Data science jobs in the US to grow 36% by 2033: Top colleges, salaries, and scholarships every aspiring data scientist should track
According to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), data science jobs are expected to grow 36% by 2033, much faster than the average for most occupations. With a median annual salary of $112,590 (approximately ₹94 lakh) and top roles earning over $194,000 (approximately ₹1.62 crore), this career path combines strong income potential with long-term relevance.
Here's why studying Data Science in the USA could be your smartest career move and how you can make the most of it.
Fastest-growing career option
The BLS forecasts that nearly 20,800 data science jobs will open each year through 2033. This explosive growth is being driven by both the public and private sectors. Every major industry including healthcare, banking, transportation, e-commerce, education, and government is generating large volumes of data that require skilled professionals to interpret.
Importantly, the rise of AI and machine learning has made data science even more critical.
Companies need experts who can clean, manage, and model large datasets to train algorithms and support business intelligence but the momentum is not just limited to companies. US federal agencies are also actively hiring data scientists to support research, national defense, public health, and climate action.
Government-backed efforts such as the National AI Initiative Act and the National Science Foundation's Big Data Hubs are pumping resources into data-driven innovation.
This means that students entering the field today are stepping into an environment backed by national-level strategy and funding.
Top universities in the USA offering Data Science degrees
When it comes to studying Data Science in the United States, a handful of universities consistently lead the pack. According to the QS World University Rankings 2025, these institutions rank among the global best, making them top choices for students aiming for academic excellence, research exposure, and strong career outcomes.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) – Rank 1
Carnegie Mellon University – Rank 2
University of California, Berkeley – Rank 4
Harvard University – Rank 6
Yale University – Rank 9
Strong return on investment
Earning a Data Science degree from a top US university can be a significant investment, but the returns are equally impressive. According to U.S. Department of Education data, starting salaries for graduates in data science and analytics programs typically range from $90,000 to $120,000 (approximately ₹75 lakh to ₹1 crore), depending on the institution and specialisation.
For most students, the financial investment in tuition and living costs is recovered within five years of employment. High-paying roles in tech, finance, consulting, and healthcare ensure that these graduates remain competitive in both USA and global job markets.
Several universities also provide cost-saving opportunities through graduate assistantships, STEM scholarships, and fee waivers. Public institutions like Georgia Tech and the University of Washington often offer excellent value for money while still delivering strong outcomes.
Scholarships and financial aid opportunities
While students may find tuition costs steep, there is robust financial support available. Most top-ranked universities offer a range of merit-based scholarships, research and teaching assistantships, and need-based aid for both undergraduate and graduate students.
Scholarships like the Knight-Hennessy Scholars at Stanford or the Fulbright Foreign Student Program are open to high-achieving students from across the world.
Graduate-level applicants can also look for fellowships tied to government-funded research labs or interdisciplinary data centers.
Additionally, because most data science programs are classified as STEM degrees, international students may qualify for additional funding opportunities aimed at promoting science and innovation in the USA.
Data science opens global doors
In a world where data drives everything from consumer behaviour to climate action, data science professionals are poised to lead.
With job growth far outpacing the national average and salaries well above the median, the field offers both stability and impact.
For students planning their academic and career journeys, Data Science in the USA presents a compelling option. The combination of globally ranked universities, financial aid, government support, and international work pathways makes it one of the most future-ready career choices today.
Whether your passion lies in machine learning, or entrepreneurship, Data Science opens doors across sectors and across borders.
