Slashdot Mirror


State Colleges May Offer Best ROI On Comp Sci Degrees

jfruh (300774) writes "PayScale has recently released a survey of various U.S. colleges and majors, and determined, perhaps unsurprisingly, that computer science graduates of elite colleges make the most money in post-graduate life. However, blogger Phil Johnson approached the problem in a different way, taking into account the amount students and their families need to pay in tuition, [and found] that the best return on investment in comp sci degrees often comes from top-tier public universities, which cost significantly less for in-state students but still offer great rewards in terms of salaries for grads."

13 of 127 comments (clear)

  1. Moo by Chacham · · Score: 4, Funny

    Unfortunately, you have to be a finance major to understand the report.

    But the Finance major can't possibly be a CS major, unless he went to college twice, which would means he can't plan anyway. Regardless, if he went for Finance first, then to CS, he obviously realized that CS was better. But, if he went for CS first, then for Finance, he would then realize that CS was better. This catch 22 is the best proof why Agile is the preferred method even when taking college courses.

  2. Re:Bullshit. by jellomizer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The MIT or Harvard, for a degree in Computer Science doesn't offer you superior education, it just looks nice on your resume. This is all fine and good to try to get a job first job. However after time less and less is dependent on where you got your degree from, just that you got a degree.
    Now we have some employers who get impressed by the fancy name, but those balance out by the ones who get turned off by it. Because they often create pretentious workers who think they know it all and are not willing to learn the real way of doing things, or listen to the experience from the guy who doesn't have such a fancy degree.

    In general companies do not like their employees with a lot of debt, because they are under more stress, and stress causes more irrational behavior. Sell their car, sleep in the office, or just get snappy at customers.

    A degree from a State University vs a prestigious college isn't toilet paper, especially if you are interested in going to the corporate world. Your education in a State School espectially for undergrad work is probably better then the big names. Why? They get more professors who want to teach undergrads, vs the big names where you have more professors involved in their own research projects and teaching undergrads is one of those useless chores they need to do. So you have undergrads getting better teaching, and more time understanding the content, and less time just being bullied by the professor who wants the class to fail out so he can use the rest of the semester on his research.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  3. Re:Bullshit. by 0xdeadbeef · · Score: 4, Informative

    Yes, brag about that Harvard CS degree. lol.

  4. Re:Bullshit. by khallow · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So it's not actually based on evidence? Two can play at that game.

    There's the other side of the coin, namely, that a employee who wracks up a lot of debt is more likely to making bad workplace decisions (since they've already demonstrated an inclination for doing so) or engage in theft and embezzlement (because they have huge financial incentive to do so).

  5. I agree, with very few exceptions by ErichTheRed · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If you're after a good solid education, state schools do offer the best ROI for undergrad studies. I went to one, and was able to (barely) pay for it myself with a small amount of student loans, summer work and a little savings. Undergraduate education, from a content perspective, is very similar everywhere. I have a chemistry degree, and almost all undergrad chemistry programs are the same -- 2 survey courses, 2 organic chem, 2 physical chem, 2 analytical chem, 4 or 5 different lab courses, 4 or 5 electives (which vary based on what the schools' professors are concentrating on.)

    The main differentiating factors I've noticed with private schools are the networking opportunities in and out of school, and the "cushy" factor. Even in a high tax state like New York, the state universities are pretty Spartan as far as accommodations go. Lately, states have been spending lavish sums trying to catch up in terms of sports facilities, etc. but they're still not a Harvard or Yale. Students going the state university route need to understand that they're going to get what they pay for, and likely be ahead of their private university peers in terms of raw dollars in debt when they get out. They need to be self-motivated and mature enough to handle their own affairs -- outside of class, everything at a state university is like dealing with a state agency. You're one student of thousands, and no one but you is going to care if you fail out. As far as opportunities go, private schools do give you a leg up. There are certain jobs you can't even hope to interview for such as white-shoe consulting firms or investment banking, who almost exclusively recruit from Ivy League schools. In my experience, this only applies to your first job or two, however. I've interviewed both public and private college grads, and there's an equal distribution of qualified people in each camp.

