College Board

It is about time that someone called the College Board on it’s madison avenue use of statistics. With one half a billion dollars in annual revenues, this non-profit lacks the intregity to put the public interest above its own sales. Thanks to Mr. Miller.

Bill Coplin, Professor at Syracuse University, at 7:30 am EDT on April 7, 2008

Reality — what a concept

Ask 20 economists, get 20 different answers.

If The College Board (and anyone else) is so certain of its claim of $1MM — let them lend money to students instead of taxpayers.

After all — if they are right, they will make money. If not — that’s on them, not the majority of taxpayers who do NOT go to college.

Reality: CB is not sure of enough of its claim to lend anyone a dime.

Any post-high school effort requiring discipline (e.g., military, work) will increase earnings. Academics without discipline creates very little.

L.L., at 8:35 am EDT on April 7, 2008

The value of a college degree

Increased lifetime earnings for holders of a college degree: $280K-$1M.

Actual value of a college degree: priceless.

Self-discovery and self-transformation have a worth that’s beyond price.

Nancy Matchett, at 9:35 am EDT on April 7, 2008

If there is any “twisting the argument” it would be more accurately aimed at the higher education establishment rather than at Mr. Miller. What exactly is so unique about the enterprise of college education that underpins the more than double inflation rate increases in tuition every year over the past 15 years? Has the quality of that education improved in a comparable fashion? The truth be told, you would find that a bachelors degree today is generally more comparable to an associates degree of 30 years past and a survey of employers who hire these graduates would offer support for that observation. Of course we have little data in that regard because any serious effort at “measuring student outcomes” continues to be met with hostility by those who profess the greatest regard for academe while standing idle as it continues to decline for the lack of thoughtful accountability.

RJW, at 9:35 am EDT on April 7, 2008

College Isn’t Worth a Million Dollars

Regardless of the actual financial benefit to the individual who earns a college degree, have we forgotten to inject into this important debate just a few of the additional benefits of earning a degree-learning to solve problems, better articulate ideas, engage in classroom discussion with folks from all over the world? An important part of this discussion must also include the real reduction in federal aid to our nation’s higher educational system over the past three decades.Should not the responsibility lie in all of us? the colleges and universities, tax payers, families, foundations,etc. to share the cost?

Mitchell Lipton, Dean of Admissions at Cooper Union, at 9:50 am EDT on April 7, 2008

Different strokes for different folks

1) Building on Glen S. McGhee’s point that a lot of the value is in credentialing, say that student x gets a degree and then gets a job that pays $1M more over a lifetime than student y without a degree. If the degree is of no intrinsic value, than if x hadn’t gotten the degree, y could have gotten the job instead. So the degree offered no net gain to society, only a gain to student x over student y. A lot of the value to the individual is probably of this nature since a lot of college graduate jobs don’t use more than high school skills. (And who would you really rather hire if you had to employ someone for life, a strong HS graduate or a weak college graduate?)

2) When students go to college really to learn, I suspect their growth does result in greater productivity. To become a physician without post-secondary education seems impossible. But students who just want to get through with as little work as possible (and I have had some of these) are no better prepared for the workforce after sitting passively for 4 years than they were before.

3) People who want to make decent money can find ways to do it without an expensive degree. When I employ a plumber, carpenter, or mechanic, their rate per hour is a lot higher than mine. For entrepreneurs, good basic HS skills and the ability to read books about marketing and so on are probably sufficient and getting 4 years extra experience and income, and 4 years less debt, is a big headstart.

I went to a subsidized state school, would do it a gain, and went on for graduate degrees with stipends. But if I had to do it again, and I had to pay full fare (or if I could have just gotten the cash instead!), I’m not so sure I would. My brain at 18 was not so different from what it is now. I could have bought a condo, holed up inside it and read books and tinkered around, and after 4 years emerged with knowledge and a condo!

Mr. Drummond, at 10:30 am EDT on April 7, 2008

The average NBA player is 6′7″ while the average height for males in the US in somewhere around 5′11″. Therefore if we want to raise the height of US males we should expand opportunities to play in the NBA.

