No income advantage to attending a sandstone uni - report

[Top_Cat]

Elite Group of Eight universities outperformed on graduate earnings, says study

The report itself:

https://www.melbourneinstitute.com/...stidtham_etal_818-mapping-background-2014.pdf

So, what they're really talking about is the effect on both starting and lifetime income. It's a bit annoying they only report p-values and estimates and not n's in the regression section but eh, it's not an academic report. Fairly short report and, shockingly, the Go8's have rejected it (they're right to wonder why it wasn't accepted anywhere for peer review, I guess) but worth a read with the Go8 unis salivating at increasing their tuition costs.

 

[Hurricane]

I know nothing about Australian schools. So I am just going in an ill informed manner from the gist I got from the article. If you are rating "top" universities against lower rated universities then the top universities will do better on every dimension including employment opportunities. But if you are going to start including polytechnics and those sort of schools as part of the mix then the top schools may not hold up as well. My experience of "tech" schools is that they have much higher employment rates and offer real life work experience through internships even if the students are not as smart academically which usually they aren't.

In my marketing department in Canada - I came from the top local university, about 10 people came from the top MBA program on other coast, and about 20 of them had been to the local institute of technology. And all of those 20 folks knew ten times more about marketing than I did. I had to learn everything on the job.

One of my fellow students who graduated with me was seriously contemplating enrolling to do a diploma at the tech school even though he had his piece of paper.

 

[Hurricane]

It's a bit annoying they only report p-values and estimates and not n's in the regression section but eh, it's not an academic report..

It has been nearly 20 years since I was an analyst that did multi step regression analysis on data sets to measure market place activity. From what little my meagre middle aged brain can remember - I think reporting p values is fine as it implies that a decently sized data series was used. Otherwise there would be t stats or some other ****duddery being quoted.

 

[Athlai]

Aww snap. Get rekt TC

 

[smalishah84]

It has been nearly 20 years since I was an analyst that did multi step regression analysis on data sets to measure market place activity. From what little my meagre middle aged brain can remember - I think reporting p values is fine as it implies that a decently sized data series was used. Otherwise there would be t stats or some other ****duddery being quoted.

I don't think you can conclude this from p-values.

You can also obtain p-values from the t-stat or F-stat or whichever other standardized stat you want to use.

The p-value just gives you the chances of observing something as extreme as you did

 

[Dan]

As a current student of a sandstone university: ****.

 

[Top_Cat]

Having been to both a Go8 a non Go8 uni, my own experience is that it depends on the course. I'm a big fan of saying the badge doesn't matter but I've bumped into the occasional employer who commented on the Go8 uni on my CV. Have no idea whether it made a difference in the hiring decision (I suspect not) but people do notice the uni. It's a bit silly, I had both good and bad experiences at both of them, varying levels of competence depending on topic. I don't know if this generalises but the top academics were similarly good at both but maybe the bottom rung were worse at the non-Go8 Uni. That's about as general as I can be, though.

It has been nearly 20 years since I was an analyst that did multi step regression analysis on data sets to measure market place activity. From what little my meagre middle aged brain can remember - I think reporting p values is fine as it implies that a decently sized data series was used. Otherwise there would be t stats or some other ****duddery being quoted.

Well, HILDA is big-ish so probably true but I just prefer seeing the size of the cells, especially with mixed models.

 

[silentstriker]

The premise is flawed in that it implies the purpose of a university education should be to maximize future earnings by teaching as many marketable technical skills as possible. I know that's what it has become because it's now become a requirement for many jobs that (IMO) shouldn't need a college degree, but I don't think that's what the universities are designed for.

 

[Uppercut]

Having been to both a Go8 a non Go8 uni, my own experience is that it depends on the course. I'm a big fan of saying the badge doesn't matter but I've bumped into the occasional employer who commented on the Go8 uni on my CV. Have no idea whether it made a difference in the hiring decision (I suspect not) but people do notice the uni. It's a bit silly, I had both good and bad experiences at both of them, varying levels of competence depending on topic. I don't know if this generalises but the top academics were similarly good at both but maybe the bottom rung were worse at the non-Go8 Uni. That's about as general as I can be, though.

The quality of education probably won't vary much. No one hires lecturers based on teaching, and the link between good research and good teaching is weak. But stronger universities attract smarter students, and the course is made tougher accordingly, so it's often more of an achievement to get a degree from the top ones.

 

[GIMH]

Is sandstone the Aussie version of redbrick

 

[Jono]

Is sandstone the Aussie version of redbrick

strictly speaking yes (as in reference to actual buildings), but sandstone uni is also now a reference to the highest ranked universities in Australia.

That's not the same as redbrick in the UK right?

