ROI on a college degree depends what you study, not where • Hacker News Board

Re: ROI on a college degree depends what you study, not where

#21

Post by IkmoIkmo » Wed, May 04, 2016, 1:40 PM UTC

Financial ROI of a degree primarily depends on whether the degree is in a high or low paying field... In other news, the ocean is full of water.

No story there. But then they draw almost flat lines, indicating the selectivity of the university (as a proxy for all kinds of things, prestige, quality of education/network etc) plays no role. But I find it misleading.

It makes sense I think to consider that they're not looking at earning potential, but at ROI. That means a selective school that costs $100k a year, and nets you a $100k annual salary, yields the same ROI as going to a 10k a year state school that gets you a 10k salary. You'd get a flat line on selectivity/ROI, as if it doesn't matter where you study.

You can be the judge of whether you think those are equal or not, and whether you'd be indifferent because they have the same ROI, particularly when you can afford the investment or get the investment subsidised.

Re: ROI on a college degree depends what you study, not where

#22

Post by rayiner » Wed, May 04, 2016, 1:40 PM UTC

tehabe wrote: post #12

On one hand it is nice to see that the school doesn't matter as much as people think but on the other hand it is sad that people see their studies only through the eyes of ROI. As if education has no value of its own. I'm probably just naive and an idealist.

Education might have some value to some people, in the same way that snowboarding or mountainbiking may have some value to some people. But the reason we make everybody do it is for the ROI.

Re: ROI on a college degree depends what you study, not where

#23

Post by crispyambulance » Wed, May 04, 2016, 1:40 PM UTC

emodendroket wrote: post #8

I find it disheartening that the only way it seems we can think about college anymore is a sort of vocational school where we train for careers.

Yes, and it is odious that "value" is measured based on ROI from getting the degree.

Do STEM degrees yield more ROI? Perhaps, but if the article is attempting to help an individual student frame their thinking about what to major in, it is very bad advice.

People should follow their aptitudes. Study what compels them and what they're talented in, regardless of statistical ROI's that apply NOT to individuals but to a population of people.

I've seen it a lot, good students who force themselves into degree programs for subjects they have no interest in: going to pre-law or pre-med or finance or engineering, not because they love the subject matter but for status and for the hope of a "well-paid" career (often propelled by parents wishes).

We may very well need more STEM folks, but what we DON'T need is more STEM folks who are passionless, untalented duds who are in it for the money/status.

Re: ROI on a college degree depends what you study, not where

#24

Post by an4rchy » Wed, May 04, 2016, 1:41 PM UTC

This would be very interesting to see when compared with schools outside of the US where higher education is free or very cheap.

I'm curious about how many people go to the standard (STEM) fields of education because of the cost, and ROI vs they are interested in them.

If people had 0 debt maybe more people might choose alternative fields of education/careers that can impact the world in other ways.

Re: ROI on a college degree depends what you study, not where

#25

Post by emodendroket » Wed, May 04, 2016, 1:43 PM UTC

jerf wrote: post #4

In addition to the obvious 0 line, it's worth taking the article's observation that S&P has returned 7.8% and mentally drawing a line there too. Also, for anyone in the position of deciding which to do, I'd add the observation that it is way easier to go to college and get a formal education in science, math, or engineering, and pursue an ongoing adhoc self-directed education in the arts and humanities in your remain…

I studied Japanese in school and I think it would have been extremely difficult to learn on my own. So... I'd say it depends.

Re: ROI on a college degree depends what you study, not where

#26

Post by khaolak » Wed, May 04, 2016, 1:43 PM UTC

HarryHirsch wrote: post #2

That is very scary if it's true. If a degree in the experimental sciences from a top-10 institution does not pay better than a degree from Tumbleweed State then the employment market for scientists is completely broken.

This is very encouraging if true. The difference between a 17 year old applying to "a top-10 institution" and a 17 year old applying to "Tumbleweed State" is almost exclusively what their parents income is (both directly for ability to pay, and indirectly through living in a desirable school district throughout their K-12 education).

I did my undergrad at a "tumbleweed state" school and grad school at a top-10. The difference in the average student at each school was privilege, not ability.

Turns out, best and brightest from Idaho to Ohio and Minnesota to Mississippi are just as smart and just as hardworking as the best and brightest from California and Massachusetts.

Re: ROI on a college degree depends what you study, not where

#27

Post by emodendroket » Wed, May 04, 2016, 1:44 PM UTC

11thEarlOfMar wrote: post #14

emodendroket wrote: post #8

I find it disheartening that the only way it seems we can think about college anymore is a sort of vocational school where we train for careers.

That is a side effect of the cost. In-state public university costs are up 296% over the last 20 years[1]. It is no surprise that a family spending that much money, per child, will consider the return on that spending. It is far more than a typical car and more in the realm of buying a home. [1] http://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/paying-for-col...

Well, is it, or is the rising cost a result of us thinking of it as some "investment" in a future career? I think it's a sort of vicious cycle.

Re: ROI on a college degree depends what you study, not where

#28

Post by emodendroket » Wed, May 04, 2016, 1:45 PM UTC

kdamken wrote: post #15

emodendroket wrote: post #8

I find it disheartening that the only way it seems we can think about college anymore is a sort of vocational school where we train for careers.

When it costs upwards of $100,000 to attend, you better be thinking of what you're getting for your money. Unfortunately in America it doesn't come free.

Yes, but this is a sort of self-fulfilling prophecy.

Re: ROI on a college degree depends what you study, not where

#29

Post by rayiner » Wed, May 04, 2016, 1:46 PM UTC

emodendroket wrote: post #8

I find it disheartening that the only way it seems we can think about college anymore is a sort of vocational school where we train for careers.

I find that point of view to be a conceit. It's an emulation of the noble classes of yore, who learned things they didn't need to know as a way of signaling that they could afford to do so because they didn't need to work. Most people are no better off 10-years down the line for having learned about what native Americans used to live in Virginia or what covalent bonds are.

Re: ROI on a college degree depends what you study, not where

#30

Post by Bartweiss » Wed, May 04, 2016, 1:46 PM UTC

emodendroket wrote: post #25

jerf wrote: post #4

In addition to the obvious 0 line, it's worth taking the article's observation that S&P has returned 7.8% and mentally drawing a line there too. Also, for anyone in the position of deciding which to do, I'd add the observation that it is way easier to go to college and get a formal education in science, math, or engineering, and pursue an ongoing adhoc self-directed education in the arts and humanities in your remain…

I studied Japanese in school and I think it would have been extremely difficult to learn on my own. So... I'd say it depends.

Language seems like a complicating factor here. It's difficult (especially in non-Latinate cases) to learn self-directed, and people who are fluent and willing to work in the field can actually do quite well traveling and translating for businesses and government agencies.

Of course, all of these numbers are complicated by "salary of graduates" versus "salary of graduates employed in field".