Is your child ready for the careers of tomorrow? Enroll now and take advantage of our early bird offer! Spaces are limited.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Economic Times
2 hours ago
- Economic Times
Why burgers cost so much in US right now
Demand from consumers for beef, meanwhile, has grown, which also contributes to higher prices. Synopsis Climate change is driving up beef prices as droughts reduce grazing land, forcing ranchers to reduce herds. High temperatures also affect cattle's health and reproduction, further impacting supply. Increased consumer demand exacerbates the situation, leading to record-high prices for ground beef and steaks, a trend expected to continue for several years. There's no question that steak and hamburgers contribute to global warming, driven by cows' potent methane burps and their wide-ranging grazing habits. But a warming planet with intensifying extreme weather is also affecting the price of your steak and hamburgers. ADVERTISEMENT After years of drought, pastures haven't been producing enough grass to feed cattle. So ranchers have been sending their animals to the slaughterhouse earlier, cutting back herds even as Americans eat more beef. This is sending prices to record highs. Average ground beef prices in city supermarkets surpassed $6 a pound in June, while the cost of uncooked beef steaks approached $11.50 a pound. Those levels are the highest in a decade, according to US Bureau of Labor Statistics data. The upward march of prices illustrates a phenomenon known as climate inflation, in which droughts, heat waves, floods and wildfires raise prices for everything from home insurance to groceries. While some price hikes are so far proving temporary, others are longer-lasting, like beef, which is expected to stay expensive for at least the next few years. 'This is one indicator of how climate change will affect our food system, and it's playing itself out in beef right now,' says Ben Lilliston, director of rural strategies and climate change at the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, a Minneapolis-based nonprofit. 'You're seeing it in other commodities, like coffee.' ADVERTISEMENT Long-lasting drought US beef prices are spiking after years of drought in areas where cattle are raised. In the southwestern US in particular, which includes cattle-producing areas like California's San Joaquin Valley, drought has exceeded historical expectations over the last quarter-century, says Brad Rippey, a USDA meteorologist. Scientists have found that global warming's higher temperatures make droughts more likely to happen in some places and more severe. For example, a 2020 study that examined anomalously dry conditions in the western US and northern Mexico between 2000 and 2018 determined that climate change contributed to nearly half of that drought's severity. ADVERTISEMENT Drought conditions in the US in recent years were also enhanced by several instances of the naturally-occurring La Niña climate pattern, which tends to leave portions of the US drier than usual, Rippey says. Ranchers have some options, including feeding their herds alternatives to pasture grass, such as hay. But as dry conditions continue, selling the cattle begins to make more financial sense than buying the expensive feed. US herds have been dwindling for years, and are now smaller than ever even as drought conditions have improved. 'The long-term impact is that you have less ability to produce, which is where we find ourselves now after four or five years of this process,' says Derrell Peel, agribusiness professor at Oklahoma State University. ADVERTISEMENT Demand from consumers for beef, meanwhile, has grown, which also contributes to higher prices. That generates a trade-off between cashing in on today's high prices and holding animals back for breeding — a process that takes years to pay off. A female calf born this year could be sold, entering next year's beef supply, or it could be bred in 2026 and rear a calf ready for market by roughly 2028. Cattle usually have only one calf at a time, in contrast with other animals like chickens and pigs. Other factors affecting cattle ranching besides drought include higher interest rates and greater costs for inputs ranging from the cattle themselves to feed and equipment. More climate challenges Most cattle spend their lives outdoors, exposing the animals to other hallmarks of climate change like extreme heat. High temperatures can affect cattle's reproductive health and their growth, extending the time and cost of raising animals. In the highest-emissions scenario, it could get so hot by 2050 that fewer parts of the world will be suitable for cattle production, according to the most recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report. ADVERTISEMENT Another climate change-related threat is also looming: a deadly parasite known as the screwworm, which was long-ago eradicated in the US but has made a resurgence in Mexico. It thrives in warmer climates, and scientists say that climate change could facilitate the fly's spread. While the majority of American beef is produced domestically, the US routinely imports young cattle from Mexico to fatten up in American feedlots, says David Anderson, a professor and livestock economist at Texas A&M University. The supply of those cattle, the equivalent of about 4% of US calf production, has been intermittently cut off since November because of the threat the screwworm poses. 'On the margin, that's a bunch of animals,' he says. 'That's contributing to high prices.' (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel) (Catch all the US News, UK News, Canada News, International Breaking News Events, and Latest News Updates on The Economic Times.) Download The Economic Times News App to get Daily International News Updates. NEXT STORY
Time of India
3 hours ago
- Time of India
Why burgers cost so much in US right now
