Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Political Discussion
Reply to "Hiring freeze in academia"
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]So, the University of California, *not* all of academia.[/quote] Stanford University, MIT, Northwestern University, Cornell University, University of Notre Dame, Emory University, University of Washington, and North Carolina State University are among other institutions that have announced either full or partial hiring freezes. You should expect more to follow suit. [/quote] Anyone who knows anything about academe knows that this has been going on since the pandemic when enrollment continued its trend of falling off the cliff. A college education has become too expensive and the cost benefit analysis is not always in the favor of throwing yourself into debt for 10 years.[/quote] The "folk wisdom" on this is total bullshit. Even accounting for the huge differences between the average student who goes to college and one who does not, there is very good evidence from very good administrative data that going to college causes one's earnings to go up, even for the most marginal students. See, e.g., https://www.nber.org/papers/w32296 Also notice in that paper that it's not just the individual rate of return to college students that is large. The "social" rate of return is large too. That's another way of saying that when people spread this folk wisdom to discourage people from going to college, they are making the world worse off, full stop.[/quote] Does that account that marginally admitted students are likely more well off to begin with. You know like the Varsity Blues sting where rich kids were cheating to get in. I was the opposite I was an exceptional student with a free ride(with fafsa), but very little return on the college degree. It took me nearly ten years to get a job in the field and am still making median wages for my area. Higher education is nothing but a social sorting system.[/quote] Actually, yes, the study does deal with this pretty effectively, although the potential issue is kind of the opposite of what you're implying. The study is using the various SAT/ACT cutoffs at public schools in Texas, only comparing people who are within a few test score points of the cutoff. These cutoffs have a big impact on admissions probability, but they are imperfect, because some students get in anyway (Figure 2). The students just above and below the cutoff look almost identical across all all the observable characteristics in the data (Figures 3 and 4), so there isn't an obvious bump that would exist if, for example, wealthier families were cheating on the SATs to get above the cutoff. But, since the cutoffs aren't 100% binding, there is still a concern that wealthier families might be finding other ways to get in despite being below the SAT/ACT cutoffs. The standard econ toolkit in this case adjusts for this by statistically identifying "compliers", i.e. people who only go if they exceed the cutoff, because they don't find another way in. Comparing columns 4 and 5 of table 1, you can see that although the compliers are pretty similar to the other marginal applicants, there is some suggestive evidence that they may be a bit more economically disadvantaged. For example, compliers are more likely to be black and a bit less likely to be male. But, the key thing is, the estimated effects of scoring above the threshold are for these compliers. In other words, this study measures the impact precisely on a subset of students that are not able to otherwise game the system, to use your words. More importantly, if the study is doing a bad job of this statistical adjustment (I don't think it is), then the estimated impact of going to college would likely be underestimated, not overestimated as you're suggesting. This is because SAT/ACT scores have a weaker relationship to eventual college attendance among wealthier people, so you'd be capturing some of the earnings effects of going to college in both sides of the cutoff tl;dr yes the research is good. You have the link. Read the paper and quit with the folk wisdom bullshitting that is harming high school graduates by talking them out of one of the best investments they can make.[/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics