To SactownDog

[Bill Marsh]

Relying on acceptance rates to compare schools is a fool's errand. The only relevant comparison metric is the academic profile of incoming students. Big East schools generally don't have the most impressive acceptance rates but that's because the applicant pools are comparatively self-selective and high-quality. That's the only conclusion you can draw when you see high academic profiles paired with pedestrian acceptance rates.

I would agree acceptance rates are a poor measure to judge a school. Better items would be what is the schools graduation rate. What is the average level of school debt after 10 years. These items are the ones that really matter, not incoming academic profiles, acceptance rates, or how many doctoral degrees. In today's world too many kids exit college with crushing debt and few job prospects to pay off that debt. Schools that do the best making sure that doesn't happen to their students are the top ranked schools in my book.

Great point! When I look at college debt these days, I have to question whether it's worth going to college. The best thing about Bernie's campaign was free public college tuition for qualified students.

Some schools do a great job with cost. I live near Wesleyan University, one of the "little Ivies". When my granddaughter was visiting the campus recently, I learned that the average student pays only $16,000 per year of the $48,000 sticker price, and a total of $24,000 on all costs. That's a school doing a great job to make it affordable.

[Savannah Jay]

Relying on acceptance rates to compare schools is a fool's errand. The only relevant comparison metric is the academic profile of incoming students. Big East schools generally don't have the most impressive acceptance rates but that's because the applicant pools are comparatively self-selective and high-quality. That's the only conclusion you can draw when you see high academic profiles paired with pedestrian acceptance rates.

I would agree acceptance rates are a poor measure to judge a school. Better items would be what is the schools graduation rate. What is the average level of school debt after 10 years. These items are the ones that really matter, not incoming academic profiles, acceptance rates, or how many doctoral degrees. In today's world too many kids exit college with crushing debt and few job prospects to pay off that debt. Schools that do the best making sure that doesn't happen to their students are the top ranked schools in my book.

WCC 4 year graduation rate is 18%; average debt after 4 years is $29k
Creighton 4 year graduation rate is 72%; average debt after 4 years is $33k

Other notable 4 year graduation rates: Nova 87%; PC 81%; Stanford 75%; SJU 68%; XU 66% (I only gave a quick glance so if other schools aren't here it just means I didn't see them when I scanned the list in US News).

[marquette]

Relying on acceptance rates to compare schools is a fool's errand. The only relevant comparison metric is the academic profile of incoming students. Big East schools generally don't have the most impressive acceptance rates but that's because the applicant pools are comparatively self-selective and high-quality. That's the only conclusion you can draw when you see high academic profiles paired with pedestrian acceptance rates.

I would agree acceptance rates are a poor measure to judge a school. Better items would be what is the schools graduation rate. What is the average level of school debt after 10 years. These items are the ones that really matter, not incoming academic profiles, acceptance rates, or how many doctoral degrees. In today's world too many kids exit college with crushing debt and few job prospects to pay off that debt. Schools that do the best making sure that doesn't happen to their students are the top ranked schools in my book.

WCC 4 year graduation rate is 18%; average debt after 4 years is $29k
Creighton 4 year graduation rate is 72%; average debt after 4 years is $33k

Other notable 4 year graduation rates: Nova 87%; PC 81%; Stanford 75%; SJU 68%; XU 66% (I only gave a quick glance so if other schools aren't here it just means I didn't see them when I scanned the list in US News).

$36,700 average debt, 1.3% default rate, 58% 4 year graduation rate. A comparison, UW-Milwaukee, one of the cheaper public schools, has an average debt around $30,000 and a default rate of 5.6%, which is still well below the national average of 7.3% (14% 4 year graduation rate). UW-Madison: $29,600 average debt, 4 year graduation rate of 57% and default rate of 1.5%.

Overall I'd say we compare somewhat favorably to other education options in the area.

Numbers taken from collegefactual.com and US News.

[Sactowndog]

Relying on acceptance rates to compare schools is a fool's errand. The only relevant comparison metric is the academic profile of incoming students. Big East schools generally don't have the most impressive acceptance rates but that's because the applicant pools are comparatively self-selective and high-quality. That's the only conclusion you can draw when you see high academic profiles paired with pedestrian acceptance rates.