This doesn’t make much sense does it? While it is not exactly the same argument for increasing college enrollment it is pretty close. This is because of the way IQ is distributed within the population (See http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110009531 for and explanation). Maybe what is not needed is college traditionally defined but more diverse learning and training opportunities for people who do not have the ability and/or desire to earn a bachelor degree.

Brent, at 10:30 am EDT on April 7, 2008

Liberal Arts Degrees Aren’t

Not all college degrees are created equal. Science and technology are demonstrably more difficult than the humanities. Foe example, engineers read literature, while most liberal arts students don’t read engineering. Medical doctors, engineers, and other degrees which lead to professional employment (and I don’t include teaching), provide the premium. Any degree with “studies” in the title won’t pay for itself, btw. Bring back quality vocational education in the high schools and fewer kids will need to go to college. It can be done and is cheaper than the alternative.Self-knowledge while priceless, is not a required outcome of a college education. Get access to the web and read the books in the Harvard Library series. Most are available free, even from your public library.

Re: Wellness centers and obesity. College students weren’t obese until recently. We didn’t need these frills then and don’t now. Like I tell my kids, “Go outside and play.” It’s that simple. The bigger point is that college salaries, benefits and featherbedding run contrary to the trends in our society at large. Being a tenured professor is a pretty sweet deal if you can get there. It shouldn’t be. Dump the unions and tenure and we’re half way to a solution. It takes managerial will to do this, and a political environment where the politicians understand they’ll be thrown out of office if they don’t cut costs.

R. Vance, SBCC, at 10:40 am EDT on April 7, 2008

Here’s the bottom line: college is not worth a million dollars, but students need college degrees because employers require them. In addition, the problem is that too many students are paying too much for their degrees, and amassing unmanageable levels of debt to do so.

The College Board adds to this problem by inflating the value of a college degree, rather than encouraging students to pursue affordable college costs. Baum says that her report includes the offending data only in a footnote, but as recently as Education Pays 2004 this information was featured prominently, in charts and bullet points (Google it and see pages 10 and 11).

The College Board also recently released a report (also by Sandy Baum!) saying that a college education leads to better health — see http://nosuckerleftbehind.blogspo...h-college-board-says-college-is.html — despite the fact that this report only found a statistical correlation, not causation. The fact of the matter is that the College Board should be barred from releasing these kinds of studies. The Board is clearly biased and should be investigated by Andrew Cuomo and Benjamin Lawsky. The Board has a clear conflict of interest, because it makes more money when students go to college.

Back to the issue at hand: the danger in overstating the financial value of college is that it encourages students and families to pay more for their degrees (leading many to unmanageable debt). Instead, we all need to encourage students to pursue affordable degrees at the lowest possible costs.

Author, No Sucker Left Behind, at 10:40 am EDT on April 7, 2008

The people who go to college would have earned more anyway

From the article, it seems they are comparing the lifetime earnings of people who go to college to the lifetime earnings of people who don’t. If that’s so, its much more vastly flawed than through using incorrect discounting. Presumably, the people who go to college are on average much smarter and more motivated people than the people who don’t. If those same people skipped college, they might earn more than if they went. In any case, the numbers quoted for the economic value of a college education, if they don’t attempt to control for the differences in the populations, are going to be vastly overstated.

Eric Baum, at 10:55 am EDT on April 7, 2008

Several Responses To Comments

First, as a mathematician/statistician/research methodologist, I detest the term “critical thinking.” As it is used in academe today, it typically means tip-toeing on the banks of the Great Lake of Mathematics and Logic, splashing a little bit here and there ... but without ever jumping in and submerging oneself.

Second, while the educations of those who make their careers in higher education cannot be denied, their “exceptional” intelligence is certainly open to question. Of course I am not referring to intelligence as measured by the standard IQ tests that are so (academically) culturally biased, it’s quite ridiculous.

