Posted on 02/25/2024 6:48:18 AM PST by karpov
Inputs are out, and outcomes are in. So goes the current thinking about the methodology used to create college rankings. The publications that tell us which colleges are best, next best, and on down the line often revamp their formulas, and the emphasis has moved in recent years to evaluating institutions by the status of their students after graduation rather than their status—and institutional conditions—when they enter.
The industry’s behemoth, U.S. News, responded to ongoing criticism by touting, about this year’s best-colleges list, “We want to ensure the educational resources we provide emphasize the outcomes for graduates … This, in conjunction with the other outcomes-focused measures we are adopting.” The now-favorite word was echoed in a recent Wall Street Journal headline about its own formula: “The WSJ/College Pulse College Rankings: Measuring Outcomes, Not Inputs.”
Forbes’s approach, in keeping with the magazine’s purpose, keys on financial outcomes such as alumni salaries, debt, and return on investment. Money magazine does likewise, while also including inputs. Washington Monthly divides its concentration among financial outcomes, research, and community and national service (e.g., Peace Corps participation and voter engagement).
Inputs are not entirely gone. They still have a presence in Money’s formula and carry considerable weight in U.S. News’s in spite of the image it wants to cultivate. But the logic behind outcomes is dominant—the idea that a ranking formula is a recipe, such that what should be rated is the final product rather than the particular ingredients. Thus, factors like SAT scores, faculty salaries, spending per student, and prestige have lost favor to calculations about graduation rates, alumni earnings, and debt, with new rankings often including a value-added calculation that gives credit to otherwise unheralded schools.
(Excerpt) Read more at jamesgmartin.center ...
Probably the most important thing is steering your child to a major that will generate lifelong income, will lead to a satisfying and rewarding career, and provide a grounding in history and humanities (as minors).
Victor Hanson points out regularly that you get a far better education for far less money than the top reputation schools, especially the Ivies.
Our youngest went to college 15 years ago. One got a degree in political science, one in biology, and one in business. That led to careers in tourism, insurance, and automotive retail management.
I regret not making a stronger effort to push them toward STEM careers, especially the oldest.
The higher ranked schools are those with fathers with fat wallets. Likewise, the fatter the wallet the less chance Jr. will get in trouble with the cops at party schools.
Look for safety rankings first and foremost.
I tend to think the trades are the way to go for most young people.
In times past children were apprenticed out.
If I was rich and had a kid, I would not be sending the kid and $320,000 of my money to Harvard.
“That led to careers in tourism, insurance, and automotive retail management.”
None of those require four years of college education.
It can be helpful to study Spanish, management and business law at the college level as cheaply as possible.
Maybe, maybe not. You’d be surprised.
Tourism research requires lots of quantitative work and analytical methods, statistics, sampling methods.
Before insurance, out bio student was a vet tech and operated at a pre-med level for quite a few years. But that was physically demanding and didn’t pay that good, so she went into insurance with much better pay.
If you are that strict in your definitions, then I’d guess only STEM would meet your criteria.
I would limit myself to institutions that are identifiably conservative.
That takes the universe down from thousands to a mere handful.
Easy.
BTTT
Bkmk
I refused to buy into the scam that I had any responsibility at all to pay for my adult children’s education. We loaned them money and expected payback.
Only one of the four did full four year college but that was for a specialized engineering degree.
Here’s an outcome. His school had an employment guarantee. A job in your field at competitive pay or they will cover the cost of a post graduate degree. I don’t they’ve ever had to pay out.
Btw. His loans were paid if ful within a year.
Research competency based degree programs.
The degree list is limited, but the programs are often less than two years, so much cheaper.
Any degree in business will help get her foot in the door.
Study “The Fountain Head “ and recognize that you need a reason to go to school. I went for an engineering degree but did not really see that I needed to learn more that just getting by. I concluded much later that I was not mature enough when I went to college.
He said it would be wise to find an affordable state school that had a decent (not exceptional) reputation in my field of study. For the same cost of a four-year degree at the top STEM school where I was accepted, I could get an undergraduate degree at a state school AND a master’s degree at a top school like MIT or Stanford.
My one piece of advice is this: The amount of money you and/or your child should be willing to spend on college should be proportional to the child’s passion for a specific field of study.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.