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

The premise is flawed in that it implies the purpose of a university education should be to maximize future earnings by teaching as many marketable technical skills as possible. I know that's what it has become because it's now become a requirement for many jobs that (IMO) shouldn't need a college degree, but I don't think that's what the universities are designed for.

Well quite. What's the mix of Science:Medicine:Engineering:Commerce:Arts:Other disciplines in the Group of 8 versus though Universities outside the Group of 8. The employment expectations certainly vary by discipline, and if the mix is skewed between the two samples then that would impact on the average salary outcome.

 

[Jono]

Elite Group of Eight universities outperformed on graduate earnings, says study

The report itself:

https://www.melbourneinstitute.com/...stidtham_etal_818-mapping-background-2014.pdf

So, what they're really talking about is the effect on both starting and lifetime income. It's a bit annoying they only report p-values and estimates and not n's in the regression section but eh, it's not an academic report. Fairly short report and, shockingly, the Go8's have rejected it (they're right to wonder why it wasn't accepted anywhere for peer review, I guess) but worth a read with the Go8 unis salivating at increasing their tuition costs.

Technically Go8 ≠ sandstone right? Because UNSW and Monash are part of the Go8 but are not deemed sandstone unis.

 

[GIMH]

strictly speaking yes (as in reference to actual buildings), but sandstone uni is also now a reference to the highest ranked universities in Australia.

That's not the same as redbrick in the UK right?

I cbf to explain so

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_brick_university

 

[Jono]

I already read that before making my post to confirm what I thought redbrick referred to. Something you could have done with your sandstone question ya lazy bum.

 

[GIMH]

I blame Top Cat. All downhill since he questioned my love for Freddie

 

[Top_Cat]

The quality of education probably won't vary much. No one hires lecturers based on teaching, and the link between good research and good teaching is weak. But stronger universities attract smarter students, and the course is made tougher accordingly, so it's often more of an achievement to get a degree from the top ones.

Would dispute that as being an absolute guarantee in Australia. Elsewhere, nfi.

Adelaide University is a sandstone uni but there are certain courses in which it is convincingly out-performed by Flinders Uni, an up-start activist campus set-up in the 60s. Entrance scores for The 'big' degrees (law, med, etc.) are similar for both or lower at Adelaide e.g. psychology at Flinders = 90-odd vs 70-odd at Adelaide Uni, both about 90 for med, similar for Law. Except for med, those courses at Flinders have been well-known for being utterly brutal whereas Adelaide's are massively under-funded and behind the times. Computer science is probably tougher at Adelaide but even that depends on the sub-area. Maths, Flinders by streets.

Big difference? Hard to generalise too much but it seems to be participation in research. Even then, that's a bit of a furphy. Mate of mine is an assoc prof in theoretical physics at Adelaide but because Adelaide's funding for physics is ludicrously low, he has no in-house facilities for his computing so he uses the big clusters at ANU in Canberra and is an Australian Research Council Future Fellow i.e. totally externally funded. AU give him a dilapidated room, chair and desk. He could literally do what he does from anywhere but I promise you AU claim him every chance they get.

Technically Go8 ≠ sandstone right? Because UNSW and Monash are part of the Go8 but are not deemed sandstone unis.

Yeah but you knew who I meant, the rich ****s united by their desire to raise fees.

 

[Jono]

Yeah but you knew who I meant, the rich ****s united by their desire to raise fees.

I wasn't meaning you, I meant the article which referred to Go8 and sandstone as if they were the same.

 

[Jono]

Anyway we all know the crud Sydney and UNSW unis within the Go8 are dragging this down. If we just assessed Melb Uni it'd be #1 by so far.

 

[Top_Cat]

The premise is flawed in that it implies the purpose of a university education should be to maximize future earnings by teaching as many marketable technical skills as possible. I know that's what it has become because it's now become a requirement for many jobs that (IMO) shouldn't need a college degree, but I don't think that's what the universities are designed for.

This is true but I think you'll find reports like this, with all their flaws, are intended as a response to the politics of the day rather than assessing whether going to university should be about maximising income. The Grattan institute is a think-tank like any other.

Our system is headed more toward an American-style deregulation of fees and the Go8 ****s are a very powerful voting bloc. Education is going to become more commodified as in the US and reports like this are one voice which will likely be drowned out in the flood of promotions that will occur when the inevitable happens (and it is inevitable). In the wave of universities quoting their fees as a proxy for prestige, people will naturally want to know what they're getting for their dollar and they need to know maybe it's not as much as they think. That said, in a deregulated setting, maybe that will change.

It's a complex debate, depends on your aims. I mean, sure, if you want to be a scientist, prestige and your name on Nature papers, go to an Ivy and pay their ludicrous fees. But I tell ya, some of the stuff I've read in Nature is very thin so I also don't think high impact = good. But then, Harvard on your CV looks awfully good to most people sooo.....