    Since tuition is going way up at both the public and private levels, students who don't already have the money saved really do need to do a cost-benefit analysis. I probably would have had a better experience at somewhere like MIT or Stanford, just because I would have been studying with more smart people. But, I didn't have the money for $100K+ tuition. Students need to stop and think whether the caché of a big name school offsets the huge expense. They need to think about things like:

    • - Do I want to go to medical or law school after undergrad?
    • - Do I ever want to work in investment banking?
    • - Will I be disappointed if I don't get to work at BCG, Bain, or Booz & Company?
    • - Do I want the opportunity to hang out with the children of corporate executives and make those "school ties" connections that public university students can't get?

    If the answer to any of these is "yes" and the student has a pot of money, they should go to private school. Otherwise, they should save their money. If a student is willing to hustle a little to get their first job, their accomplishments at that job and the connections they make will carry them through the rest of their careers. They probably won't reach stratospheric heights of corporate power, but talented students graduating with in-demand degrees can still do well.

  6. Re:Most undergrad educations are the same by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I teach CS at an almost Ivy school in the Philly area. I don't see any advantage to any one decent-enough CS school over any other beyond, perhaps, the contacts that might lead to one's first job. That said, determination trumps contacts. It's just not the deal that people make it out to be. Would much rather my kids get through school without 200k in debt to pay off. The logo on your diploma doesn't really matter to anybody who matters.

  7. Re:Bullshit. by ThatsDrDangerToYou · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Wow, you must work for some real assholes. Basically, you are describing a level of cluelessness in management that I think is less common than you think. Because.. really?

    "You assume that anyone gives a shit about the quality of education once you're trying to get a job, they care about WHERE you went"

    Only if they are clueless.

    They want their employees as stressed out as possible, because they think that's the way they'll be the most productive.

    They are assholes and you really don't want to be working for them. Run!

    Let's say you've got two resumes on your desk. One is from someone who had a 4.0 at Aggie U, the other is from someone with a 4.0 at Harvard. Guess which resume winds up in the bin with no further scrutiny? Hint: It's not the one from the Harvard grad.

    Anyone with a 4.0 from anywhere deserves a phone screen at a minimum, assuming they have relevant experience. As others have noted, as you get more experience, what you have done professionally becomes far more important than where you spent your undergrad days. Where you did your grad degree(s) is given more weight, but even then, it's what you did with your time there.

    You have apparently had bad experiences in corporateland. I would suggest a few years in startups maybe.

  8. Re:Bullshit. by jellomizer · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Having worked with bosses, and been part of the hiring process... Those big college names mean very little. Perhaps an equivalent of 2 more years of experience.
    So we got Person A with 4 years experience and a State Degree and we got a Person with 2 years experience and a Ivy League Degree, then we will have a crap shoot. Just because of the difficulty of getting in the school means that this person has a good track record of working hard. But that is about it.
    However the real value of a good education isn't getting the job, but keeping and advancing in the job. If you know your stuff then you will advance, if you just an arrogant prick unless you truly mastered the art of BS and Networking (not common with people with just a CS degree) then you will probably stay at your position while others work up.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  9. "Education" vs "degree" by netsavior · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I know very few people who actually went to university to get an education. And even fewer employers who care more about "Education" than "degree." Nearly all of the people I work with and went to college with went for a degree.
    If you could do the job you want to have for the rest of your life the day you leave high school (like most software engineers who actually write code for a living - assuming some learning on the job) then your greatest ROI is to get an accredited diploma from the cheapest, fastest university you can go to.

    You are filling in a checkbox, not seeking an education... don't fool yourself.

