Texas Top 15 Universities (Houston, Dallas, Austin: salary, living, cost)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
4 year graduation rate is a stupid way of measuring ROI. If you want to measure ROI, then measure debt levels upon completion (graduation or non-enrollment) which you can then measure against the student's current income. 4 year graduation rate is only relevant to idiots who think college is an extension of high school.
Not only that, graduation rate is also highly dependent upon socioeconomic factors, so all you are really measuring is the class of the students you admit - you don't need to look at graduation rates to do that. You have all their socioeconomic info on their admittance forms.
As for all the people trumping Rice and Trinity, I'm sure they are great schools, but they are so small as to be irrelevant. Rice has 3848 undergrads and Trinity like 2500 - I'm sorry but that's not producing enough high quality workers in a state the size of Texas. Compare that to Stanford with 15,000, MIT with 5,000 (and 10,000 total). Rice is 50% smaller.
I'm sure if Angelo State (to pick a seriously middling school) had that few students, they'd be able to pick and choose the best few as well. Also at that size, the alumni networks are small and the reach outside of Texas for each is basically non-existent.
Measuring ROI based on four-year graduation is not perfect, agreed, but very others are either. Still, when you look at large numbers of a student body not graduating, regardless of one's individual situation within said student body (say you graduate from U Houston in four years, while 84% do not), multiply just one semester of tuition UH receives for a credential not granted, and while it may be good for the school financially it is not good for it's reputation; it's a terrible return for the student/alum as s/he is saddled with the reputation of the school as a whole.
So, the four-year graduation rate is not "only relevant to idiots who think college is an extension of high school," but it is a measure, in part, of the school's reputation, which can impact an individual's ROI, and it is a measure of the time under ideal conditions one is expected to complete a degree, especially given the cost of attendance. Longer time spent in school earning a bachelor's degree lessens the time one can begin realizing a ROI with said credential. Even after six years, more than half of U Houston students fail to graduate. If someone is in school 6, 7, 8 years without obtaining a bachelor's, it is a terrible outcome for the mission of a degree-granting institution and a terrible return for the student, as opportunity costs have mounted and the skills and knowledge learned in Year One of school have become diminished if one is not using them in his/her intended profession.
Still, measuring ROI based on an alum's current income is flawed. If you measure this 1-2 years out of school, or if one is currently unemployed, the return can seem terrible (but misleading), as opposed to measuring 10-15 years into an alum's career, when earning potential is presumably much greater. Further, measuring ROI varies considerably even within institutions, and using it as a proxy for the value of college attendance can be misleading, as it: 1) politicizes one's individual academic pursuits, 2) needlessly pits academic disciplines against each other, and 3) attempts to reduce college attendance to a purely investment decision, when attending college is about much more to many. But I did not raise this issue initially, another poster did.
If the chances are higher that my kid would actually graduate, YES. Employers do not recruit exclusively from schools in the city in which they are located. Kids move all around the country, let alone a state, to go to school, and it does not necessarily limit their chances of finding a job in a particular city (not every UT student stays in Austin after graduating, and thousands have found jobs in cities around the state and country).
Also, as an employer, I would care about the reputation of the school. Baylor and A&M have better reputations and stronger student bodies overall than U of H, so, as a parent, I would send my kid to one of those schools over UH.
What?! A&M yes but I wouldn't say that Baylor has a significantly stronger student body that outshines UH.
As a parent and an employer I'm gonna guess you're a little behind the times but UH is slowly but surely becoming a popular choice among people in the Houston area. Its rep has gone up and it's an excellent school to get a cheaper degree in a relevant field, even if you're leaving the city or state. As Houston's rep goes up so does The UH.
As for all the people trumping Rice and Trinity, I'm sure they are great schools, but they are so small as to be irrelevant. Rice has 3848 undergrads and Trinity like 2500 - I'm sorry but that's not producing enough high quality workers in a state the size of Texas. Compare that to Stanford with 15,000, MIT with 5,000 (and 10,000 total). Rice is 50% smaller.
A lot of students that go to Trinity are from other states, and most leave Texas after graduation. Yes, it's a small school but having a low professor to student ratio is not irrelevant. And I don't see how having a small student body makes a university irrelevant. Living in SA I have met many Trinity students from Washington, Oregon, New Hemisphere, California, Vermont, Wyoming, etc. Needless to say I don't think many bright high school graduates from states across the country are busting down the doors to come to Texas and go to Tech, UH, SMU, etc.
A lot of students that go to Trinity are from other states, and most leave Texas after graduation. Yes, it's a small school but having a low professor to student ratio is not irrelevant. And I don't see how having a small student body makes a university irrelevant. Living in SA I have met many Trinity students from Washington, Oregon, New Hemisphere, California, Vermont, Wyoming, etc. Needless to say I don't think many bright high school graduates from states across the country are busting down the doors to come to Texas and go to Tech, UH, SMU, etc.
Many aren't flocking in from other states to go to UT, A&M either. I don't think it's the same as students moving out of state to go to schools in Cali or Mass.
