Subscribe to Blog via Email
Good Stats Bad Stats
Search Text
November 2024 S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 -
Recent Posts
goodstatsbadstats.com
Last Sunday in an opinion piece by Robert Samuelson appeared in the Washington Post questioned the emphasis on getting a college education. With the increasing cost of a college education the wisdom of sending our young people to college has come into question. With the recent recession the recent graduates have been having a hard time getting their first job has added to the controversy. Funny thing is back in 1970 new college graduates were also having a hard time getting a job and no one seemed to be questioning the value of a college degree back then. The sad truth is that in the middle of a recession many people have problems getting and keeping a job. That is the nature of a recession.
So with the release by the Bureau of Labor Statistics job report today I looked at one measure of the value of a college degree – the unemployment rate. The numbers are enlightening. I only looked at those over age 24 as these are the values readily available in the BLS report. The downside of using the 25 and over age group is that if fails to fully reflect the status of the recent college graduates. Samuelson cites statistics on graduation rates within six years of starting college. Those would be mostly people turning 24 or 25 that year. That in itself makes that cutoff a fair values for evaluating the impact of a college degree on employment.
So which group is it better to be in? I’d rather have that college degree.
As with any situation relying on just one number can be misleading. A full evaluation would look at income levels and debt levels for college graduates as compared to other groups.
Samuelson failed to look at the bottom line. Instead he quotes claims that we have “dumbed down college.” He cites statistics that show that “fewer than 60 percent of freshmen graduate within six years.” He seems to think 60 percent is a bad number but offers no evidence of his reasons for coming to that conclusion. Who asked: is it better to try and fail than to never try?