Who's Anxiously Waiting The Us News And World Report Rankings!

College Search & Selection
61

<p>hoedown,</p>

<p>If you believe that the numbers presented show agreement between how PA voters rank colleges and how employers see their graduates, then we just interpret the data differently. Focusing just on your U Michigan and its comparison with ND, I really struggle to see how you can reach this conclusion. </p>

<p>$56,300, $116,000… Notre Dame (3.9)
$52,700, $93,000… U Michigan (4.5) </p>

<p>or focus on the less personal comparison of Tulane and U Texas</p>

<p>$49,100, $95,800… Tulane (3.3)
$49,700, $93,900… U Texas (4.1)</p>

<p>or how about a state university vs a state university</p>

<p>$52,000, $95,000… U Maryland (3.6)
$52,700, $103,000…U Virginia (4.3)</p>

<p>There are literally dozens of examples where the PA results contradict the Payscale results and frequently those differences are large. </p>

<p>As for the comparisons you draw between Harvard-Duke and Stanford-Podunk U, I agree. But these are rarely (never) the comparisons that I or other PA protesters make. I have previously posted that, for the group of schools ranked in the USNWR Top 50 (and probably beyond), the differences in the eyes of employers are quite small and yet I see colleges like Notre Dame or Tufts or Rice consistently marginalized in rankings that draw from academic viewpoints and not from the real world. </p>

<p>My purpose in these comments is to expand the discussion and understanding of what is important in evaluating colleges. For the most part, undergraduate students care about what their post-graduate financial prospects are and thus they care about how employers view their college and pay their graduates. By the same token, IMO most undergraduate students and most employers aren't particularly concerned with many of the factors that academics use to decide among themselves which college is worthy and which is less so. Ranking services such as USNWR and their PA scoring gives voice only to those in the academic world. I feel strongly that these views should be supplemented, if not mostly replaced, by the views of those in the world into which most students will enter after they finish college.</p>

62

<p>Of course salary is not an indication of academic excellence or respect for a school in professional circles. Salary is a rather superficial aspect.</p>

<p>Some careers just dont earn what other careers earn. Social work comes to mind. </p>

<p>I do know that USNWR ranks programs as well as schools and they also rank graduate programs and professional schools (perhaps more helpful...not sure if they are more or less valid.)</p>

<p>Rankings are for curiosity seekers. I use them as general indicators of prestige and as a blunt instrument. But I also know that some schools that are not on the list have superb programs.</p>

<p>Take English/Creative Writing for example. Some of the best programs (published authors) are from schools not highly ranked or in less "prestigious" lists. Kenyon and Hollins University come to mind.</p>

63

<p>Another example, the number ONE ranked program in Health Law? Its not Harvard, Yale, or U Chicago Law School. Its St. Louis University Law School.</p>

64

<p>Money is certainly not everything, but in the minds of most college students I would doubt that they would classify student outcomes, including salary data, as superficial. </p>

<p>Now, the items that college faculties use to judge what is good and which is not, I'm betting that a lot of that could be considered superficial. And yet the perspective of unidentified academics is the only opinion that is permitted in rankings like USNWR. </p>

<p>Unfortunately, data such as USNWR's PA scoring is used by many (including many sophisticated posters here on CC) as true indicators about a college's quality. In some cases, such as for those interested in a career in academia, this might be appropriate. For those interested in a career in the for profit world, I would argue that it is not. But this nuance is commonly lost (deliberately?) in these discussions and almost certainly by the general public that is consuming the USNWR magazine.</p>

65

<p>Hawkette, the WSJ report is complety flawed. You know that. I am not sure what you are trying to accomplish here, but if you are trying to prove that those highly unrefined figures somehow serve as an indicator of employer sentiment, you are sadly mistaken.</p>

66

<p>alexandre,
My good friend! I knew you'd show up soon enough to try to discredit these numbers. What took you so long? :)</p>

