UGA or Duke? Do elite schools reap greater returns?

Studies suggest graduates of elite schools like Duke earn more over their lifetimes.

Studies suggest graduates of elite schools like Duke earn more over their lifetimes.

Many Georgia parents of high school seniors are debating whether to push their child to attend UGA or Tech or go broke sending them to Duke or Emory.

Are those select colleges worth the thousands more that they charge in tuition?

That’s a question that you will hear discussed at almost every high school PTA meeting these days. With elite colleges costing $50,000 a year for tuition, room and board, many parents reason that their children should go the HOPE route and attend UGA , GSU or Valdosta for undergraduate and save their money for a top tier graduate school.

But will that $50,000 a year at a Princeton or Yale lead to higher salaries and more opportunities down the road?

A New York Times story explores that issue — one that we have discussed here at length in the past –  in a news story this week.

According to the Times:

Among the most cited research on the subject — a paper by economists from the RAND Corporation and Brigham Young and Cornell Universities — found that “strong evidence emerges of a significant economic return to attending an elite private institution, and some evidence suggests this premium has increased over time.”

Grouping colleges by the same tiers of selectivity used in a popular college guidebook, Barron’s, the researchers found that alumni of the most selective colleges earned, on average, 40 percent more a year than those who graduated from the least selective public universities, as calculated 10 years after they graduated from high school.

Those same researchers found in a separate paper that “attendance at an elite private college significantly increases the probability of attending graduate school, and more specifically graduate school at a major research university.”

One major caveat: these studies, which tracked more than 5,000 college graduates, some for more than a decade, are themselves now more than a decade old. Over that period, of course, the full sticker price for elite private colleges has far outstripped the pace of inflation, to say nothing of the cost of many of their public school peers (even accounting for the soaring prices of some public universities, especially in California, suffering under state budget crises).

Despite the lingering gap in pricing between public and private schools, Eric R. Eide, one of the authors of that paper on the earnings of blue-chip college graduates, said he had seen no evidence that would persuade him to revise, in 2010, the conclusion he reached in 1998.

“Education is a long-run investment,” said Professor Eide, chairman of the economics department at Brigham Young, “It may be more painful to finance right now. People may be more hesitant to go into debt because of the recession. In my opinion, they should be looking over the long run of their child’s life.”

He added, “I don’t think the costs of college are going up faster than the returns on graduating from an elite private college.”

Still, one flaw in such research has always been that it can be hard to disentangle the impact of the institution from the inherent abilities and personal qualities of the individual graduate. In other words, if someone had been accepted at an elite college, but chose to go to a more pedestrian one, would his earnings over the long term be the same?

In 1999, economists from Princeton and the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation looked at some of the same data Professor Eide and his colleagues had used, but crunched them in a different way: they compared students at more selective colleges to others of “seemingly comparable ability,” based on their SAT scores and class rank, who had attended less selective schools, either by choice or because a top college rejected them.

The earnings of graduates in the two groups were about the same — perhaps shifting the ledger in favor of the less expensive, less prestigious route. (The one exception was that children from “disadvantaged family backgrounds” appeared to earn more over time if they attended more selective colleges. The authors, Stacy Berg Dale and Alan B. Krueger, do not speculate why, but conclude, “These students appear to benefit most from attending a more elite college.”)

– By Maureen Downey, for the AJC Get Schooled blog.

110 comments Add your comment

[...] fees, they are responsible for choice of educational institutions? This is a problem … Read More Share and [...]

Toto: speakin' the truth to power

December 21st, 2010
2:22 am

The graduates of the “elites” have DESTROYED this country. Why are we in debt for TRILLIONS? Why have most jobs gone overseas? Why is Wall Street, filled with ivy grads, a DEN OF THIEVES? These schools churn out politically correct amoral robots. THEY ARE NO BETTER THAN CASINO WORKERS! Our ivy league President has historic low approval ratings and has turned the Constitution on its head. His leadership is so poor that a third party has been formed to unseat him! Shut down the ivies and Wall Street, and we would once again have a great nation.

John

December 21st, 2010
3:30 am

The fact of the matter is, most people commenting and saying elite schools don’t matter are people who didn’t go to these schools and are projecting anti-aristocratic resentment (as seen above^). At the end of the day, elite schools do open doors for people- the only question is how much and whats that worth? If they all costs the same, Duke is the obvious choice of schools mentioned in the article, followed by Emory, then GT (perhaps 2nd if a science type), and then UGA. If you throw more elite schools into the mix, then Duke falls behind the likes of Harvard, Yale, and Princeton. So who generally sends there kids to the elite schools? Those who can afford it without thinking- which means students at Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Duke, Northwestern, Stanford, Dartmouth, etc. (basically the USNews Top 10) are often comprised of a majority of wealthy children receiving the best educations available in America– which leads to rich kids getting more opportunities. Fact of life.

