Latest news with #CollegeScorecard
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Opinion: Don't Destroy Institute of Education Sciences, Rebuild It With Students in Mind
The scaffolding that supports the nation's federal education data systems is crumbling. By canceling programs and eliminating staff, including those that fulfilled statutorily mandated functions, the Trump administration has taken a hatchet to the Institute of Education Sciences, the federal agency responsible for collecting, analyzing and making public key higher education data, with no real plan for replacement. This is not strategic reform; it's irresponsible leadership. This system must be rebuilt, and it must be done thoughtfully, with student success as the guiding goal. Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter Data are among the most important tools available for understanding what's working and what isn't in education. For higher education especially, data are critical for identifying problems, spotlighting solutions and distinguishing colleges and universities that deliver strong student outcomes from those in need of improvement. IES has long provided trusted, rigorous data that inform decisionmaking and drive policy change. But the agency and the insights it supports are now in jeopardy. The administration's cuts have real consequences for students, families, states, policymakers and the country. Every year, over 1 million people use tools powered by federal data to make decisions about college and about higher education policy. The College Scorecard, for example, helps prospective applicants compare schools by cost, student loan debt, graduation rates and post-graduation earnings. However, colleges have reported system outages when trying to upload information to the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System, which the scorecard relies upon. In addition, staffers responsible for verifying, approving and publishing the data have been terminated — along with 90% of all IES personnel. Equally troubling, the Department of Education canceled the contract that provided training to the professionals who report data to the system, risking the quality and integrity of the information. Related In February, IES did away with other vital data collections, including the National Postsecondary Student Aid Study and its longitudinal follow-up study about the outcomes of first-time college students, the Beginning Postsecondary Students Longitudinal Study. These data sources are essential to answering basic questions like: Who enrolls in college? Who transfers? Who completes their degree? How do students pay for college? How do graduates fare in the workforce? While the contract for the 2024 postsecondary student aid data collection was reinstated June 30, questions remain about the scope of that study and its future, as well its related longitudinal studies. These concerns are especially pertinent as IES remains severely understaffed and the Trump administration has proposed a 67% budget cut for fiscal year 2026. IES' outlook remains wholly unclear. The administration has not outlined a plan nor has it sought, nor has it sought any public input to determine its future. Some officials have advocated scattering the Education Department's responsibilities across other agencies, but they have not explained how they would preserve researcher access and data quality under such a fragmented system. This creates uncertainty for students, families, state officials and researchers — and threatens to destroy a system that took decades to build, undermining the future of evidence-based policymaking. Related A newly announced department senior adviser, Dr. Amber Northern, is reportedly focusing on IES reform. But without swift and transparent action, the damage risks becoming permanent. The nation doesn't need a patchwork fix. It needs a clear, thoughtful and ambitious plan to rebuild its education data infrastructure. That starts with a few key principles: First, protect the principles that made IES so crucial in the first place: statistical rigor, public transparency, data security, privacy protections, data accessibility and responsiveness to stakeholder input. Second, recognize that no state or private entity can replace what the federal government is uniquely equipped to do: mandate consistent reporting across colleges, access administrative data across agencies and ensure national recognize that federal data are a public good, and that changes to them should be informed by stakeholders — states, colleges, education researchers, policy analysts, policymakers and, of course, students and families. Any reform must be conceived with their needs in mind. Related Fourth, think bigger. Set an ambitious vision for the depth, breadth and scope of education data and research that the nation truly needs. America's future relies on the strength of its education system — and education decisions made by students, families, educators, states and policymakers ought to be informed by the best available data and research. If students are to succeed, the nation must commit to providing and learning from the data. As the Education Department and Congress consider their next steps, they face a pivotal choice: continue to erode critical data systems, replace what existed before or seize the moment to design something stronger — a system worthy of the students it's meant to serve.
Hindustan Times
6 days ago
- Business
- Hindustan Times
It's a Tough Job Market for New College Grads. Is an Advanced Degree Worth It?
