<p>This article shows salary lags if you start at a community college, even if you go on for advanced degrees. I am not surprised. My husband, a prof at a 4 year school, always commented on how in the advanced classes the transfers could not compete with students who started at a four year institution. Their initial courses were not as rigorous and put the transfers at a real disadvantage, no matter what their grades had been while at the community colleges.</p>
<p>When you look at studies like that, it is not always clear what the real story is. It makes sense that kids who start at a community college would have lags compared to their 4 year counterparts IN AGGREGATE. The "in aggregate" is important because it does not take into account specific cases. The fact of the matter is that kids who start at a community college tend to be from lower income backgrounds and also not as good of a student in terms of test scores and grades and academic preparation. Not all kids--- but more kids at the community colleges than those who start out at a 4 year school. So, yes, it makes perfect sense that these kids would have a lag in salaries, again taking the whole group into consideration, than those going to 4 year schools. I would have been surprised if the outcome was otherwise.</p>
<p>There was a study done some years ago where they tracked a group of kids going to the most selective schools and a group going tothe state or less selective schools, and checked outcome included income. The thing that they did to make this study focus purely on the the education, and not the caliber of the students is that they selected only students with like specifications. In other words, for each Harvard bound kid with the 1500 SAT and 4.0 average, they matched with a kid going to state U with the same profile, rather than taking aggregates. The outcome was that there was not any difference. I am sure that if the community college study had been done the same way, matching apples with apples, meaning kids with like credentials, there would not have been that discrepancy.</p>
<p>It would be interesting to see how the GPAs from the 2 years at the 4 year school compare. Do those the community college students coming into the 4 year school and attaining excellent grades in the 4 year school have lower salaries? Or is it those that have less stellar grades?</p>
<p>A cousin went to Penn State satellite campus and transferred to the main campus his junior year. He had a lot of trouble with his courses immediately, and claims to this day that the foundation courses at the satellite did not prepare him for the advanced courses, particularly in the mathematics. When I was at my college many years ago, I saw many transfers struggling with the high level of the advanced courses there, after getting outstanding grades (necessary for such a transfer) at their original schools. We had grad students in some of upper level undergrad courses, because some of them did not have the depth needed in a required subject from their education, despite the fact that they wer stellar students.</p>
<p>So, I do believe there are discrepancies in the depth and difficulties of courses offered. My son took an Honors Chem course at his high school that really put him way ahead of most kids who took chem in high school. This same thing can happen in colleges as well. My husband struggled during his first year at a rigorous college after graduating at the top of his class from a sup par high school. But for those who have it and are willing to work, water does level out.</p>
<p>I think there is something else at work here. When you go to school with brighter kids, you learn from them and even if it's not outwardly competitive you tend to work harder. I think the expectations are higher and the courses not taught to the lowest common denominator. Students at SOME four years colleges actually learn more in every course and the material can be more extensive and harder, because the students can handle it. When you are at a CC you have a mix of students: some there for the money issue, some there to get their grades up from a lackluster career in HS, some others may not be that motivated or may not know what they want to do. They can not teach them all as they would in a school where there are students who know they want a four year degree and are willing to work to achieve that. Some may not even be able to handle the harder material.
I always tell my friends to think before they send their kids to a Community college just to save some money. however, nowadays they might not have a choice.</p>
<p>It can be a difficult transition year when a student goes from a community college or a school that does not have a lot of top caliber students to a school that does. But all things equal, once that hump is jumped, students of like ability and motivation will go along similarly, is my guess. I am not talking about comparing a kid with a 1000 SAT, and a C average who goes through two years of CC and then transfers to a four year school after doing well enough at the CC, with a kid who started at the four year school with a 1400 SAT and an A average. That is not a fair comparison. Let's talk about two kids, one who went to CC for 2 years with a 1200 SAT and B- average in high school transferring to a 4 year college and match him with someone who went to this 4 year school with the same high school and test stats, but started as a freshman there. All things equal, the one transferring will have some transition issues, but I am willing to bet that things level out once that transition is mastered.</p>
<p>Kaf, that is another reason, and it ties into family income. In every education study I've seen, there is a direct link between student performance and family income. Kids going to community college tend to come from lower income families than those going on to 4 year schools.</p>
<p>I agree with the other posters that suspect it's a socioeconomic class thing. Worthington W. Worthington III doesn't got to community college, and when our boy Worth (we call him Chip) gets out of college, Uncle Chad or Aunt Muffy is going to find him a job. However, hard-working Maria and Vang, who can't afford a four-year college and go to community college for their first two years, don't have parents at law firms and uncles with medium-sized businesses to get them jobs.</p>
<p>Swim and Laura, I am not saying that every child needs a connection to get a first job, I am just saying it can help and the CC kids are less likely than average to have that help. And even if you dont have connections, do you have a car you would loan your dear child so he could interview? Help with a plane ticket? Have a computer and internet service for him/her at home? Help him buy a suit?</p>
<p>
[quote]
The pattern continues even for community college students who go on to earn a doctorate or a professional degree. And it holds for people of the same gender, race, education, experience level, field of study and type of college attended.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Obviously it's not because CC's lack rigor.
