I have found this scorecard to be useless. The methodology should be clearly stated at the outset. Instead you have to look for the microscopic link at the bottom. Then you are expected to read through an 88 page document to understand the methodology. No, I will not do,that. A clear, brief methodology of each component of the scorecard should be stated on the homepage of,the scorecard. I of course submitted my opinion to the Dcept of Ed, only to be told that yes, I really should read the 88 page document. I will not, and so I find the numbers to just be a random and meaningless set of figures,
The Scorecard’s “average annual cost” number won’t be too useful for posters whose income is not average. However, if you drill down into each school’s entry, you can find the average costs for families at 5 different income brackets.
That’s good … but I’d like to be able to able to select my income bracket, specify a net price ceiling, then get a list of all schools that match.
Mr. @TedMitchell , is it true that the federal government has decided not to include some colleges known for their conservancy?
“Conservancy”?
The US government’s opposed to nature conservation? Or did you mean conservatism?
While the average income data is not as useful as income by major, it is useful in showing the general focus of a school. A high average means there are likely many STEM majors. A low average means there are probably more liberal arts majors. Schools that have more STEM majors tend to be more “serious” schools, while schools with more liberal arts majors tend to be less serious academically. So in effect, the average income tells you which are the more serious schools, and which are the less serious.
But the income data could be expanded to indicate the most pressing questions that most people want to know:
-
Comparing the same major, how does the starting salary, 10 year and 20 year salaries of a 2nd tier public compared with a 2nd tier private, with a first tier flagship state U, with a top 20 private school?
-
How does the CS/Engineering major from a flagship state U compare with a liberal arts major from a top 20 private school in starting salary, 10 year and 20 year incomes?
We’ve often read about how liberal arts majors end up out earning STEM majors in mid or late career, is that true? The most pressing questions that many people want to know is, in the long run are you better off going to a State U and major in CS/Engineering, or are you better off going to Yale to get a degree in Serbian poetry? Does that expensive seemingly useless degree from Yale really pay off 20, 30 years down the road?
Because after all, everyone knows there are no intensely rigorous liberal arts colleges that graduate lots of humanities graduates!
Seriously, do you really believe that, or did it just come out badly?
I’m sorry, that didn’t come out right. Of course LGBT studies is every bit as rigorous as Electrical Engineering. Don’t know what I was thinking.
I’m not saying this to be snarky, but I know a few people who I predict would have an easier time getting through an EE curriculum vs LGBT studies, which does require a good amount of reading, writing and verbal talents. Some people hate those kinds of classes and struggle in them.
These Economic Success Metrics reports http://collegemeasures.org/esm/ are exactly the kind of information we really need to have on the College Scorecard. Currently they are available for only six states, but it would be very helpful to have all states included. Would it be possible for you to use your influence to jump start this expansion?
Here’s a link to one of the reports for TX so you can see how valuable this would be.
Re: posts 122 &123 See article in Wall Street Journal today by David Whalen, Provost and Professor at Hillsdale College in Michigan. He writes that Hillsdale is not in the College Scorecard and attributes it (with supporting information) to a bias against Hillsdale’s conservative outlook and classical liberal arts education.
So you’re trying to suggest that STEM students are not only smarter, but also more obnoxious? You may have something there.
@numbersfun doesn’t Hillsdale decline federal money? That would mean no data for the scorecard.
ETA: It does indeed decline to participate in federal financial aid programs. Since the scorecard uses that data I can’t imagine why they’d think they should be included. http://www.hillsdale.edu/aid/scholarships
129: Brigham Young and Liberty are in the database. David Whalen is just being silly, at best.
127: people hate those classes because those classes are stupid, same goes for all those race/class/gender "equality" classes and the ever more convoluted list of classes that the humanities departments keep coming up with, where no intelligent facts and thoughts are presented, just lots of opinion. Liberals Arts these days is nothing but indoctrination by the liberal left.
@cmsjmt: First off, that’s going pretty far off-thread. Second, are you just repeating what you’ve heard, or do you have any actual data to back that up (with a reminder that I asked for data here, not anecdotes).
RE: posts 131 and 132. Is there no information on the College Scorecard that is not a function of participation in Federal Financial Aid programs? And are there no schools listed with significantly large parts of the information missing? For example: https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/school/?435000-Louisiana-State-University-Health-Sciences-Center-Shreveport or https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/school/?416801-The-University-of-Texas-MD-Anderson-Cancer-Center
The scorecards for the above 2 schools are not very useful because most of the information is missing. But they were included. I don’t know why.
I also don’t know why the Federal Government did not include Hillsdale College. I do know that the Provost thinks it is because of the school’s “conservative outlook and classical liberal arts education”, which quote I should have specified as from the article. I hoped Ted Mitchell might respond.
I don’t know if Ted Mitchell is still on this thread—we’ll see. But yes, the database relies on information based on participation in federal aid programs. This is mentioned in the (insanely fine-print, but that’s a whole different issue) description of data sources linked to the site.
Why David Whalen is being all culture-warrior-y on this, I don’t know, since he presumably has read the fine print.
^ those schools have the financial aid and average debt info.
The college that I currently attend, Nashville State Community College, is not listed in the scorecards database. It is a regionally accredited academic body. As a sophomore looking to transfer after attaining my A.S. at the conclusion of this academic year, I would appreciate a better understanding of my college. Particularly, this could assist me from the collective perspective of the U.S. Department of Education as to better ascertain what potential colleges that I would do best seeking admission to for enrollment in a bachelor’s degree program, next year, think about the college which I currently attend.
Try this link. It may have the information you are searching for.