The current job market is making a good case for recent college graduates to consider going to graduate school. But is it really worth it? Uncertainty around the potential impact of higher U.S. tariffs is tamping down hiring. And even before tariff stress hit the job market, new college grads faced headwinds. The unemployment rate for recent graduates (those ages 22 to 27) was 4.8% in May, the latest data available for that age group, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. That's up from 4.3% in May 2023. The overall unemployment rate, meanwhile, rose to 4% from 3.5% during the same period. (The overall employment rate stands at 4.2% for July.) Add to that the growing debate over whether artificial intelligence might eat a chunk of entry-level, white-collar jobs, and tacking on an advanced degree seems like a sound competitive strategy. The Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce projects that the number of jobs requiring graduate degrees will be 14% higher in 2031 than it was in 2021. The question is: Will the potential for improved employment prospects and higher long-term earnings outweigh the cost of obtaining a graduate degree, especially if you have to take on debt to pay for it? The answer depends on what specific degree you are pursuing—and how much of a salary boost you can expect from it—and how much of a burden your total debt load would be. 'It is totally valid to go to grad school when the job market is not great, because we know that it does make a difference when you enter the labor force,' says Artem Gulish, senior federal policy adviser at Georgetown's education and the workforce center. 'But you still have to exercise due diligence that it is going to be beneficial and not just a way to stay out of the labor market.' An earnings premium, but… There is an alluring earnings premium that typically comes with a graduate degree—18% on average for someone with a master's degree compared with someone with just a bachelor's degree, according to the Georgetown center, and more than 60% for medical, law and doctoral degrees. The problem is the earnings premium has pretty much stayed around 18% over the past 30 years, while median borrowing for graduate school has increased by nearly 50% (in inflation-adjusted 2022 dollars) between 2000 and 2020 alone, according to the Georgetown center. That means if you intend to take out loans to pay for grad school, more of any additional earnings are likely to be eaten up by debt repayments. So where should students draw the line on borrowing? The Georgetown center recommends that student-loan repayments should be no more than 10% of discretionary income, to make it possible for borrowers to juggle debt repayment with current living costs and savings goals. But that may be a tough mark to hit. While only a minority of graduate programs report detailed earnings and debt information to the federal College Scorecard database, the Georgetown center found that among those programs that did report, 41% of master's-degree programs and 67% of professional-degree programs (doctor, dentist, lawyer) sent graduates out into the job market with repayment burdens above the 10% benchmark. Students are feeling the pain. In a 2023 survey of 1,000 graduate students by the Third Way think tank, nearly half of borrowers said their final borrowing tab was more than they expected going in, and more than half said it was going to take more time to repay those loans than they expected. On the earnings side, nearly 75% of respondents said the prospect of earning more was a major motivation for going to graduate school. But among those who had graduated, less than half felt their school did a good job in helping them toward that goal. Changes to federal loans Another factor to consider is the changes to the federal college-loan system under the tax and spending bill recently signed into law by President Trump. The new rules, which take effect July 1, 2026, limit the amount students can borrow from the government for graduate school ($100,000 for master's degrees and $200,000 for professional degrees), eliminating the popular Grad Plus program that had allowed loans for the full cost of a graduate degree. They also impose a combined lifetime limit for all federal undergraduate, graduate and professional loans, and cap the amount parents can borrow for their children. And the sole income-driven repayment plan is less generous than prior options. Mark Kantrowitz, an expert on student financing, says the new borrowing limits mean many prospective doctors, dentists and lawyers may need private loans to help pay for their degrees. Some master's-degree students who attend high-cost programs also may need to borrow more than they can from the government. Private loans require either a strong credit score or a cosigner, and their repayment terms generally are far stricter. They also often have higher interest rates. And, says Ann Garcia, a certified financial planner in Portland, Ore., the new limits on federal graduate loans mean less competition for private lenders, which could drive up the interest rates on many private loans. The debt you already have Some young adults also don't fully take into account the cost of their existing undergraduate debt when thinking about graduate school. Payments on federal undergraduate loans generally can be deferred while the borrower is in graduate school at least half time, but if the undergrad loan was unsubsidized, interest continues to build. Some private lenders offer this type of deferment, but interest usually also continues to build in those cases. 'You left undergrad with $27,000' in student loans, Garcia says, 'and in grad school that same debt grows to $41,000 because interest accrues, and that's on top of what you're borrowing for grad school.' Kantrowitz suggests limiting total borrowing (undergraduate and graduate) to no more than what you can expect to earn your first year working. To get an idea of what that will be, you can search employment sites including and which provide general salary ranges. You also can check if a graduate program reports median earnings and debt for graduates to the federal College Scorecard database. If you are pursuing an advanced degree that you expect to qualify for public-service loan forgiveness, borrowing more may be OK, Kantrowitz says. But he cautions that an executive order signed this past March aims to limit the types of businesses and organizations whose employees would qualify for public-service loan forgiveness. The Education Department is working out specific rules. New Orleans certified financial planner Ryan Frailich says a common mistake he sees with clients who took on a burdensome amount of debt is that they tended to 'make the grad decision first and how to pay for it later, as though they are two separate decisions.' He suggests moving the repayment question into the decision process. 'It's not a 'Should I go to grad school' question,' he says. 'It's a 'Should I go to this grad school if I have to repay X dollars.' ' Carla Fried is a writer in Tenerife, Spain. She can be reached at reports@
Mint
6 days ago
- Business
- Mint
It's a tough job market for new college grads. Is an advanced degree worth it?
The current job market is making a good case for recent college graduates to consider going to graduate school. But is it really worth it? Uncertainty around the potential impact of higher U.S. tariffs is tamping down hiring. And even before tariff stress hit the job market, new college grads faced headwinds. The unemployment rate for recent graduates (those ages 22 to 27) was 4.8% in May, the latest data available for that age group, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. That's up from 4.3% in May 2023. The overall unemployment rate, meanwhile, rose to 4% from 3.5% during the same period. (The overall employment rate stands at 4.2% for July.) Add to that the growing debate over whether artificial intelligence might eat a chunk of entry-level, white-collar jobs, and tacking on an advanced degree seems like a sound competitive strategy. The Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce projects that the number of jobs requiring graduate degrees will be 14% higher in 2031 than it was in 2021. The question is: Will the potential for improved employment prospects and higher long-term earnings outweigh the cost of obtaining a graduate degree, especially if you have to take on debt to pay for it? The answer depends on what specific degree you are pursuing—and how much of a salary boost you can expect from it—and how much of a burden your total debt load would be. 'It is totally valid to go to grad school when the job market is not great, because we know that it does make a difference when you enter the labor force," says Artem Gulish, senior federal policy adviser at Georgetown's education and the workforce center. 'But you still have to exercise due diligence that it is going to be beneficial and not just a way to stay out of the labor market." There is an alluring earnings premium that typically comes with a graduate degree—18% on average for someone with a master's degree compared with someone with just a bachelor's degree, according to the Georgetown center, and more than 60% for medical, law and doctoral degrees. The problem is the earnings premium has pretty much stayed around 18% over the past 30 years, while median borrowing for graduate school has increased by nearly 50% (in inflation-adjusted 2022 dollars) between 2000 and 2020 alone, according to the Georgetown center. That means if you intend to take out loans to pay for grad school, more of any additional earnings are likely to be eaten up by debt repayments. So where should students draw the line on borrowing? The Georgetown center recommends that student-loan repayments should be no more than 10% of discretionary income, to make it possible for borrowers to juggle debt repayment with current living costs and savings goals. But that may be a tough mark to hit. While only a minority of graduate programs report detailed earnings and debt information to the federal College Scorecard database, the Georgetown center found that among those programs that did report, 41% of master's-degree programs and 67% of professional-degree programs (doctor, dentist, lawyer) sent graduates out into the job market with repayment burdens above the 10% benchmark. Students are feeling the pain. In a 2023 survey of 1,000 graduate students by the Third Way think tank, nearly half of borrowers said their final borrowing tab was more than they expected going in, and more than half said it was going to take more time to repay those loans than they expected. On the earnings side, nearly 75% of respondents said the prospect of earning more was a major motivation for going to graduate school. But among those who had graduated, less than half felt their school did a good job in helping them toward that goal. Another factor to consider is the changes to the federal college-loan system under the tax and spending bill recently signed into law by President Trump. The new rules, which take effect July 1, 2026, limit the amount students can borrow from the government for graduate school ($100,000 for master's degrees and $200,000 for professional degrees), eliminating the popular Grad Plus program that had allowed loans for the full cost of a graduate degree. They also impose a combined lifetime limit for all federal undergraduate, graduate and professional loans, and cap the amount parents can borrow for their children. And the sole income-driven repayment plan is less generous than prior options. Mark Kantrowitz, an expert on student financing, says the new borrowing limits mean many prospective doctors, dentists and lawyers may need private loans to help pay for their degrees. Some master's-degree students who attend high-cost programs also may need to borrow more than they can from the government. Private loans require either a strong credit score or a cosigner, and their repayment terms generally are far stricter. They also often have higher interest rates. And, says Ann Garcia, a certified financial planner in Portland, Ore., the new limits on federal graduate loans mean less competition for private lenders, which could drive up the interest rates on many private loans. Some young adults also don't fully take into account the cost of their existing undergraduate debt when thinking about graduate school. Payments on federal undergraduate loans generally can be deferred while the borrower is in graduate school at least half time, but if the undergrad loan was unsubsidized, interest continues to build. Some private lenders offer this type of deferment, but interest usually also continues to build in those cases. 'You left undergrad with $27,000" in student loans, Garcia says, 'and in grad school that same debt grows to $41,000 because interest accrues, and that's on top of what you're borrowing for grad school." Kantrowitz suggests limiting total borrowing (undergraduate and graduate) to no more than what you can expect to earn your first year working. To get an idea of what that will be, you can search employment sites including and which provide general salary ranges. You also can check if a graduate program reports median earnings and debt for graduates to the federal College Scorecard database. If you are pursuing an advanced degree that you expect to qualify for public-service loan forgiveness, borrowing more may be OK, Kantrowitz says. But he cautions that an executive order signed this past March aims to limit the types of businesses and organizations whose employees would qualify for public-service loan forgiveness. The Education Department is working out specific rules. New Orleans certified financial planner Ryan Frailich says a common mistake he sees with clients who took on a burdensome amount of debt is that they tended to 'make the grad decision first and how to pay for it later, as though they are two separate decisions." He suggests moving the repayment question into the decision process. 'It's not a 'Should I go to grad school' question," he says. 'It's a 'Should I go to this grad school if I have to repay X dollars.' " Carla Fried is a writer in Tenerife, Spain. She can be reached at reports@
The Hill
22-07-2025
- Business
- The Hill
Graduate wage data can help restore public trust in higher education
President Trump's 'big, beautiful' budget reconciliation bill is now law, marking a watershed moment for higher education policy and renewing the debate about how to evaluate the return on investment of a college degree. College presidents, myself included, are accustomed to communicating the many benefits of their institutions, Yet it is also true that our sector has often resisted measuring and improving the financial returns of a college degree. Under the new policy framework adopted by Congress, it will no longer be possible for leaders to snub such disclosures. Despite the discomfort it will cause, I am hopeful that this policy transition will restore the public's trust in higher education through methods like those that Colorado Mountain College — the institution I lead — has employed for more than 10 years. Methods to measure the return on investment of a college degree have existed for decades. Nearly 40 years ago, my mentor Larry Leslie published the book 'The Economic Value of Higher Education.' When I studied under him a decade later, calculating social and economic returns was routine and not particularly controversial, as student debt was relatively low and most college degrees provided noteworthy positive results (they still do). More recently, the costs of college and average debt loads have grown dramatically, as has the pressure to demonstrate results. Despite these shifts, the active use of labor market data among higher education practitioners remains uncommon. Michael Itzkowitz, former director of the College Scorecard, describes higher education leaders as going through the 'five stages of grief' when confronted with the economic outcomes of their former students. Through my experience working in state government and now, as the president of a public institution, I have witnessed this firsthand. I distinctly recall being on the receiving end of one college executive dismissing a report my team and I prepared as 'lies.' Another prominent researcher called our findings 'deeply harmful,' arguing such data might discourage students from pursuing public-service degrees with lower financial returns. Labor market data is not deceitful. It is silent on the quality of academic