Measuring ROI based on four-year graduation is not perfect, agreed, but very others are either. Still, when you look at large numbers of a student body not graduating, regardless of one's individual situation within said student body (say you graduate from U Houston in four years, while 84% do not), multiply just one semester of tuition UH receives for a credential not granted, and while it may be good for the school financially it is not good for it's reputation; it's a terrible return for the student/alum as s/he is saddled with the reputation of the school as a whole.
So, the four-year graduation rate is not "only relevant to idiots who think college is an extension of high school," but it is a measure, in part, of the school's reputation, which can impact an individual's ROI, and it is a measure of the time under ideal conditions one is expected to complete a degree, especially given the cost of attendance. Longer time spent in school earning a bachelor's degree lessens the time one can begin realizing a ROI with said credential. Even after six years, more than half of U Houston students fail to graduate. If someone is in school 6, 7, 8 years without obtaining a bachelor's, it is a terrible outcome for the mission of a degree-granting institution and a terrible return for the student, as opportunity costs have mounted and the skills and knowledge learned in Year One of school have become diminished if one is not using them in his/her intended profession.
Still, measuring ROI based on an alum's current income is flawed. If you measure this 1-2 years out of school, or if one is currently unemployed, the return can seem terrible (but misleading), as opposed to measuring 10-15 years into an alum's career, when earning potential is presumably much greater. Further, measuring ROI varies considerably even within institutions, and using it as a proxy for the value of college attendance can be misleading, as it: 1) politicizes one's individual academic pursuits, 2) needlessly pits academic disciplines against each other, and 3) attempts to reduce college attendance to a purely investment decision, when attending college is about much more to many. But I did not raise this issue initially, another poster did.
Even after six years, more than half of U Houston students fail to graduate. If someone is in school 6, 7, 8 years without obtaining a bachelor's, it is a terrible outcome for the mission of a degree-granting institution and a terrible return for the student, as opportunity costs have mounted and the skills and knowledge learned in Year One of school have become diminished if one is not using them in his/her intended profession.
Now it's beginning to sound like your out to put down U of H. Maybe U of H doesn't want to just hand out degrees in short order to students that may or may not EARN a degree. They're are many "degree factories" out there.
Exactly, the guy sounds like he has it out for UH. While UH's reputation is going up, it's still a city college with a much more lax admissions policy than the other Tier 1's in the State. That's not a bad thing per se. It's just some people come into college thinking it's for them but later on decide it's not, or think they can maintain a good GPA while working full time and find out that they can't. That doesn't mean that UH is a crappy school. If anything it's been quite the little gem for a city college.
But I've seen this level of UH-hate before. I remember I used to tease the school as Cougar High too back when I was selecting a college for undergrad but looking at it now and seeing how it's risen in reputation, it's not the laughing stock anymore.
There are still older people who I don't wanna say but come from a certain big state school in Austin *hint* who just spill the most vile hate about UH I've ever heard. I really think these folks just haven't gotten with the times, or it's part of the Austintude hate against Houston.
To add further, UH has been known to have an abysmal administration full of red tape that also frustrates the student body to no end. So in that regard I do agree that the school needs to do a lot more and can see why it's graduation rate is so low. It's not a perfect school by any means. It's flaws are that it's a school that doesn't hold your hand or give you any guidance. If you go there you have to be prepared to eek it out on your own, know what you want and make it happen yourself.
I only meant that it was a good ROI because if you're a motivated individual that doesn't need a thorough ground breaking all around college experience but just wants the great education at a fraction of the cost, go to UH. I guess that's why UH's grad programs are flourishing.
Many aren't flocking in from other states to go to UT, A&M either. I don't think it's the same as students moving out of state to go to schools in Cali or Mass.
Incorrect. As a UT grad I met a ton of students from out of state and from other countries. And as someone who has worked in Europe, UT is a very recognized university.
Incorrect. As a UT grad I met a ton of students from out of state and from other countries. And as someone who has worked in Europe, UT is a very recognized university.
Dude, I'm not disparaging UT Austin but it's no Berkeley. Heck it's no UCLA. Its rep is great but sometimes I think UT grads overstate its position on the academic hierarchy.
Exactly, the guy sounds like he has it out for UH. While UH's reputation is going up, it's still a city college with a much more lax admissions policy than the other Tier 1's in the State. That's not a bad thing per se. It's just some people come into college thinking it's for them but later on decide it's not, or think they can maintain a good GPA while working full time and find out that they can't. That doesn't mean that UH is a crappy school. If anything it's been quite the little gem for a city college.
But I've seen this level of UH-hate before. I remember I used to tease the school as Cougar High too back when I was selecting a college for undergrad but looking at it now and seeing how it's risen in reputation, it's not the laughing stock anymore.
There are still older people who I don't wanna say but come from a certain big state school in Austin *hint* who just spill the most vile hate about UH I've ever heard. I really think these folks just haven't gotten with the times, or it's part of the Austintude hate against Houston.
Full disclosure: in spite of my username I did not go to UT, nor am I from Austin; I chose the name because I don't live in Texas any more. I am trying to have an objective discussion based on the data and assertions that UH and other schools on the original list should be ranked as highly as they are over others. Sometimes the truth is difficult to hear.
But I can tell you this: whereas a good student from out of state might consider going to UT, NO ONE knows of, or is considering UH as a school; not hating, just stating a fact.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
