Top US Colleges according to Payscale (Mid-Career Median Salaries)

[drax12]

<p>Pea, Post 13:</p>

<p>

So they are asking people what their compensation packages with no verification. If I was filling out one of their surveys, and I don’t know why I would, I’d give my best guess of the numbers. I might be way off. Payscale publishes their list with no acknowledgment of what their margin of error is. With such sloppy data collection it is huge.

</p>

<p>I personally think that there are a lot of USC grads posing as UCLA’s. When WSJ published the the survey about five years ago (?) (I’m not sure how long Payscale’s been in existence) - and WSJ hasn’t done it since because I’m sure it sees the inherent flaws, UCLA’s median was around $101K. Now it’s ~ $91K a drop of median of ~ $10K. Others including Cal’s have remained stable.</p>

<p>I can see the economic times having an obvious effect, but I’m wondering how the site would incorporate the under- and unemployed into these medians, unless many of these were active job seekers, with the site reporting essentially zero income for this set. But Payscale isn’t monster.com, matching employer and employee, so why would an unemployed person want to fill out its survey? </p>

<p>Another problem I see as Barrons noted, is its lack of a scientific sample size of the grads with just baccalaureate degrees. Do these surveys reflect the correct proportion of professions for each school’s grads; are these correct snap-shots of graduates for each school wrt professions?</p>

<p>By soliciting responses from persons taking the surveys, Payscale cannot possibly have the right mix. Unless Payscale were to actively seek info from each school wrt its grads instead of inactively awaiting hits to its site - and no school would ever release info on its grads - then this survey is truly bird-cage liner.</p>

<p>

Dunn:</p>

<p>– crazy high, or crazy low? (that is, that 40% of Ivy alumni ultimately get a JD, MBA, or MD degree)

</p>

<p>Sentiment: Why are you grouping MBAs with JDs and MDs? You’re comparing a Master’s degree to Doctoral degrees. It is much more difficult to earn the latter two than the former. Worse than that, a Master’s in Business Administration is literally the least prestigious Master’s possible. ITT Tech offers MBAs.

</p>

<p>You’re missing the point sentiment.</p>

<p>Any graduate degree, masters, doctorate will disqualify anyone from the Payscale survey. </p>

<p>

[quote]

Quote:
I did some quick math on UCLA’s graduating classes for Medicine (400), Business (360), and Law (320), compared to the Undergraduate graduating class (6000). At UCLA anyway, the professional degree graduating classes are at about 18% of the undergrad graduating classes.</p>

<p>Why all the math? According to Wikipedia, UCLA has 11548 postgraduates and 38476 students. That’s 30%.</p>

<p>The problem, however, is that its a mistake to assume all UCLA undergrads go on to UCLA grad school. The fact is the matter is that most don’t. There are far fewer grad schools out there than undergrad schools. Many students from colleges or universities who don’t offer a graduate degree in their field are forced to come to UCLA (or a small pool of other large universities).

</p>

<p>I think what Dunn was alluding to wrt the 18%-comment was that this was the % from UCLA undergrad who attend one of the three professional schools initially from graduation, probably mainly law - and yes most go elsewhere. There would be more later on, esp for MBA’s and MD’s because most MBA programs require work/life experience, and many defer enrollment, eg, attending grad life sciences, to become more attractive to med schools.</p>

<p>Of the UC schools, UCLA produces > JD’s than Cal, >>>>> than the other UC’s. There are indications of UCLA producing > MD’s than Cal, and >>> the other UC’s. MBA’s would be hard to measure.</p>

<p>This would probably -> UCLA’s % being around ~ 30% for the three, say, five years down the road. This wouldn’t include PHD’s, masters in non professions. So with these in mind, I wouldn’t disagree with Ivies producing 40% or so in the professions. I think it would be higher than Dunn’s revised 25%, but certianly not be near 70% as the other poster estimated.</p>