If you want to run into a high preponderance of “above average” critical thinkers, don’t waste your time dropping into your closest psychology department or philosophy department ... and certainly not your closest communications/English department. Instead, spend a weekend working with the plumbers and electricians at your closest construction site. And, by the way, I’m proposing that any decent definition of intelligence, measured by a culturally unbiased test, will demonstrate that there’s not a dime’s worth of difference between the “intelligence” of electricians (and maybe even plumbers) and the “intelligence” of university faculty. The only thing I’m willing to concede to university faculty is that lots of education hides a great many intellectual deficiencies (at least hides them from the general public).

Now, for T-bone’s silly comment (sorry Susan Alexander); to wit ...

“Individuals who have earned a bachelor’s degree report a lower unemployment rate, use seatbelts more often, have a longer life expectancy, participate in government assistance programs at lower rates, participate more in dentist visits and women’s health activities and art, movies and sporting events, and have children who score higher in elementary school tests.”

He could just as well have written ...

“Individuals who come from middle (or higher)-income backgrounds or come from higher socio-economic backgrounds tend to get a bachelor’s degree and report a lower unemployment rate, use seatbelts more often, have a longer life expectancy, participate in government assistance programs at lower rates, participate more in dentist visits and women’s health activities and art, movies and sporting events, and have children who score higher in elementary school tests.”

Much as I try, I cannot help comparing the comprehensive advantages of higher education to the comprehensive advantages of ethanol and other biofuels. Employ a little simple-minded statistics and you can make it appear to be quite wonderful. But look beneath the surface, recognizing that A is related to B ... and B to C ... and C to D ... etc. – and don’t forget to factor in all of the “substitution principles” – and you’ll find that the picture changes dramatically.

P.S. Don’t you just love the following statistics?

33 percent of high school graduates never read another book for the rest of their lives.

42 percent of college graduates never read another book after college.

80 percent of U.S. families did not buy or read a book last year.

70 percent of U.S. adults have not been in a bookstore in the last five years.

Gotta love that education!

Frizbane Manley, at 12:35 pm EDT on April 7, 2008

IQ

I’m not satisfied with Murray’s definition of IQ in the Wall Street Journal article linked by someone above. What is really meant by that? An individual’s brain changes in its abilities from infancy through old age, i.e. the ability to learn languages, innovate mathematically, integrate and de-compartmentalize knowledge later on. When is a given aspect of IQ being measured?

Seems to me every child needs to get off to the best possible start, which includes a family and community “discourse” that is “educated” in wholesome and productive ways, not relegated to the need for survival in an underground (or quasi underground) economy, or the need to survive despite being situated therein. I’m sure it is all-absorbing and greatly counteracts the ability to learn academically or otherwise. And it is pernicious to suggest, however faintly and indirectly, that people born into that situation must be somehow less intelligent, else they would escape.

We need to bring both education and democracy along simultaneously, which, I fear, means a resurgence of poor people’s movements (yes, in a globalized solidarity with working people of other countries), labor movements, radical restructuring of the economy, curtailing the power of corporate interests that usurp public and environmental needs and so on.

In short this political economy DICTATES. There’s too much wealth and power at the top (which involves exorbitant medical and education costs) and therefore too little at the bottom. What if the appeal to “IQ” is just another tactic of class warfare waged from above by yet another right-wing think tank trying to turn progressive populism into regressive populism? It’s painful to face this need for more democracy, isn’t it?

Susan Alexander, at 1:15 pm EDT on April 7, 2008

“Individuals who come from middle (or higher)-income backgrounds or come from higher socio-economic backgrounds tend to get a bachelor’s degree and report a lower unemployment rate, use seatbelts more often, have a longer life expectancy, participate in government assistance programs at lower rates, participate more in dentist visits and women’s health activities and art, movies and sporting events, and have children who score higher in elementary school tests.”

Ehhh, I’m not sure it’s the socio/economic thing so much as it is the better education that perpetuates the higher socio/economic advantage. Daddy & Mommy may be high paid lawyers, but if they don’t send Junior to college & get equivalent skills, he won’t get the kind of job that made Mom & Dad’s life so cushy. The backslide begins.

Andrea, at 3:25 pm EDT on April 7, 2008

College Marketing

click on ‘About Us’ on collegeboard.com:"The College Board is a not-for-profit membership association whose mission is to connect students to college success and opportunity. Founded in 1900, the association is composed of more than 5,400 schools, colleges, universities, and other educational organizations.”

