Combining Multiple Undergrad Rankings To Get One! Interesting Results

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In which universe UF is better than UCSD?[/quote

You have no idea what you are talking about. UF is under ranked in this analysis because if the stupid inclusion on Niche. Florida is a great school and getting better every year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Doesn't the Harvard manager just tell the MIT grad to fix their engine?

Harvard 10 year out median earning: $84,918
https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/school/?166027-Harvard-University

MIT 10 year out medina earning: $111,222
https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/school/?166683-Massachusetts-Institute-of-Technology

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Doesn't the Harvard manager just tell the MIT grad to fix their engine?

Harvard 10 year out median earning: $84,918
https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/school/?166027-Harvard-University

MIT 10 year out medina earning: $111,222
https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/school/?166683-Massachusetts-Institute-of-Technology

Do you think that is a useful comparison? MIT being a niche school (yes, they have some pretty good econ and poly sci students too) skews their earnings data significantly. You should be comparing by department or area not by school. Stanford, for example, has the highest paid CS grads of any school but it also isn't close to MIT using that metric (~$98k) because they have large numbers of students self selecting into other areas.

[Anonymous]

People referring to broad university-wide earnings data for schools are borderline clueless. It is one of the reasons "output driven" rankings using the metric get so misunderstood. The Dept. of Ed. hasn't exactly helped either though their hearts were in the right place with these scorecards and the debt issues students encounter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Doesn't the Harvard manager just tell the MIT grad to fix their engine?

Harvard 10 year out median earning: $84,918
https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/school/?166027-Harvard-University

MIT 10 year out medina earning: $111,222
https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/school/?166683-Massachusetts-Institute-of-Technology

Do you think that is a useful comparison? MIT being a niche school (yes, they have some pretty good econ and poly sci students too) skews their earnings data significantly. You should be comparing by department or area not by school. Stanford, for example, has the highest paid CS grads of any school but it also isn't close to MIT using that metric (~$98k) because they have large numbers of students self selecting into other areas.

Last time I checked CalTech and UC Berkeley are above Stanford,

http://www.ivyachievement.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/IvyAchievement-CS-Employment-Top-40.png

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Having good engineering schools is overrated (especially for undergrads). All you really need is fairly good CS at this point.

wut?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In which universe UF is better than UCSD?

I think everyone knows UF is better than UCSD, not really close but where is UT, better than both?? Agree with rankings for UVA, UNC, and rest of publics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Doesn't the Harvard manager just tell the MIT grad to fix their engine?

Harvard 10 year out median earning: $84,918
https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/school/?166027-Harvard-University

MIT 10 year out medina earning: $111,222
https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/school/?166683-Massachusetts-Institute-of-Technology

Do you think that is a useful comparison? MIT being a niche school (yes, they have some pretty good econ and poly sci students too) skews their earnings data significantly. You should be comparing by department or area not by school. Stanford, for example, has the highest paid CS grads of any school but it also isn't close to MIT using that metric (~$98k) because they have large numbers of students self selecting into other areas.

Last time I checked CalTech and UC Berkeley are above Stanford,

http://www.ivyachievement.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/IvyAchievement-CS-Employment-Top-40.png

Median starting salary for Stanford University graduates in CS: $119,000 (much higher than the number your source has too)
https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/slideshows/10-college-majors-with-the-highest-starting-salaries?slide=10

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Having good engineering schools is overrated (especially for undergrads). All you really need is fairly good CS at this point.

wut?

The word "engineering" is even becoming narrowed meaning wise and associated with the Boomer gen. X science or Y technology are the ways new or cross functional areas are branded.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Doesn't the Harvard manager just tell the MIT grad to fix their engine?

Harvard 10 year out median earning: $84,918
https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/school/?166027-Harvard-University

MIT 10 year out medina earning: $111,222
https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/school/?166683-Massachusetts-Institute-of-Technology

Do you think that is a useful comparison? MIT being a niche school (yes, they have some pretty good econ and poly sci students too) skews their earnings data significantly. You should be comparing by department or area not by school. Stanford, for example, has the highest paid CS grads of any school but it also isn't close to MIT using that metric (~$98k) because they have large numbers of students self selecting into other areas.

Last time I checked CalTech and UC Berkeley are above Stanford,

http://www.ivyachievement.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/IvyAchievement-CS-Employment-Top-40.png

Median starting salary for Stanford University graduates in CS: $119,000 (much higher than the number your source has too)
https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/slideshows/10-college-majors-with-the-highest-starting-salaries?slide=10

Starting salary isn’t even the best metric. Lots of graduates from top schools now are trying to make their own startups or joining small startups hoping they find the next big company. Their salaries on paper end up being lower, but their stock options (which are not accounted for by gov data) could end up being worth a lot. Although they could also end up being worth close to nothing, but still even somewhat established companies will try to lure these top grads with attractive stock

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Saw this and thought it was interesting. Basically someone took the average ranking of each college from these sources and created a composite rank for each school relative to all the other schools. It was noted schools like Georgetown and Duke were underranked by US News and schools like UChicago and JHU were overranked. Some of these rankings included focus more on academics and some more on ROI, so with a composite I believe the idea was to see which schools excel in all the important metrics for undergrad.

UNC jumping over UVA probably has some people miffed LOL

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:niche??? lol

I think Niche is important to include because it’s the only ranking that actually considers quality of life and students’ opinions about a school. That’s pretty important if you ask me

almost equivalent to a dcurbanmom ranking

But Admissions offices DO pay attention to qualitative info on Niche, like reviews that can't be scrubbed and politics on campus. Also, acceptance by subjects--not overall school--are helpful.

Not perfect or exhaustive, but after applying to 10 schools, the profile info and non- academic rankings were helpful and the site was easy for my kid to use. Just one of several resources.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:niche??? lol

I think Niche is important to include because it’s the only ranking that actually considers quality of life and students’ opinions about a school. That’s pretty important if you ask me

almost equivalent to a dcurbanmom ranking

But Admissions offices DO pay attention to qualitative info on Niche, like reviews that can't be scrubbed and politics on campus. Also, acceptance by subjects--not overall school--are helpful.

Not perfect or exhaustive, but after applying to 10 schools, the profile info and non- academic rankings were helpful and the site was easy for my kid to use. Just one of several resources.

+1 also useful for HS research

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Having good engineering schools is overrated (especially for undergrads). All you really need is fairly good CS at this point.

wut?

The word "engineering" is even becoming narrowed meaning wise and associated with the Boomer gen. X science or Y technology are the ways new or cross functional areas are branded.

+1 but having an engineering background is still useful for working on physical products

[Anonymous]

Can't and won't understand how USCw averages as a top 30. They were barely 50ish a couple or so decades ago, right? Really not sure what WSJ is seeing.