job.</p>

<p>If you make: $100,000.00 in Chicago, IL you will have to make: $155,000.77 in NY, NY</p>

<p>from [Cost</a> of Living Comparison, Salary Calculator - CityRating.com](<a href=“http://www.cityrating.com/costofliving.asp]Cost”>Cost of Living Calculator, Salary Comparison)</p>

<p>So those U of C and Northwestern grads might actually be doing better than Columbia and Princeton grads.</p>

[RML]

<p>the_prestige, no offense but the one you made was the worse ranking i’ve ever since in my entire life.</p>

[hawkette]

<p>RML,
Methinks you need to work on your thread titling. Do you realize that several of the surveys have nothing to do with prestige, eg, College P.r.ow…er, Payscale, USNWR Teaching and HS couselor? </p>

<p>Forgetting for the moment the LARGE differences that many would have with the weightings that you assign, there are lots of flaws in your data:</p>

<ol>
<li> The USNWR Teaching Survey is not done by students. It is done by the same folks who vote on the PA scores.</li>
<li> The HS counselor rankings have a ton of flaws, not least of which is that the distribution of the survey was heavily slanted. 10 states had no representation and large concentrations in large population states like California, New York and Texas. (This reminds me of the debate between which is the more appropriate way to elect a president—via popular vote vs the electoral college.)<br></li>
<li> The Payscale data needs to be regionally weighted. Of course students from colleges in California and the Northeast will get higher initial wages.<br></li>
<li> For the Gallup poll (please spell it right as George would get upset), it shows two things. H, and to a lesser degree YP and S, are transcendent and, after that, there is no national consensus.<br></li>
</ol>

<p>So, the result is that 4 of the 6 surveys you cite are either inconclusive on a national scale(Gallup), mislabeled (USNWR Teaching) or badly flawed with biased data (HS counselor ratings and Payscale). </p>

<p>Other than that, you got the USNWR PA ratings and the College Pr…wl.er ratings right. </p>

<p>Way to go! :rolleyes:</p>

[ghostbuster]

<p>Oh goodie…another useless prestige ranking system to satisfy the insatiable needs of the permanently disabled with prestige-itis.</p>

<p>Good grief.</p>

<p>4 Lynn University students died in Haiti. They were on missions to help the poor and suffering. And all you care about is PRESTIGE?</p>

<p>How sad.</p>