IOW, CB is the marketing arm of 5400 institutions. Real estate agents connect buyers and sellers; CB connects students to colleges. However, just as a real estate agents works for the seller, not the buyer, CB works for the colleges, not the student. In the same way that the real estate industry touts the virtues of home ownership, (a dubious proposition lately), CB heralds the monetary advantages of a college education. As such I have always viewed the claims of CB regarding the value of a college education with the same skepticism as the claims of a real estate agent. While I recommend home ownership and higher education under the right conditions, there is no substitute for do your own research and validating every claim, especially the ones that promise to deliver the most.

justaguy, at 4:00 pm EDT on April 7, 2008

value of college degree

The main problem with calculating the value of a college degree is the wide dispersion of earnings of college graduates. The lowest quarter of college graduates earn less than about one-half of all those with only a two year degree.This indicates that for a student graduating with a low GPA from a weaker public college, there may be NO financial benefits.

robert cherry, professor at brooklyn college, at 4:45 pm EDT on April 7, 2008

A crucial problem

I would argue that a college education—for marginally qualified students has NEGATIVE value. Of course, people with college degrees earn more, but that’s because they’re more capable and well-connected to begin with. You could lock them in a closet for four years and they’d earn more. If you look at the pool of the non-college-bound, they did poorly in high school making them likely they’ll do even more poorly in college, becoming one of the millions who drop out of college, having learned little, acquired a mountain of debt, and having had their self-esteems assaulted. See my article on the subject that is coming out in 2 weeks in the Chronicle of Higher Ed. Or for an advance peek, go to this webpage: http://www.martynemko.com/article...ated-product-higher-education_id1539

Marty Nemko, Contributing Editor at U.S. News & World Report`, at 4:50 pm EDT on April 7, 2008

Dear Marty Nemko, Ph.D.,

Do you really believe that the more highly motivated and prepared students could be locked in a closet for four years and they’d still earn more? Even if one accepts that it’s not college classes that increase earning potential, many people feel that it’s the connections one makes in college that help your future career. Locking in a closet (or for that matter, working a blue- or pink-collar job for four years) is not the greatest way to build up the network that will allow you to move along in a career. Which is not to say that college is better than a blue or pink-collar job, but that it is now something you need if you don’t want to be stuck in a blue- or pink-collar job the rest of your life. I also think many people might actually learn something while there, if we could deter the transformation of college into business-vocational school.

Also, if the benefits of college credentials are marginal, why are the articles on your website bylined “Marty Nemko, Ph.D."?

Sincerely,

the Assistant Research Cynic (Ph.D.)

Assistant Research Cynic, Enormous State University, at 6:05 pm EDT on April 7, 2008

Marty is correct

“Do you really believe that the more highly motivated and prepared students could be locked in a closet for four years and they’d still earn more?”

Actually, there is a lot of psych-research about this topic that supports Marty’s position.

Notable college drop-outs: Bill Gates and Steve Woziak (finally finished — to avoid failure?), Paul Allen, Steve Jobs, Michael Dell, just to name a few, low-hanging examples.

Going to college is one thing. Doing the hard work to make a difference in the world is another. College costs eternally rising faster than mean-average rate of inflation is unsustainable and insane.

J.J., at 6:45 pm EDT on April 7, 2008

Value of College

In addition to the flawed financial analysis, the assumptiom is that people who do finish college are the same as those who don’t. People who finish college are more likely to be smart, high achievers from good high schools. They would probably make more money than average students who don’t go to college. College just didn’t screw them up too badly.

Bob Johnson, at 10:55 pm EDT on April 7, 2008

Tuition & other costs

Within 20 years, a lot of the third-tier schools are simply going to be gone.

95% of what I learned in three years of law school could have been better presented on a set of DVDs. Most people would learn more from a top instructor on a DVD than they would from a third-rater with a thick foreign accent in person. The Socratic method is highly overrated.