Hypothetically -
Student A is a highly qualified high school student who attends the local CC for two years. Then transfers to Big State U, earns a bachelors and moves on to a PhD at School Z.
Student B is also a highly qualified high school student who attends Big State U for 4 years and earns a Bachelors degree. Then goes to earn a PhD at School Z.</p>
<p>The study is saying that Student A will earn less than Student B. Regardless of field of study, gender, race etc.......
The quality of the CC has nothing to do with it - once the student has graduated and moved on any shortcomings of a less rigorous education will have been resolved. </p>
<p>Interesting stuff. I wonder if when repeated the study reaches the same conclusion.</p>
<p>"And it holds for people of the same gender, race, education, experience level, field of study and type of college attended. "</p>
<p>Its only a newspapers article, but I dont see income level. </p>
<p>"And even if they never complete a two-year degree, students who attend some community college can get higher-paying jobs. "</p>
<p>Maybe it is because students in the more vocational programs are more apt to get a two-year degree and the more tranfer oriented don't -- they just accumulate courses and move on.</p>
<p>I think transfer students have it tough, regardless. A school's advanced classes presume you have taken the earlier classes from that school. Rigor is just one attribute, what they teach, what they emphasize, techniques, etc. all come into play in advanced classes.</p>
<p>I think a kid from a CC, LAC, or any other school without a rigorous engineering program would have a tough time transferring into an engineering program at MIT. It is just not CC's with the problem.</p>
<p>A school earns a reputation in a field because they are doing stuff that other schools are not doing. That difference starts at day 1 and builds through out the 4 years. You just can't get the advantage from taking classes there in the last 2 years of college.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Their initial courses were not as rigorous and put the transfers at a real disadvantage, no matter what their grades had been while at the community colleges.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>To their credit, the community colleges here in Maryland seem to be aware of this problem. They appear to be making an effort to keep their courses on the same level as those at the four-year state institutions. (Many kids need remedial work before they can tackle these courses, though.) And I think that the four-year institutions are keeping the academic rigor of their introductory courses relatively moderate because they know that their system must accommodate transfers.</p>
<p>My son attended our flagship state university all four years, but several of his friends did their first two years at community colleges to save money and found that they were adequately prepared for their upper-division courses when they transferred to the university for their last two years. My son also noticed a substantial jump in academic rigor between underclass and upperclass courses, which I suspect is at least partly attributable to the recognition that underclass courses must be designed in such a way that transferring within the state system is workable.</p>
<p>I think it all depends on how long the student is at CC and what they are doing. DH went to a community college and finished his general ed requirements. The community college had an articulation agreement with a four year school...and he enrolled and finished his degree in three years (because he did the co-op program and worked every other semester). When he was offered his first job, no one even cared about his CC beginnings...they looked at his Bachelors degree and co-op experience. No lag in salary at all.</p>
<p>Now...many community college students also attend school for an extended number of years while working either part or full time. If the income in these jobs is considered...of course their salaries will look like they "lagged".</p>
<p>thumper1 - you are right - one a degree is earned no one cares about any CC time.</p>
<p>But the study isn't looking at one specific person and one specific job. They are comparing the salaries of all the people your DH went to CC with who got 4 year degrees against all the people who just got the 4 year. Group A makes less. Your husband could be making "less" - in that if he went straight to a 4 year he would be in a different job.</p>
<p>I don't think they are concluding that CCers are taking a salary hit due to discrimination.</p>
<p>Even if the rigor of the CC is less than the 4 year - in this study it doesn't matter. It is all made up in the end. the first two years are basics. If a Chem major takes freshman chem in a CC it doesn't matter - they will have moved on to Organic, Analytical etc etc.</p>
<p>I would be interested to see the scope of the CC's attended that were included - was this a sample from just one state? or many states?</p>