I would agree acceptance rates are a poor measure to judge a school. Better items would be what is the schools graduation rate. What is the average level of school debt after 10 years. These items are the ones that really matter, not incoming academic profiles, acceptance rates, or how many doctoral degrees. In today's world too many kids exit college with crushing debt and few job prospects to pay off that debt. Schools that do the best making sure that doesn't happen to their students are the top ranked schools in my book.

WCC 4 year graduation rate is 18%; average debt after 4 years is $29k
Creighton 4 year graduation rate is 72%; average debt after 4 years is $33k

Other notable 4 year graduation rates: Nova 87%; PC 81%; Stanford 75%; SJU 68%; XU 66% (I only gave a quick glance so if other schools aren't here it just means I didn't see them when I scanned the list in US News).

I'm guessing WCC stands for Wichita Community College. If Creighton were something other than the backup school for rich Nebraskans with more money than brains that insult might be compelling.

As for your data... 4 year graduation rates mean much more at a private college then a lower cost state school. How about 6 years graduation rates. I would also like to see your average debt by income brackets. My daughter has little debt also but it isn't do to the grad school she attends.

If you are going to insult try to not so obviously slant your data.

[Sactowndog]

I would agree acceptance rates are a poor measure to judge a school. Better items would be what is the schools graduation rate. What is the average level of school debt after 10 years. These items are the ones that really matter, not incoming academic profiles, acceptance rates, or how many doctoral degrees. In today's world too many kids exit college with crushing debt and few job prospects to pay off that debt. Schools that do the best making sure that doesn't happen to their students are the top ranked schools in my book.

WCC 4 year graduation rate is 18%; average debt after 4 years is $29k
Creighton 4 year graduation rate is 72%; average debt after 4 years is $33k

Other notable 4 year graduation rates: Nova 87%; PC 81%; Stanford 75%; SJU 68%; XU 66% (I only gave a quick glance so if other schools aren't here it just means I didn't see them when I scanned the list in US News).

$36,700 average debt, 1.3% default rate, 58% 4 year graduation rate. A comparison, UW-Milwaukee, one of the cheaper public schools, has an average debt around $30,000 and a default rate of 5.6%, which is still well below the national average of 7.3% (14% 4 year graduation rate). UW-Madison: $29,600 average debt, 4 year graduation rate of 57% and default rate of 1.5%.

Overall I'd say we compare somewhat favorably to other education options in the area.

Numbers taken from collegefactual.com and US News.

I have no problem with Marquette but 4 year graduation rates are slanted in favor of private schools which have to get kids out generally in 4 years. BTW, I say that and all members of my family went to private schools: Pomona, Smith, Butler, and UOP. It's just a slanted statistic. Also default rates should be compared across comparable socio-economic classes. If 75% of parents come from the top 10% and get no loans or small loans the data is skewed. For example, my daughter has a 10K loan for grad school merely to build her credit score. She has classmates with 100K or more in debt. The delta has nothing to do with the quality of the school. Her loan will be paid off regardless what happens with the school.

I get the data may not exist and quite frankly we need better more accessible data to judge the effectiveness of our educational institutions. Too often the data can be misleading and lead to poor financial decisions by students.

[Sactowndog]

Relying on acceptance rates to compare schools is a fool's errand. The only relevant comparison metric is the academic profile of incoming students. Big East schools generally don't have the most impressive acceptance rates but that's because the applicant pools are comparatively self-selective and high-quality. That's the only conclusion you can draw when you see high academic profiles paired with pedestrian acceptance rates.

I would agree acceptance rates are a poor measure to judge a school. Better items would be what is the schools graduation rate. What is the average level of school debt after 10 years. These items are the ones that really matter, not incoming academic profiles, acceptance rates, or how many doctoral degrees. In today's world too many kids exit college with crushing debt and few job prospects to pay off that debt. Schools that do the best making sure that doesn't happen to their students are the top ranked schools in my book.

Great point! When I look at college debt these days, I have to question whether it's worth going to college. The best thing about Bernie's campaign was free public college tuition for qualified students.

Some schools do a great job with cost. I live near Wesleyan University, one of the "little Ivies". When my granddaughter was visiting the campus recently, I learned that the average student pays only $16,000 per year of the $48,000 sticker price, and a total of $24,000 on all costs. That's a school doing a great job to make it affordable.

Thanks Bill,

Sadly it increasingly a world of haves and have nots which is not a good proposition for our country. Too many kids are sunk before they start. We need more data that shows kids from X background received on average Y help and Z loans. 10 year default rates, based on socio-economic status was xx%.