There will always be an Ivy League, and there will always be the flagship universities of the state system (UT-Austin, UCLA, etc.) but a lot of the other schools could be replaced by tutoring on-line from India for mathmatics, DVDs, CDs, etc.

Many schools have been financially irresponsible by building Taj Mahal dormitories, and by building enough classrooms so that even the junior professors don’t have to teach courses in unpopular time slots.

There may not be a substitute for teaching chemistry in a school laboratory setting, but a lot of other courses could be taught in other ways.

It all boils down to the schools being the ones to pass out credentials which are now required to get any sort of decent office job in our society. It’s a shame, but I don’t think the university cartel will hold together much longer. The English only require three years of university to get a degree — there is no reason why nearly every university in America requires four years.

Skeptic, at 10:55 pm EDT on April 7, 2008

Yeah, it’s right for me...

Just did the math, and yeah it’s right on. I’m 38 and figure I’ve got another 20 years left, at least...by my estimate, I’m making about $50K more than without my two degrees (both Humanities), so one million is spot on. And that’s just for the remainder of my career.

DGarza, at 11:40 am EDT on April 8, 2008

Maybe it is time to return to the wisdom of Ronbert Maynard Hutchins:Cclose down all our colleges and universities — forever. It is obviously very simple, as any undergraduate would readily explain. No doubt that explains why so many of them go on to get baccalaureate degrees — and MAs or MSs or PhDs.

RBG, at 5:55 pm EDT on April 8, 2008

“College Isn’t Worth a Million Dollars”

When the Pilgrims established Harvard College, they did not claim that the education was “Worth a Million Dollars.” Its purpose was to give the students the education that they needed to be of service to others, as teachers, ministers or other service to humanity, including being a better parent and good citizen. My colleagues in the Business Department say that some of their students state that they are not there for an “education,” but for a degree to get them a high paying job in business. Some of them wonder if their classes will be “Worth a Million Dollars” in their future earnings, rather than what they can learn to make them serve their future customers in a better manner. In the Education field, we try to instill that motivation to be a teacher to help their students be of service to society. Have our schools failed? Yes, when we look at the business men and women on “Wall Street” who have been dishonest. In our own community, three former directors of the local Boys & Girls Club are being charged with stealing money from the Club. In the Political area, the newspapers currently report some congressmen who have taken bribes. The former Governor of NY lost his position because he did not live up to the ethical principles of being faithful to his wife that are inscribed in the traditions of Harvard and all other legitimate schools. If the President of ETS is arguing for the monetary value of a college education, then he should read the purpose that Carnegie had in mind when he gave money to help establish that institution. It was not to help them get into a “prestigious” school to make more money. If he does not want to promote the true goals for which ETS was established, then he should resign or else the Board should replace him. I hope that he will rise to the true goals of ETS. Thomas Jefferson set us a good example by learning to read well enough to gain the insights that enabled him to draft the Declaration of Independence and then promote those ideals in his service to others. Unfortunately, that is not what some of his biographers have stressed, but it is what we should stress to ourselves and to our students. The comic strip “Frazz” emphasizes the value of using one’s education to be of service to others, regardless of our occupation, providing we are in an occupation that is of benefit to others in some manner. Our college education should enable us to earn money for the ultimate purpose of helping others in ways that will be of most benefit to them, including our families and all of our “neighbors” (when that term is used in its scriptural sense).Bruce G Rogers, Professor Emeritus, U of N IA

Bruce Rogers, Professor Emeritus at U of N IA, at 4:00 pm EDT on April 9, 2008

Let’s find some middle ground about higher ed

First of all, there’s at least something to be said about responsible use of statistics in arguing for the benefits (or lack thereof) associated with higher education. Mean (what seems to have been computed by the Census for earnings, and quoted by CB) is only one type of average, and it can be distorted by extreme data points. The University of Virginia was, once upon a time, taken to task for computing Ralph Sampson’s salary (as arguably, the first NBA superstar) in with its other Rhetoric department graduates, thereby inflating the Rhetoric earnings average to be higher than that of the Chemical Engineering majors. One can only hope that while that error persisted (it has long since been corrected) no Chemical Engineers changed their major to Rhetoric with an eye to the increased income.