programs, but it can reveal an uncomfortable reality: Students often end up with vastly different outcomes depending on their field of study and the type of credential they pursue. My home state of Colorado was one of the first to match the records of college graduates with post-graduation wages. This data-driven approach has informed educational policy for years, but it is seldom used at the institutional level. At our college, access to good-paying jobs isn't a luxury — it's essential. Our 11 campuses serve high-cost, rural-resort communities where many students work multiple jobs just to afford basic living expenses. For them, college is a pathway to financial stability and family security. Our students must weigh daily the varying opportunity costs of attending class or picking up an additional shift at work. Nearly a decade ago, we embraced this reality and began using 'labor market-aware' practices. We incorporated initiatives to better align our certificates and degrees to match critical local economic realities. From dental hygienists and nurses to first responders and specialists in addiction treatment, the school invests in programs that allow graduates to achieve economic stability. We don't create new programs unless they enable graduates to earn good jobs in our communities. The 'big, beautiful' law will, among many other things, tie federal funding to labor market outcomes at degree programs across the U.S. This new political reality may be disorienting to some schools, but given the rising costs of college, the ease with which students can accumulate significant debt and families' resulting worries about college affordability, it should surprise no one. Fortunately, labor market data is increasingly available, as higher education organizations, federal agencies and state governments have been analyzing, publishing and disseminating it for years. For the most part, the foundation is built, we just need to use it. Some national organizations provide accessible data on post-graduate earnings, identifying which institutions and programs produce strong outcomes and drive upward mobility — and which do not. Their work with states is helping scale these insights, filling a crucial gap in public understanding. The American Council on Education and the Carnegie Foundation also recently unveiled a new classification system that introduces labor market outcomes, giving policymakers and institutional leaders a new lens on social economic mobility, which should be a central goal of every college. As an educational economist and college leader, I embrace statistics — even those figures that make presidents a little queasy — and am accountable for demonstrating positive outcomes for all interested parties. Without question, wages aren't the only outcomes worth evaluating, but I believe that the active use of labor market data will create transparency that will go a long way toward restoring the public's trust in our institutions. I have questions about whether the Department of Education has sufficient capacity to manage program-level accountability. But I know that college presidents love their institutions and will do what is needed to deliver positive outcomes for their graduates. This moment is an opportunity for us to lead, to play offense and stop playing defense — and to reclaim higher education's status as America's preeminent investment opportunity for enabling economic growth and mobility. Matt Gianneschi is president of Colorado Mountain College, a local district Hispanic-Serving Institution with 11 campuses across the state.
Forbes
21-05-2025
- Business
- Forbes
Top 10 U.S. Colleges With The Highest ROI—Backed By Data
Many U.S. colleges provide exceptional lifetime ROI, showing that strong financial returns come from ... More more than just famous names. While parents and students often fixate on prestigious university brand names, the data tells a different story. The U.S. colleges offering the highest return on investment aren't necessarily those with the most recognizable reputations. As college costs continue to soar, financially savvy families are shifting their focus from acceptance rates and campus amenities to long-term ROI. This analysis identifies an elite group of 10 U.S. colleges delivering seven-figure lifetime returns, examines why many frequently fly under the radar, and reveals how employers increasingly value skills-based education. The leading authority for measuring college ROI comes from Georgetown University's Center on Education and the Workforce (CEW), which analyzes data from the U.S. Department of Education's College Scorecard. Their methodology calculates Net Present Value (NPV) over a 40-year career timespan, providing a comprehensive view of lifetime earnings potential. This approach accounts for critical variables like financial aid, graduation rates, and typical time-to-degree. It's worth noting that the CEW's calculations do not factor in the long-term impact of student loan debt. When evaluating ROI, prospective students should consider how loan repayment obligations might reduce their net financial gain. This specialized institution focuses exclusively on pharmaceutical sciences and healthcare, with graduates typically entering high-demand roles in pharmaceutical research, clinical practice, and healthcare administration. Despite its relatively low national profile, UHSP delivers returns that outpace even the most elite universities. As a member of the Claremont Colleges consortium in California, this small but mighty STEM powerhouse