Also unclear how it works for the PhD pipeline. If you roll straight from bachelor's to a doctorate program - you have abysmal earnings for the next 5-6 years of your life.

▲

bruce511 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Indeed. Equally the person who has 4 Years experience in the workplace probably does better than a first year grad.

In other words, when trying to measure value outcomes, what time period should one consider?

And does the rule apply at the college level or the program level? If I churn out 100 people in my law school, can I average their prospects with 50 from my Archaeology degree? Or with 50 from my "music in movies" degree?

▲

dataflow 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Unless a program has a habit of sending the majority of its undergrads into PhDs, that part might not be so hard to resolve -- just exclude everyone who does that from the measurement sample.

	▲	bruce511 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Who decides who should be included or excluded from the statistics? The govt? In this era of open hostility to institutions that won't toe the line? Who are looking for ways to punish what they don't like? Or perhaps the college? If they decide then can they pick and choose who goes into what statistic? Does a drop-out (like say Bill Gates) get included or excluded? Do we even accept the premise, that education's sole goal is higher salaries? This whole rule is performative. It merely gives power to the powerful to exercise in whatever way they like.

▲

WalterBright 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

You're right that getting a PhD comes with a vow of poverty. Unless your doctorate is in AI.