    A degree is a practical expense for most people. An "education" is a luxury afforded only for the very rich. Don't go into crippling debt to get an education, you (basically everyone) can't afford that crap. You can study and learn on your own, later. You are there for a degree, and don't forget it.

    An entire generation of people seem confused about this. They think an "education" is worth going into massive debt, they think an "education" will get them a job that will pay the bills... well, I should use the past tense, because nobody thinks that anymore. According to what I have read about "Millennials"

    Degree as part of a structured career plan = good idea
    Education as a "career will follow" plan is OVER, it was the case in 1965, but you will enjoy a lifetime full of debt and meager earnings if you use that "plan" now.

    If it seems harsh and anti-education I am sorry. I am all about learning, but novelty $100,000 sheepskins, sold at 4% interest to first generation college students with no career plan - really boils my blood.

    It is really disappointing that in my lifetime we have managed to shift seeking an education from an empowering experience to hopelessly and permanently hindering the lives of middle and lower class people.

  10. Calculation was flawed by ranton · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You don't have to be a finance major to understand that the calculations were flawed. They only count the amount spent on tuition. They don't count the cost of your human capital and the opportunity costs involved. Investing in yourself is not like investing in the stock market because you only have one life to invest in. So you cannot just compare the difference in tuition between a state school and Stanford because you are also giving up a portion of your young life to your educational pursuits.

    Their highest 20 year net ROI/yr school was University of Virginia, but they only returned $1.3 million in total. Stanford returned $1.7 million. So even though the annual ROI was greater at the University of Virginia, you are still leaving $400k on the table by not choosing Stanford. And considering you can borrow money at 6.8% interest, it only costs you $90k more after interest to go to Stanford instead of the University of Virginia (if the loans are paid over a 20 year period).

    So the only correct calculation is that going to Stanford will net you an extra $300k versus going to the University of Virginia (obviously this is not a very precise calculation though).

    --
    -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
    1. Re:Calculation was flawed by LordLimecat · · Score: 4, Informative

      On the flip side, attending UVA in-state costs around $12k/year and you arent gambling your future on the hope that you DO recoup the costs.

      Opportunity cost is thrown around as if attending Georgetown guarantees a high-paying job. Turns out all it guarantees is a massive debt and a shot on the roulette wheel.

  11. You get out of your education... by cplusplus · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...what you put in to it. I went to a local state university for CS, and I studied hard and did well in school. Four years later I had my BS in CS in hand having paid less than $15K in tuition (and that wasn't all that long ago). I got a job locally with the help of referrals by professors who had good working relationships with many of the local tech employers. In short, my entire education was a helluva bargain, and helped launch my career.

    --
    "False hope is why we'll never run out of natural resources!" - Lewis Black
  12. Bad training for programming careers by Grishnakh · · Score: 3, Insightful

    One thing I've found in the work world that they don't prepare you for at all in college is the work environment. In college, you take CS or engineering classes, and you do the work on your own, frequently in the solitude of your own apartment, or at the library where it's quiet. Then, when it's time for an exam, you take it in the classroom, and talking and discussion and other noises are not allowed. This should all be changed, because it doesn't reflect the modern work environment.

    First off, students should be required to do all their programming assignments and exercises together in one large room, at rows of open tables with no dividers between them. A class full of business majors or better yet marketing majors should be brought in and sat right next to them, so they can do their collaborative projects next to the CS/engr majors. The business/marketing majors can talk loudly all they want, and interrupt the CS/engr majors while they're working with various useless comments ("How's it going!"). The CS/engr majors should not be allowed to take their work anywhere else; they have to do it only in this environment.

    When it's test time, the test should be held in a busy corridor. Put all the students at long tables together on the side of the corridor, so that all the foot traffic passes right next to them.

    If you can't do your programming work with lots of noise and commotion and people talking to you and walking by you constantly, you have NO business being a programmer in today's corporate world where open-plan work areas are now the norm.