iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Zac Bissonnette

Zac Bissonnette

Posted: June 30, 2010 06:42 PM

Why PayScale's Data on Which Colleges Offer Best ROI is Useless

What's Your Reaction:

PayScale's latest data showing the return on investment of attending various schools is getting a ton of press.

The Wall Street Journal has an item on the data, and so does The Chronicle of Higher Education. On the surface, it's quite interesting. Payscale looked at the costs of colleges and then compared it with the average earnings of the schools' graduates and calculated an annual return on investment over thirty years. Ivy League grads tend to earn a lot of money so, even though those schools have high sticker prices, they also tended to yield the highest returns on investment.

But there's just one problem (actually two: we'll get to the second one later): In order for Payscale's data on return on investment to be valuable, you have to assume that the only difference between at MIT grad (the college with the best ROI) and a Black Hills State University grad (the college with the lowest ROI) is that one went to MIT and the other went to Black Hills State.

With apologies to Black Hills State grads, that assumption is insane: MIT grads are a lot smarter, more ambitious, and more connected before they start college than the average Black Hills State grad. Saying "Go to MIT so you'll earn more money" is like saying "Sleep in a crib so you'll weigh less." I've done extensive research and found that people who sleep in cribs do in fact weigh, on average, a lot less than people who sleep in beds -- but that doesn't necessarily make it valuable weight loss advice.

Perhaps there is some financial benefit to be derived from attending an elite school; and perhaps there isn't. Payscale makes no effort to determine that. Incidentally, there was one study that did: Princeton economist Alan Krueger and Stacy Dale of the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation found that, on average, students who get into elite colleges but attend less elite colleges earn the same amount of money ten years in as students who attend elite colleges. As Krueger wrote, "Children smart enough to get into elite schools may not need to bother."

Payscale furthers the problem with its methodology by penalizing schools with low graduation rates. Here again, elite schools have high graduation rates at least in part (and maybe completely) because they only admit students with high GPAs, SAT scores, and strong extracurriculars; such students are unlikely to dropout regardless of where they enroll. By giving schools like Harvard and MIT higher ROI numbers because of their low dropout rates, Payscale is almost intentionally compounding the impact of selection bias on its study.

Dropping out of college is a decision, not a passive outcome; it's like saying it's unsafe to live in Mississippi because it's the fattest state in America. If you lay off the fatty foods, you'll be just fine. Similarly, you can live in Colorado, the thinnest state in the union, but if you eat 50 Twinkies for breakfast and don't exercise, the demographics will do nothing to help your life expectancy.

Even if the college you attend does have some impact on whether you'll drop out, Payscale's method of controlling for dropout rates assumes that the college you attend determines 100% whether you'll graduate. That's ludicrous.

The bottom line is this: Your earnings trajectory will be influenced by a multitude of factors, with the impact of the college from which you receive your bachelor's ranging anywhere from zero to very small. Parents: Relax! There are far more important things to worry about than where your kid goes to college. You could start by worrying about the impact excessive student loan debt will have on his life if you decide to overextend yourselves in pursuit of an elite diploma.

 
 
 

Follow Zac Bissonnette on Twitter: www.twitter.com/zacbissonnette

 
 
  • Comments
  • 5
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
10:14 AM on 07/11/2010
I'm curious if the study examined the earnings potential based on the major? I mean, it may not matter what you major in at Harvard, you're relying on the brand and whatever connections you make there. But at state university, you'd better pick something in demand like nursing, accounting, etc., etc. Some of the best accounting programs are based in public universities. For example, students majoring in accounting at University of Texas at Austin will probably pay competitive tuition rates and secure a position with a major firm, earning a nice ROI. Possibly better than someone majoring in liberal arts at Ivy League school. The same probably goes for a top school in nursing or other field. It just all depends.
Mildmannered
"Be excellent to each other"
12:51 AM on 07/02/2010
Your earnings trajectory is also influenced by outsourcing.
10:56 PM on 07/01/2010
I feel like this article plays into the mystique about college that has had a stranglehold on America for decades. I'm living proof that you can get accepted to a fancy school (I went to Wellesley), get by with B's and graduate, but if you're too immature to know how to network and you have no clue what you want to do with your life, you won't fare much better than someone who went to their local city or state university. When I graduated I was lucky to land a receptionist job for $35K, as I had not made any connections and had no real drive towards any realistic career at the time. A few years, many corporate jobs, and some salary raises later, I decided to finally do what I was really cut out to do and become a nurse. It's possible that simply going to Wellesley and graduating helped me land a spot in a great nursing program that only takes 20% of those who apply, but it sure was a round-about and inefficient way to finally become a nurse.

Correlation is not causation - ever. Read these articles with a very sceptical eye.,
08:52 PM on 06/30/2010
The PayScale college ROI report does not predict what a student will earn in the future. As Zac points out, earnings vary widely with the characteristics of the student as well as the education.

The report does say, if you are the typical enrolled student at a school, pursue the typical major(s), and graduate at the typical rate, how valuable your typical future earnings will be.

As a parent, I know the hard choices concerning how much to "invest" in our children's education.

If your child gets into MIT, the odds are good, no matter how much a parent spends, that your child will earn enough in the future to justify the cost. Your child could even borrow the $200,000 at 7% safely.

Could a student admitted to MIT go to another school, or not go to college at all, and earn the same? Maybe. Trading, e.g., for a full ride A.B. Duke Scholarship at Duke University likely would be fine. I wouldn't bet on skipping college all together.

For the parent whose child is only able to get into, e.g., Lesley University, the story is very different. Paying the full ~$200,000 for a 50-50 chance at a net $400,000 return is risky. I would definitely not recommend financing the full amount at 7%.

The value of the PayScale report is that it shows, for the typical student at a school, how much to spend on education before it is no longer a wise investment.
08:07 PM on 06/30/2010
Good article. I don't know whether to be more disappointed in the study's authors or in the journalists and editors, who did not ask the very simple questions regarding PROVED cause and effect.