HS Public Teacher

December 21st, 2010
8:58 am

@really amazed -

It is a very good thing for your son to be taking the most rigorous courses in high school. You should be proud and also encouraging to him. This will only serve to benefit him in the future, regardless of where he goes to college.

However, you also should be concerned that he is not making As any more. Is there a reason? Does he need to increase study time at home? Does he have a group of friends for a study group? Finding these answers now will help resolve future problems he may face once in college. The worst thing is just to accept that “less than A” is okay. He will then develop the mentality that he does not need to try his best academically.

TopPublicSchool

December 21st, 2010
10:11 am

The “ELITE” elementary school in Northside, Buckhead Atlanta…Be proud!
And …”put on a Jackson Smile” when you drop your labels at the country club.

Atlanta Public School-Warren T. Jackson Elementary School
Principal, Lorraine B. Reich

http://www.youtube.com/user/TopSchoolAtlanta

there right now

December 21st, 2010
3:55 pm

@really amazed -

My kid got As and Bs in high school, ut they were in the most challenging classes the school offered. Colleges take this into account, and it is better to get a mixture of grades in hardest classes than to have gotten all As in the second-hardest classes. Shows the student is willing to work hard and take an academic risk to challenge himself.

The colleges also look at what else a kid did in high school – they don’t really want the kid who got all As but did it by going home every night and studying without a break. Don’t stick to high school clubs – if your son does something in the community (like he has been rock climbing since he was 10 and still loves it, or he has volunteered at 2 or 3 fundraisers a year for a local non-profit for the last 4 years) that’s great. Not so good to join LOTS of clubs just to be a member – better to join fewer and stick with them for 3 or 4 years, even taking on a leadership position. This isn’t supposed to be stressful for him – it should be a break from school stuff.

William Casey

December 21st, 2010
11:15 pm

This is a very engaging discussion, especially the “Georgia Southern Sux” vs. “Georgia Southern Rules” banter. My son is currently pursuing a dual degree program in mathematics and philosophy at Georgia Southern and I’m very impressed at what I’ve seen so far (he’s a soph). His situation crystallizes some of the discussion here. IMHO, it’s not only about elite schools vs. lesser institutions, it’s also about “hard majors” vs. “soft majors.” There will ALWAYS be demand for people who can “do math” because such a small % of the population is really good in math. But, it’s the philosophy part of his program that has amazed me so far. The changes I’ve seen in his ability to articulate and reason are nothing short of phenomenol. Just think, a mathematics guru who can explain the complex to the average person. Now, that is something of value in almost any setting. Networking is important, but there is something to be said about actually understanding a complex subject, being able to apply it, AND being able to explain it to others. It’s also nice that he will leave school with no debt thanks to HOPE, our savings and his work.

My Dad was an Ivy guy (Brown) and I certainly have no negative feelings about elite schools even though I didn’t attend one. That being said, whenever I hear people waxing eloquent about them, I always think of David Halberstam’s classic book, “The Best and the Brightest.,” in which he details how the cream of the elite schools’ graduates managed to lead us into the morass that was Vietnam. Why even a Georgia Southern guy couldn’t mess things up much worse than that!

JFrenchbranding

December 22nd, 2010
10:32 am

As a Duke University and Vanderbilt Law School alumni I can attest that the reputation of a ‘top tier’ school is a currency that is tradeable even in these harsh economic times. I was impacted by the Great Recession but the senior level leadership in the companies I was interviewing with who shared a connection to Duke or Vanderbilt was astounding. The fact that more decision makers were represented by my school’s made all the difference in the world.

Emory Texan '09

December 22nd, 2010
12:14 pm

I got in to CalTech and went to Emory on a full ride. In my experience, I would have been better off going to the University of Texas, but that’s because no one knows Emory outside of the SE. For what I do, buy and develop off high rises, a better brand that was a little more universal would have been a great networking tool.

Winder

December 22nd, 2010
8:23 pm

Interesting analysis here of the return on investment of different colleges:

http://www.payscale.com/education/average-cost-for-college-ROI

Filter by Annual ROI column. Georgia Tech has the highest Annual ROI (14.2%) of any college in America by their methodology. GT landed 31st it raw 30 year return with the very expensive privates above them.

GT doesn’t fit everyone (great for business & engineering), but the choice isn’t always expensive school vs cheaper state school. Tech is the best example. UGA (in-state tuition) represented well too…but I was surprised that the 30 year estimate return was about half of GT.

But this site does show that the CalTechs, MITs, Dukes do seem to pay off. I’d just want to make sure if I went there I had one of the degrees that was in demand and high earnings so I could pay off all that debt!