

Harvey Mudd College #1 in ROI, Caltech #2, MIT #3 - loverobots
http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-04-09/college-roi-what-we-found

======
kapilkale
It frustrates me that these ROI calculations are done as comparisons between
two separate populations, each with different characteristics like raw
intelligence or work ethic. Return on investment should be looking at
treatment effects only.

For example, it may be that science minded people have higher salaries in
general, and those people also tend to apply to technical schools. In that
case, the real ROI is from being technically minded, not from attending a
school that focuses on that.

A better test would be looking at kids that got into both Harvey Mudd and MIT
and separating them into populations based on where each kid decided to
matriculate. That way you're factoring out the admissions bias.

Malcolm Gladwell wrote an article in the New Yorker about the difference
between state schools and Ivy League schools that actually looked at treatment
effects. And he found that there were none for the majority of the population.

I haven't seen one of these done for college vs. no college, but that would be
much more valuable than misleading shit like this.

edit: summary of the Gladwell article here
[http://notesandrestsmakemusic.wordpress.com/2011/09/14/the-v...](http://notesandrestsmakemusic.wordpress.com/2011/09/14/the-
value-of-an-ivy-league-education/)

~~~
intenex
I _really_ want to see one for no college vs college. People who got into
MIT/Ivy Leagues/etc but decided not to go to college vs people who did go to
the elites. Would finally stop people from doing the extraordinarily
frustrating dual quotation of "going to college matters, they studied people
who didn't go to college and people who did and those who did make way more
money" + "but which college you go to doesn't matter, they studied people who
got into ivies and went to state schools vs people who went to ivies and there
was no difference!"

In the first case you're using two separate populations, and in the second
you're not. Assholes.

EDIT: Actually fascinating that they found 191 schools with negative ROI using
their ranking system. Suggests that the school really _does_ matter - getting
a simple degree isn't what differentiates you anymore, it really is where you
get it from. Or perhaps those students just can't match par with the 75th
percentile of high school grads, as that was their ranking criteria.

------
derwiki
I've never seen a bad HMC hire.

------
beefman
In annualized ROI it looks like UVA is #1, with Harvard and Princeton being
the top two private schools.

------
bane
The numbers "feel" off to me. Here's some rough numbers from an earlier
discussion. <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3753975>

In my own case graduating with a degree resulted in an immediate 45k per year
pay bump, and I don't think that was particularly exceptional. Their 30 year
ROI sounds hopelessly low by an order of magnitude (at least for Eng and bus)

~~~
apl

      > [...] "feel" off [...]
      > [...] I don't think that was particularly exceptional.
      > (at least for Eng and bus)
    

Have you considered the possibility of you drawing conclusions from a biased
sample (i.e., you; your engineering buddies; hearsay)?

------
rmord
Miss the cs lab in the basement at HMC...

------
intenex
Of course HMC tops the list. It's free for everyone. Reminds me of that one
(Forbes?) college ranking list that had West Point as the best school to go
to, primarily because they factored in cost as a major ranking determinant.

And yes, everything's stacked in the favor of elite schools. They make you
more money, and they cost less. I had a full ride to Harvard and so did
everyone else whose parents made less than $80k. At state school I would have
been fucked over twice.

~~~
willscott
As a recent HMC grad: It's very much not free for everyone. Many of my
classmates graduated with fairly hefty loans which will take many years to
fully pay off.

Olin is free for everyone, and there's a wave in the elite schools to set up
payments so that students don't leave with loans. Mudd has a relatively small
endowment, so probably couldn't function under that model.

~~~
intenex
Whoops, my bad. Not sure how I came under that impression. Seems like Olin's
not free anymore either, only half-tuition now. Shame

EDIT: Ahh, I was thinking of Cooper Union.