<p>Hey, I know and understand the flaws and bclinton has ably pointed them out, but I think you're absolutely incorrect in your attempt to dismiss these numbers as meaningless. Despite the problems, the results actually look pretty close to how I think most employers see colleges across the USA. Sure, there are a few outliers, both ways, that are surprises (eg, Bucknell on the upside and Emory on the downside), but I think that Payscale got it broadly right. More importantly, these results are a lot more relevant to undergraduate students than things like PA scores, Feeder School rankings, THES rankings, etc. </p>

<p>The one suggestion that I would have is to add a Cost of Living Adjustment. Colleges in the Midwest and South are disadvantaged by this and I suspect that their true "real-world competitiveness" is understated in these results. </p>

<p>Any suggestions from you or anyone on how to adjust these numbers to reflect the regional Cost of Living differences?</p>

67

<p>I know that salaries are not considered superficial by students, many parents, and often enough....many professionals. Lord knows, money pays the rent and food bills. (not being glib here). I just interpose my view that to evaluate a school based upon its graduates incomes is indeed superficial and likely an inaccurate basis by which to judge the value of an education at any given institution, because some kids from some schools may be more inclined to seek jobs in high income careers, such as wallstreet brokers and analysts, investment banking etc. Or some schools may excel at entrepreneurship, though that is usually attributed to MBA programs. </p>

<p>Would you say that Oberlin Conservatory Graduates and Brandeis University graduates are regarded as lesser beings because they didnt go to Harvard, Princeton or Yale and become lawyers or investment bankers? Assuredly not. </p>

<p>Look at our most prolific writers of the last 100 years. Not just fiction writerws, but historical fiction and non fiction writers. Writers of influence and not just quantity. Where did they go to college? Supreme Court Justices...many were Ivy League credentialed but many were not. Justice Sandra Day OConnor went to Arizona. Justice Clarence Thomas went to Holy Cross. Justice Lewis Powell went to Washington and Lee. </p>

<p>Prestige certainly has its place in our society. To ignore it or dismiss it is foolhardy. But it is equally foolhardy to attempt to quantify it and make it an objective qualifier, when in fact its highly subjective. </p>

<p>Is there a category of colleges that do the best job of educating the most people who become successful human beings? Like Colleges that Change Lives? For some people this is much more important than the salaries they might earn upon graduation.</p>

<p>Success is in the eyes of the beholder. Just my two cents.</p>

68

<p>WSJ report is like to say that the elephant is four pillars. It is very misleading.</p>

69

<p>I don't know if UMichigan is going to helped that much by cost of living adjustments considering that it comes in as #86 at the top 25%ile level and similarly at the top 10% level. </p>

<p>To try to isolate out UG effect and get salary data, there are certainly going to be flaws, but don't see how it is any more flawed than basing 25% of your rankings on the cumulative effect of whether deans at the likes of University of Idaho and Nebraska think Emory or Vanderbilt is a better school.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Supreme Court Justices...many were Ivy League credentialed but many were not. Justice Sandra Day OConnor went to Arizona. Justice Clarence Thomas went to Holy Cross. Justice Lewis Powell went to Washington and Lee.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Through 1990, no Supreme Court Justice had gone to a law school other than Harvard, Yale, Stanford, UChicago.</p>

70

<p>"$56,300, $116,000… Notre Dame (3.9)
$52,700, $93,000… U Michigan (4.5)"</p>

<p>Hawkette, what I find fascinating is that the average starting salary of Michigan Business and Engineering majors is $60,000. Since roughly 40% of undergrads hitting the work force immediately after graduating at the University of Michigan are enrolled in the CoE and Ross, the average salary of LSA majors would have to be roughly $40,000. That sounds a little low, but it is plausible. </p>

<p>The average starting salary of Notre Dame Business and Engineering majors is $55,000. Since roughly 40% of undergrads hitting the workforce immediately after graduation at Notre Dame are enrolled in the CoE and Mendoza, the average starting salary of Arts and Science majors at Notre Dame has to be around $58,000. Now that does not sound likely. Arts and Science majors almost never outearn Engineering or Business majors (as a collective that is) when fresh out of college.</p>