I want to know which colleges helped all kids be successful regardless of socio-economic class not which schools can attract kids who have a wealthy daddy.

[Sactowndog]

Here is a great site that provides ratings:

https://sportstvratings.com/espn-colleg ... 2016/7004/

Got to be impressed by the Creighton rating which lost out to Auburn/UAB on Bein

[Jet915]

Here is a great site that provides ratings:

https://sportstvratings.com/espn-colleg ... 2016/7004/

Got to be impressed by the Creighton rating which lost out to Auburn/UAB on Bein

Bein sports is in 42 million households about the same as Fox Sports 2 so not sure what kind of lame point you are trying to make. Better than being on ESPN3.

[Savannah Jay]

]

I'm guessing WCC stands for Wichita Community College. If Creighton were something other than the backup school for rich Nebraskans with more money than brains that insult might be compelling.

As for your data... 4 year graduation rates mean much more at a private college then a lower cost state school. How about 6 years graduation rates. I would also like to see your average debt by income brackets. My daughter has little debt also but it isn't do to the grad school she attends.

If you are going to insult try to not so obviously slant your data.

I posted 4 year graduation rates of the Big East Schools, Wichita, and Stanford (because you brought them into the mix a few posts ago). And I used 4 years because, you know, schools market themselves as four year universities. Your comments about Creighton students show your general ignorance about it, which is fine. I am not from Nebraska and most certainly did not grow up rich (by monetary standards). My dad worked in a factory for 40 years and my mom stayed at home. But i did feel rich. Does that count?

Wichita's 6 year grad rate is 41.5%. Since you asked, the 4 year grad rates at other public universities in Kansas:
Southwestern College 37%
Pittsburg State 36%
Univ of Kansas 32%
Kansas State 26%
Emporia State 22%
Fort Hays State 20%
Wichita 17% (Kiplinger's has it at 17%; US News at 18%); i used Kiplinger's because it can be searched by state but 17% and 18% are equally bad

Wichita's grad rate is the worst of any public university in Kansas. I could show the grad rates at state schools all over the same region and the story would be the same. Right now Wichita has a really good basketball team. It is not a really good school by any objective measure. Instead of holding itself out as a four year university, maybe they should market it as "we'll take your money for 6 years and after that amount of time and effort, you have a better than 40% chance of having a degree." If you want to do your own research about debt and household income, knock yourself out. If I do it, you will just manufacture more excuses or change the criteria.

[Sactowndog]

]

I'm guessing WCC stands for Wichita Community College. If Creighton were something other than the backup school for rich Nebraskans with more money than brains that insult might be compelling.

As for your data... 4 year graduation rates mean much more at a private college then a lower cost state school. How about 6 years graduation rates. I would also like to see your average debt by income brackets. My daughter has little debt also but it isn't do to the grad school she attends.

If you are going to insult try to not so obviously slant your data.

I posted 4 year graduation rates of the Big East Schools, Wichita, and Stanford (because you brought them into the mix a few posts ago). And I used 4 years because, you know, schools market themselves as four year universities. Your comments about Creighton students show your general ignorance about it, which is fine. I am not from Nebraska and most certainly did not grow up rich (by monetary standards). My dad worked in a factory for 40 years and my mom stayed at home. But i did feel rich. Does that count?

Wichita's 6 year grad rate is 41.5%. Since you asked, the 4 year grad rates at other public universities in Kansas:
Southwestern College 37%
Pittsburg State 36%
Univ of Kansas 32%
Kansas State 26%
Emporia State 22%
Fort Hays State 20%
Wichita 17% (Kiplinger's has it at 17%; US News at 18%); i used Kiplinger's because it can be searched by state but 17% and 18% are equally bad

Wichita's grad rate is the worst of any public university in Kansas. I could show the grad rates at state schools all over the same region and the story would be the same. Right now Wichita has a really good basketball team. It is not a really good school by any objective measure. Instead of holding itself out as a four year university, maybe they should market it as "we'll take your money for 6 years and after that amount of time and effort, you have a better than 40% chance of having a degree." If you want to do your own research about debt and household income, knock yourself out. If I do it, you will just manufacture more excuses or change the criteria.

I agree Wichita's numbers at 6 years are poor. BTW I never changed the criteria. I stated 6 years from the start.