Climate change is driving up beef prices as droughts reduce grazing land, forcing ranchers to reduce herds. High temperatures also affect cattle's health and reproduction, further impacting supply. Increased consumer demand exacerbates the situation, leading to record-high prices for ground beef and steaks, a trend expected to continue for several years. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads There's no question that steak and hamburgers contribute to global warming, driven by cows' potent methane burps and their wide-ranging grazing habits. But a warming planet with intensifying extreme weather is also affecting the price of your steak and years of drought, pastures haven't been producing enough grass to feed cattle. So ranchers have been sending their animals to the slaughterhouse earlier, cutting back herds even as Americans eat more beef. This is sending prices to record ground beef prices in city supermarkets surpassed $6 a pound in June, while the cost of uncooked beef steaks approached $11.50 a pound. Those levels are the highest in a decade, according to US Bureau of Labor Statistics upward march of prices illustrates a phenomenon known as climate inflation , in which droughts, heat waves, floods and wildfires raise prices for everything from home insurance to groceries. While some price hikes are so far proving temporary, others are longer-lasting, like beef, which is expected to stay expensive for at least the next few years.'This is one indicator of how climate change will affect our food system, and it's playing itself out in beef right now,' says Ben Lilliston, director of rural strategies and climate change at the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, a Minneapolis-based nonprofit. 'You're seeing it in other commodities, like coffee.' US beef prices are spiking after years of drought in areas where cattle are raised. In the southwestern US in particular, which includes cattle-producing areas like California's San Joaquin Valley, drought has exceeded historical expectations over the last quarter-century, says Brad Rippey, a USDA have found that global warming's higher temperatures make droughts more likely to happen in some places and more severe. For example, a 2020 study that examined anomalously dry conditions in the western US and northern Mexico between 2000 and 2018 determined that climate change contributed to nearly half of that drought's conditions in the US in recent years were also enhanced by several instances of the naturally-occurring La Niña climate pattern, which tends to leave portions of the US drier than usual, Rippey says. Ranchers have some options, including feeding their herds alternatives to pasture grass, such as hay. But as dry conditions continue, selling the cattle begins to make more financial sense than buying the expensive feed. US herds have been dwindling for years, and are now smaller than ever even as drought conditions have improved.'The long-term impact is that you have less ability to produce, which is where we find ourselves now after four or five years of this process,' says Derrell Peel, agribusiness professor at Oklahoma State from consumers for beef, meanwhile, has grown, which also contributes to higher prices. That generates a trade-off between cashing in on today's high prices and holding animals back for breeding — a process that takes years to pay off. A female calf born this year could be sold, entering next year's beef supply, or it could be bred in 2026 and rear a calf ready for market by roughly 2028. Cattle usually have only one calf at a time, in contrast with other animals like chickens and factors affecting cattle ranching besides drought include higher interest rates and greater costs for inputs ranging from the cattle themselves to feed and cattle spend their lives outdoors, exposing the animals to other hallmarks of climate change like extreme heat. High temperatures can affect cattle's reproductive health and their growth, extending the time and cost of raising animals. In the highest-emissions scenario, it could get so hot by 2050 that fewer parts of the world will be suitable for cattle production, according to the most recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change climate change-related threat is also looming: a deadly parasite known as the screwworm, which was long-ago eradicated in the US but has made a resurgence in Mexico. It thrives in warmer climates, and scientists say that climate change could facilitate the fly's spread. While the majority of American beef is produced domestically, the US routinely imports young cattle from Mexico to fatten up in American feedlots, says David Anderson, a professor and livestock economist at Texas A&M supply of those cattle, the equivalent of about 4% of US calf production, has been intermittently cut off since November because of the threat the screwworm poses. 'On the margin, that's a bunch of animals,' he says. 'That's contributing to high prices.'
Mint
4 hours ago
- Mint
Trump's science reform veers off course
Gift this article Critics accuse President Trump of politicizing the National Science Foundation, warning that the administration poses a lethal threat to what one called 'American science expertise as we know it." At first, these assertions were overwrought and misleading: The administration was cleansing the NSF of left-wing politics. The administration's latest proposals, however, don't go far enough in some areas while jeopardizing progress in others. Critics accuse President Trump of politicizing the National Science Foundation, warning that the administration poses a lethal threat to what one called 'American science expertise as we know it." At first, these assertions were overwrought and misleading: The administration was cleansing the NSF of left-wing politics. The administration's latest proposals, however, don't go far enough in some areas while jeopardizing progress in others. From February through May, the NSF, which supports academic science, terminated more than 1,700 grants, totaling $1.4 billion. 'The American people deserve a scientific enterprise free from political interference," California Rep. Zoe Lofgren, the House Science Committee's ranking Democrat, said in an April press release. Jon Freeman, Columbia psychologist and NSF grant recipient, told the New York Times that the cuts will cede 'American leadership in science and technology to China and to other countries." Science magazine reported that 'NSF watchers" feared a proposed restructuring would leave the foundation 'more vulnerable to pressure from the White House to fund research that suits its ideological bent." The claim about ideological bias was rich. The NSF has been supporting ideologically driven projects for years, much of it through its Directorate for STEM Education. The foundation's education grant-making has focused on racial victimhood. 