<p>There is something strange and very wrong about this WSJ report.</p>

<p>I would personally love to see industry give its $0.02 on undergraduate institutions. Perhaps a reliable source could send a survey similar to the USNWR PA to the top 10 companies in 10 key industries (Accoutning, Aerospace, Biotech, Consulting, Information technology, Investment Banking, Manufacturing, Pharmaceuticals and a couple more) in 6 key regions (Northeast, South, Midwest, Great Planes, West, California)</p>

71

<p>nocousin,
I appreciate your attempt to bring balance to the discussion and your points are well made and it may surprise you that I agree with you. I'm giggling, however, that when one makes a subjective decision to include salary data as part of their evaluation of a school, this is seen by some as inappropriate. And yet there are those (probably the same folks who object to the use of information like the Payscale data) who think that PA scoring and the truths that are found therein are universal and must be accepted as "the word" about a college's standing. Hah! </p>

<p>As you may know, I like data points and the Payscale data is useful for those of us who care about measurable student outcomes and what they might say about a college and its graduates. It has flaws and it's certainly not universally applicable, eg, your Oberlin example, and all students will make their own judgments about the value of money and the connection that they place on the college to their individual outcome. But the Payscale data is valuable to consider when some make grandiose claims about the prospective (and better) pots of gold awaiting their graduates, especially when the data does not support such a claim.</p>

72

<p>another michigan vs. second-rate private warfare....</p>

<p>my take on this... I've been following usnews rankings for 9 years, elite publics, meaning Berk/UCLA/Michigan/UVA will stay within and around top 25, between 17-28, usnews is a business if these powerhouse schools are ranked any lower, they will have a tough time maintaining credibility, thus in that case people will start caring less about it.</p>

<p>There are usually very few big movements, it's probably about time for WUSTL/Upenn to come down for the same reasons listed above.</p>

73

<p>
[quote]
If you believe that the numbers presented show agreement between how PA voters rank colleges and how employers see their graduates, then we just interpret the data differently. Focusing just on your U Michigan and its comparison with ND, I really struggle to see how you can reach this conclusion.</p>

<p>$56,300, $116,000… Notre Dame (3.9)
$52,700, $93,000… U Michigan (4.5)</p>

<p>or how about a state university vs a state university</p>

<p>$52,000, $95,000… U Maryland (3.6)
$52,700, $103,000…U Virginia (4.3)

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Here's how I reach that conclusion.</p>

<p>PA says that U-M is a distinguished school.
Salaries suggest that employers think U-M is a good school. </p>

<p>Ergo, agreement.</p>

<p>PA suggests that Maryland is a distinguished school, just less than UVa. Same with Notre Dame vs. Michigan.
Salaries suggest employers find them equally good, and even give an edge to Notre Dame over Michigan.</p>

<p>Ergo, employers don't agree 100% with the PA distinctions made between the schools, but they agree that all four of the institutions are good (because IMO, those are all good salaries).</p>

<p>This is certainly not perfect agreement, but neither is it evidence that employers are largely "AT ODDS WITH" PA. I'll just repeat what i said above: </p>

<p>Employers & academics largely agree. Employers, in recruiting and setting salaries, may not draw the same degree of distinction that academics must when they are given a five-point scale and asked to differentiate their peers, but that does not mean that their attitudes are opposite or uncorrelated. </p>

<p>If you had some examples where graduates from schools rated lower than a 3.0 were exceeding graduates from schools rated well above that, then I'd be more likely to agree that employers and academics really do differ.</p>

<p>Frankly, I think our positions are similar--*students would be foolish to assume that graduating from a school rated, say, 4.3 - 4.5 was going to materially better their resume when compared to a school rated just a little lower. * The evidence, as you've shown, says otherwise. But where we differ is in your contention that employers don't share academics' overall estimation of quality. It looks to me like they roughly agree! A degree from Notre Dame or Michigan appears to be more impressive to employers AND to academics than one from Chadron State.</p>