In regard to statistics, several contributors mentioned as well that correlation does not imply causation (thanks!)-though I suspect world views about social justice are getting in the way of this point: some people, due to good genes, supportive families, responsive upbringing, challenging high school environment, or what have you, are more likely to succeed in college than others with similar ambitions. So does education really help people have better lives (I believe this was the point of the quote about health, seatbelts, earnings etc), or do people who were already primed for better lives find education is part of the plan anyway? I have not seen any study that has teased apart the strands of this snarl.

I guess the main thing is to realize that there are hidden structural problems associated with higher educational opportunity in the US. What’s not fair is that our higher ed system conceals the structural problems and in league with businesses like College Board (remember, it’s dot com), stand to operate so frequently at the expense of the little guy and those who are already disenfranchised. We do need to work consistently to address the underlying conditions — prejudice, poverty, poorly performing high schools and other social factors — that make the differences among individuals so pronounced as to eclipse individual efforts. However, trying to get everyone into college is a nonsensical response.

All it all, parents of school age children should treat the statistics about the value of education with great caution, and look into what happens in the market where they expect their child to be employed. Better still, they should help their child assess his/her personalities, skills and inclinations as well as the job market. What does the student find interesting? What motivates the students to work hard? (One overlooked statistic is that “hours worked” is also highly correlated with earnings.) I found peppered throughout the responses to this article a lot of use of the word “only” to qualify jobs that provide a good living for many good people. One responder used the phrase “pink or blue collar” as if that is some kind of cruel imprisonment. I know people who love their work as carpenters, hairdressers, and and truck drivers. In fact, much of our economy revolves around the work contribution of dental hygienists, AC repairpersons, entrepreneurs, administrative assistants, power plant operators,x-ray technicians and the like — all of whom can gain their training in much lower cost ways than the 4-year academic route. I hope they are good citizens, responsible family members and have healthy lives, and I would absolutely decline (as I hope many of the responders would) to judge in area of quality of life solely on career choice or level of formal education.

For those who love learning, a four-year degree may be a great opportunity without regard to cost. But as another respondent pointed out, public libraries have shelves full of great books and rooms packed with discussion groups and other ways to develop intellectual faculties. (Think Erich Hoffer...) Anyone who just wants to learn would still be wise to put a price tag on it, just like I compare Haagen-Daas with store brand. Sometimes it’s worth it, sometimes it’s not.

Clearly, there’s no need to take sides on the question, is a four-year degree worth it? Both answers can be right. This is America, it’s all about life, liberty and what’s that other thing, something about happiness. Pursuit, that’s the word I was looking for. It just reminds me of how we are all individuals, and what satisfies one is nothing for another. I think the Founding Fathers were really onto something there, making pursuit the central right we are granted. The only enhancement I can think of is to make it MINDFUL pursuit.

Ann, at 4:25 pm EDT on April 18, 2008

It’s pretty sad that acceptance into society has become this contest where you follow a single path to victory. Go to college at 18, graduate in 4 years, get married, have kids, get a big house in the suburbs... and if you deviate or fail to do any of these, you lose.

In my opinion, we really need to rethink what makes people valuable to others. I’ll tell you one thing — it isn’t a piece of paper.

A concerned american, at 5:20 am EDT on May 12, 2008

College Isn’t Worth a Million Dollars

Benefits of any education will depend on the supporting industrial base. At this point, the long term stability of jobs in the field of Science and Technology is in a precarious condition. With the outsourcing of jobs and importation of cheap temporary workers are making it very difficult for the U.S. citizens to justify investment in higher education. Similar conditions exist in the field of medicine where administrative costs of running medical practice are skyrocketing while medical graduates with greater college loans find their incomes shrink over a period of time.

Future students pursuing higher education should make a realistic analysis of whether the investment would pay off or not. Greater responsibility remains on the shoulders of our political and indstry leaders who should foster an appropriate industrial base where higher education jobs would remain in this country.

Prasad Gavankar, Ph.D., P. E. at Oracle Corporation, at 9:20 pm EDT on May 26, 2008