produces graduates who excel in engineering, computer science, and quantitative fields. With less than 1,000 students, Harvey Mudd maintains an intimate learning environment while delivering substantial returns. MIT's global reputation for excellence in science, engineering, and technology translates directly into exceptional graduate outcomes. The institution's deep connections to innovation ecosystems in Cambridge and beyond create pathways for graduates into high-growth sectors. Like UHSP, this specialized institution focuses on pharmaceutical sciences and healthcare professions, with graduates benefiting from the growing demand for healthcare expertise. The college's strategic location provides access to major healthcare employers across the Northeast. Formerly Massachusetts College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences, with Boston, Worcester, and Manchester campuses, MCPHS offers specialized training in pharmacy, nursing, and allied health fields that consistently command premium salaries. This innovative engineering school in Massachusetts was founded in 1997 with a substantial endowment and a mission to reimagine engineering education. Its project-based curriculum and entrepreneurial focus produce graduates who excel in technical and leadership roles. As the highest-ranked Ivy League institution, Princeton combines elite academic credentials with generous financial aid, resulting in lower net costs for many students and consequently higher lifetime ROI. Penn's Wharton School of Business contributes significantly to this strong showing, with business and finance graduates commanding premium starting salaries and experiencing steep earnings trajectories. Caltech's intimate size and intense focus on scientific research and engineering create exceptional outcomes for graduates, particularly those entering technology and research sectors. Located in the heart of Silicon Valley, Stanford's graduates benefit from unparalleled access to technology companies, venture capital, and innovation networks that drive premium earnings. Despite their exceptional financial returns, many of these high-ROI institutions remain under the radar for several reasons: • Prestige Bias: Families choose brand-name universities instead of looking at actual results. The status that comes with attending a well-known college continues to influence their choices, even when data clearly shows they'd be better off financially at another institution. • Limited Marketing Reach: Specialized institutions like pharmacy colleges typically operate with smaller promotional budgets than state universities or elite private colleges. Their recruitment efforts often focus regionally rather than nationally, limiting their visibility among potential applicants from other parts of the country. • Acceptance Rate Misconceptions: While many applicants focus on ultra-selective universities, several top-ROI schools accept over half of qualified applicants. This accessibility goes unnoticed when families automatically equate selectivity with quality. • Geographic Limitations: Many colleges and universities primarily draw students from their immediate regions, despite offering returns that would justify national consideration. This lack of national visibility means qualified students outside these geographic areas often remain unaware of these high-return institutions. The data reveals that what you study matters more than where you study. Engineering, computer science, and pharmacy programs deliver superior returns regardless of institutional prestige, while business or humanities degrees vary based on brand name. Even at Stanford and MIT, STEM graduates significantly out-earn humanities majors. Georgetown's analysis shows that technical and quantitative fields provide more consistent returns across colleges and universities. Students maximizing financial returns should prioritize their field of study over the institutional brand. According to the National Association of Colleges and Employers' (NACE) Job Outlook 2025 survey, nearly two-thirds of employers use skills-based hiring to identify promising candidates. This trend benefits graduates from high-ROI colleges and universities, as these schools typically emphasize practical training that develops real-world skills rather than just theoretical knowledge. However, the shift toward skills-based hiring means that even graduates from these high-return institutions can't rely solely on their alma mater's reputation. Employers increasingly use behavior-based job interviews, competency-based job descriptions, and resume screening for specific skills. These practices require all candidates to demonstrate their capabilities regardless of college pedigree. Given the availability of ROI metrics, students should approach college and university selection like any other significant investment by analyzing costs, risks, and expected returns. This approach positions students for long-term financial success regardless of shifting economic conditions. The colleges highlighted here demonstrate that prestige and financial payoff don't always align. Many less prominent schools deliver far superior financial returns than their more famous counterparts. Students can maximize their ROI by running careful calculations, choosing majors strategically and focusing on developing marketable skills throughout their college experience. In today's competitive environment, this data-driven approach to selecting a college is essential to securing a strong financial future.