74

<p>"I don't know if UMichigan is going to helped that much by cost of living adjustments considering that it comes in as #86 at the top 25%ile level and similarly at the top 10% level."</p>

<p>Gellino, I find all the figures questionable, not just Michigan's. There needs to be some serious cleaning and qualifying before releasing such figures. Having a few alums report their salaries regardless of location will give a very narrow, limited and partial view of a very complex and large picture.</p>

75

<p>gellino,
Where are you finding the data for the 10% and 25% and other percentiles? </p>

<p>alex,<br>
Engineering and business do not represent 40% of the undergrads at U Michigan. From the latest CDS for graduates from U Michigan, the facts are:</p>

<p>15% Engineering
6% Business & Marketing</p>

<p>Now to reach your 40% estimate, if you are adjusting your figures to exclude those who you believe are headed directly for graduate study, you would need to assume that nearly half (over 3000 students) of the graduating class is doing that. For starters, I doubt that it is anywhere near that high. Second, most high level colleges send a lot of students on for graduate study. U Michigan is certainly not unique in this regard. </p>

<p>keefer,
Your disparaging comment about "second-rate privates" is pretty big talk given that students from many of these schools compete pretty effectively in the real world with graduates of your U Michigan. </p>

<p>hoedown,
I don't know the numbers for the Chadron State comparison, but isn't it interesting that, for mid-career earnings, graduates of Eastern Michigan ($72,100) are closer to U Michigan ($93,000) than U Michigan is to Notre Dame ($116,000).</p>

76

<p>
[quote]
Gellino, I find all the figures questionable, not just Michigan's. There needs to be some serious cleaning and qualifying before releasing such figures. Having a few alums report their salaries regardless of location will give a very narrow, limited and partial view of a very complex and large picture.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>As opposed to asking some deans located hundreds to thousands of miles away about the relative differences between schools and then making the cumulative result the largest factor in compiling college rankings? I would bet if you ran a regression of PA vs SAT and median midcareer salary vs SAT that the latter would have a higher correlation. It seems intuitive to me that employers, grad schools and applicants would care more about differences in the student body than the faculty and facilities at schools. I certainly know I did when applying to schools.</p>

<p>The figures for top 25%ile and top 10%ile were in the same chart as median salary in the columns further to the right.</p>

77

<p>
[quote]

I don't know the numbers for the Chadron State comparison, but isn't it interesting that, for mid-career earnings, graduates of Eastern Michigan ($72,100) are closer to U Michigan ($93,000) than U Michigan is to Notre Dame ($116,000).

[/quote]
</p>

<p>It seems consistent with the idea that the further out you get from college, the less the name of your school matters. A big-name school can help you get your foot in the door, but as time goes by one increasingly relies on the connections and accomplishments acquired after graduation. The only thing I find surprising about the EMU data is that EMU is a former normal school and continues to train many teachers. I would expect that to suppress their salary averages when compared to schools like Michigan which has an engineering school.</p>

78

<p>What is a normal school and what now makes it former?</p>

79

<p>^ "Normal school" is an old-fashioned name for a school to train teachers in elementary and secondary education. Eastern Michigan University was founded in 1849 as "Michigan State Normal School," the sixth teacher-training school in the nation, offering two courses of study: classics and English. In 1899 it became Michigan State Normal College; in 1956 it was renamed "Eastern Michigan College" (Michigan had several other teacher-training schools by then in other parts of the state), and in 1959 it became "Eastern Michigan University" in recognition of the fact that it was no longer exclusively a school of education, adding a College of Arts & Sciences and a Graduate School. It subsequently added a business school, a College of Health and Human Services, and a College of Technology. Thus it's fair to say it's a "former normal school"---though that's not to say it's become somehow "abnormal."</p>

80

<p>^Ah, got it. I just thought those types of schools were called state teachers colleges, but see the reason for the confusion.</p>