'Learning From Black Intellectualism: Broadening Epistemic Foundations in Engineering Education to Empower Black Students and Faculty," funded in 2023 at nearly $600,000, was typical. According to the project's abstract, the prevailing 'narrative" around black underrepresentation 'preserves Whiteness by passively neglecting the culture of racism in engineering." 'Learning From Black Intellectualism" would 'advance educational justice by countering the epistemic violence within engineering and its sense-making practices." It would use 'fugitive pedagogy" to 'investigate engineering faculty epistemic norms." 'Black intellectualism" would be used to 're-politicize engineering pedagogy." Projects like that obviously don't advance American leadership over China. On May 9, the NSF announced that it was disbanding its most concentrated source of racial grant-making: the Division of Equity for Excellence in STEM, housed within the Directorate for STEM Education. Predictably, the press played the race card, claiming the cuts 'reduced the diversity of NSF's pool of funded scientists," as the Science article put it. Black grantees suffered the heaviest blow, it reported, with a cancellation rate four times as high as their representation among total NSF grantees. Such a disparity is hardly surprising, given that racism-themed grants serve as a vehicle for increasing black representation among NSF awardees. The education directorate contains three other divisions: Graduate Education, Undergraduate Education, and Research on Learning in Formal and Informal Settings. All should be eliminated. Like the Division of Equity for Excellence, these divisions are mere extensions of education schools, whose effect on the transmission of knowledge has been disastrous. The NSF's Directorate for Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences is another source of grant-making premised on academic leftism. Consider Mr. Freeman, the Columbia psychologist. His terminated grant—from the directorate's Division of Behavioral and Cognitive Sciences—focused on how 'social inequities such as gender and racial disparities" are shaped by facial and other 'learned stereotypes" about race and sex. It is doubtful that China is attempting to compete in this area. Such was the state of play before the Trump administration's funding request for fiscal 2026: The science establishment was crying bloody murder because the NSF had started cutting some of its most blatantly politicized grants. Enter the 2026 budget, released on May 30. It would reduce funding for research and related activities by 61%, or $5 billion. The NSF's total budget would be cut 55%, or $5.12 billion. But the Education and Social Sciences directorates wouldn't be eliminated. Worse, the Division of Equity for Excellence in STEM within the Education Directorate would be exhumed. True, the Equity Division's budget would be cut nearly 80%, from $214 million in 2024 to $43 million in 2026. But $43 million can support a lot of mischief. On the bright side, the 2026 budget would almost zero out a category of grants known as 'Broadening Participation." These grants reflect Congress's decadeslong mania for imposing nonscientific goals onto the foundation. In 2010 Congress forbade the NSF from evaluating grants solely on scientific merit. Instead, scientists have to justify their research according to its 'broader impacts," and vital scientific projects have been rejected for failure to state a sufficiently attractive 'broader impact." Broadening Participation grants dealing with race and sex are mostly eliminated. But the budget preserves geographic Broadening Participation funding, which allows politicians in noncoastal areas to brag of bringing home the science bacon, regardless of whether their district's colleges are likely to make breakthrough discoveries. While the cuts to the Education and Social Science directorates were too timid, cuts to the hard-science directorates were too sweeping. Biological Sciences is down 71.5%. Mathematical and Physical Sciences, which includes chemistry, physics and astronomy, is down 67%. The May 30 budget request reads like a pitch for a tech startup. Its 'prioritized" activities are Artificial Intelligence, Quantum Information Science, and the Directorate for Technology, Innovation and Partnerships—the last akin to a tech incubator for small businesses. Other favored areas are Advanced Manufacturing, Advanced Wireless, and Microelectronics and Semiconductors, because those fields help 'harness the full power of American innovation by empowering entrepreneurs and unleashing private-sector creativity." It is a mistake to reorient the NSF toward research perceived to be economically useful. The private sector is already charging ahead on high-tech research and applications. It has less incentive to fund curiosity-driven research into the laws of the universe. Other battles are more worthy of attention. Congressional Republicans should provide the White House with an unambiguous charter for its reform efforts. Congress should strip all identity-politics language from NSF budgetary authorizations by rejecting the notion that researchers must justify their work on nonscientific grounds. Lawmakers should also extricate the NSF from teacher training and education research. Congress and the administration could treat scientists like adults again by cutting red tape and restoring discretion to project managers and researchers. The White House has started a long overdue overhaul of science and academia, unleashing end-of-times prophesying from those intertwined establishments. But federal science funding shouldn't go to social or economic goals, 'equity" or any other ideology. Rather, its aim should be to unleash human genius in its confrontation with natural mystery. Ms. Mac Donald is a fellow at the Manhattan Institute and author of 'When Race Trumps Merit." This is adapted from the Summer issue of City Journal. Topics You May Be Interested In
