Bloomberg ROI metric for top 25 schools

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP, Why does Northwestern U have such a bad ROI?

Kids there major in easy stuff like communications, psychology, journalism, theater, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP, Why does Northwestern U have such a bad ROI?

Kids there major in easy stuff like communications, psychology, journalism, theater, etc.

Easy way out

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Once again, this list, which is the same list as the WSJ list thread only pulls numbers "For undergraduate students receiving federal financial aid".

That is why the list doesn't mean what you think it means, OP. Did you even bother reading that part?

There are lots of donut families who don't receive federal aid.

There are families who pay for college with 529.

Typically, state univ are cheaper and don't require that much federal aid.

So, once again, that metric is really only meaningful if you take federal loans. The majority of students/families do not take out federal loans.

Now, do you understand why this list is meaningless?

Once again you are totally backward and wrong.
This is for anyone who received/used any form of federal program - grant, subsidized loan, unsubsidized loan, plus loan.
Donut families are likely to use Federal parent plus loans.
34% of undergraduate students receive a Pell grant alone.
The Majority gets one or more of these.

Nobody cares about where Trump's son goes, what he majors, and what he makes after graduation.
Probably making multi millions right after college working for his dad.
This data actually eliminates these kinds of people that often skew the real number for real people.

The data comes from IRS, loan servicing companies, etc. rather than 'self-reporting' numbers by schools.
This is the most reliable income data worth referencing for low income, mid class, umc folks.

Once again, the list only includes those who get federal money. Lots of donut hole families and public state u students don't get that.

So the data is eliminating not just the Trumps of the world, but also UMC/MC families with zero federal money, and/or families who take private but not federal loans. Those exist, too. We're a donut family. We applied for FAFSA. We got zilch. But, we are not taking out any loans because DC is going to an in state college with merit.

You can also see that the majority of the schools on that list are stupid expensive, so the students probably needed more financial aid. The list also looks at income 10 years out, so that will include people who have gone on to masters degrees, law, medical, etc..

The list is mixing people who have graduate with just undergrad degrees. It doesn't make any sense.

If you want to compare apples to applies, then compare just undergrad degree earners, not masters.

Data analysis is important.

OP's list school as a whole.

It provides info by major which is more helpful.

No data or statistics is perfect, but this is the best source out there to reference.

You can choose to ignore.

Once again, the data mixes undergrad with grad.

By major is 3 year out.
You can argue about folks going to grad schools, but this is the best source.
Use it to your advantage.

? The list shows earnings 10 years out, not 3.

https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/data/glossary/

"The median annual earnings of individuals who received federal financial aid during their studies and completed an award at the indicated field of study. To be included in the median earnings calculation, the individuals needed to be working and not be enrolled in school during the year when earnings are measured. Median earnings are measured in the fourth full year after the student completed their award.

These data are based on school-reported information about students’ program of completion. The U.S. Department of Education cannot fully confirm the completeness of these reported data for this school.

For schools with multiple locations, this information is based on all of their locations."

But the OP's link to Bloomberg shows "median earnings 10 years after starting college".

So, that would include a masters, unless people are taking 6 years to graduate.

The list is mixing people earning masters with people earning undergrad only. Apples to oranges comparison.

[Anonymous]

NU seems overrated based on investment and return

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Once again, this list, which is the same list as the WSJ list thread only pulls numbers "For undergraduate students receiving federal financial aid".

That is why the list doesn't mean what you think it means, OP. Did you even bother reading that part?

There are lots of donut families who don't receive federal aid.

There are families who pay for college with 529.

Typically, state univ are cheaper and don't require that much federal aid.

So, once again, that metric is really only meaningful if you take federal loans. The majority of students/families do not take out federal loans.

Now, do you understand why this list is meaningless?

Once again you are totally backward and wrong.
This is for anyone who received/used any form of federal program - grant, subsidized loan, unsubsidized loan, plus loan.
Donut families are likely to use Federal parent plus loans.
34% of undergraduate students receive a Pell grant alone.
The Majority gets one or more of these.

Nobody cares about where Trump's son goes, what he majors, and what he makes after graduation.
Probably making multi millions right after college working for his dad.
This data actually eliminates these kinds of people that often skew the real number for real people.

The data comes from IRS, loan servicing companies, etc. rather than 'self-reporting' numbers by schools.
This is the most reliable income data worth referencing for low income, mid class, umc folks.

Once again, the list only includes those who get federal money. Lots of donut hole families and public state u students don't get that.

So the data is eliminating not just the Trumps of the world, but also UMC/MC families with zero federal money, and/or families who take private but not federal loans. Those exist, too. We're a donut family. We applied for FAFSA. We got zilch. But, we are not taking out any loans because DC is going to an in state college with merit.

You can also see that the majority of the schools on that list are stupid expensive, so the students probably needed more financial aid. The list also looks at income 10 years out, so that will include people who have gone on to masters degrees, law, medical, etc..

The list is mixing people who have graduate with just undergrad degrees. It doesn't make any sense.

If you want to compare apples to applies, then compare just undergrad degree earners, not masters.

Data analysis is important.

OP's list school as a whole.

It provides info by major which is more helpful.

No data or statistics is perfect, but this is the best source out there to reference.

You can choose to ignore.

Once again, the data mixes undergrad with grad.

By major is 3 year out.
You can argue about folks going to grad schools, but this is the best source.
Use it to your advantage.

? The list shows earnings 10 years out, not 3.

https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/data/glossary/

"The median annual earnings of individuals who received federal financial aid during their studies and completed an award at the indicated field of study. To be included in the median earnings calculation, the individuals needed to be working and not be enrolled in school during the year when earnings are measured. Median earnings are measured in the fourth full year after the student completed their award.

These data are based on school-reported information about students’ program of completion. The U.S. Department of Education cannot fully confirm the completeness of these reported data for this school.

For schools with multiple locations, this information is based on all of their locations."

But the OP's link to Bloomberg shows "median earnings 10 years after starting college".

So, that would include a masters, unless people are taking 6 years to graduate.

The list is mixing people earning masters with people earning undergrad only. Apples to oranges comparison.

It provides median salary for the school as a whole - 10 years out
It also provides median for specific field of studies at the school - That's 4 years out

[Anonymous]

The cost info is interesting, but the median earnings data is useless. It's heavily influenced by majors and geographic location.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The cost info is interesting, but the median earnings data is useless. It's heavily influenced by majors and geographic location.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP, Why does Northwestern U have such a bad ROI?

Kids there major in easy stuff like communications, psychology, journalism, theater, etc.

That description makes Northwestern sound like a “party school.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The cost info is interesting, but the median earnings data is useless. It's heavily influenced by majors and geographic location.

I find it very much useful. It's the best source for income and outcome information.
You can easily take location into an account on the side.

In fact, the data and information is mainly for specific fields of study.

You can see GMU CS > Harvard English
Until this information, people have blindly assumed Harvard English >>> GMU CS

It's not exact science. Any data and information is open to further interpretation.
Use it to your advantage.