College loans - article in Rolling Stone

[Candid]

I just read this local  news article published on 9/4/2013 and the data is still interesting even though it is for the bay area part of California. There are 146 colleges listed including community colleges.

Cost and loan data for Bay Area public, private and for-profit colleges

 

From the article

"Stanford University

Grad Rate - 96%

Default Rate - 1.0%

Students on Loans - 18%

Average Net Price - $21,421

 

University of California - Berkeley (UCB)

Grad Rate - 90%

Default Rate - 2.6%

Students on Loans - 32%

Average Net Price - $16,178"

 

As others have asked up thread, the real devil in this information is what is the "Average Net Price" exactly. Is that how much all graduates ever now have on a student loan, is it how much the average graduate graduates with? or is it something else? Unfortunately the link does not detail how this figure is arrived at. 

[creekland]

Anyone can see student loan default rate if they go to this link (click on graphics if it doesn't come up that way):

 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324432004578306610055834952.html?mod=WSJ_hps_LEFTTopStories#articleTabs_interactive%3D%26articleTabs%3Dinteractive

 

You can sort by any of the columns.  It was interesting to scroll through, esp when sorting by worst default rates.  Who knew there were Golf Academies one could get federal aid for... and look at the default rate for those for-profits often advertised on TV...

[Sebastian (a lady)]

As others have asked up thread, the real devil in this information is what is the "Average Net Price" exactly. Is that how much all graduates ever now have on a student loan, is it how much the average graduate graduates with? or is it something else? Unfortunately the link does not detail how this figure is arrived at.

I think the asterisk at the bottoms of the table indicates that ave net cost is the average cost of one year. But it didn't specify if that is tuition and books or includes room and board.

[Candid]

I think the asterisk at the bottoms of the table indicates that ave net cost is the average cost of one year. But it didn't specify if that is tuition and books or includes room and board.

 

Okay, that is helpful, I read that but did not take it to mean what you have read much more clearly than I did. I'm afraid since the chart was about loans, I assumed the number must also be about loans. 

 

I still think there is vagueness in the if the average is for one year or the full length, but reading it your way for one year then makes me go:

 

reading it for one year means that this number looks pretty low because you have to multiply by four to get the ending cost to a student. So in the figures quoted by the Arcadia, Stanford is really around $80,000 and Berkley, $60,000. 

[Arcadia]

I think the asterisk at the bottoms of the table indicates that ave net cost is the average cost of one year. But it didn't specify if that is tuition and books or includes room and board.

The room and board for 1st year for UCB (given in a different local news article as $14k) is about the average net cost. I think it is tuition only.

 

ETA:

This link might have a clearer breakdown on cost

http://college-insight.org/#spotlight/go&h=be2d4127daff616537d35f5281897e27

For all states

http://college-insight.org/#explore/go&h=9ff0f64de53c75726f575a49172d7ff8

[Arcadia]

As others have asked up thread, the real devil in this information is what is the "Average Net Price" exactly. Is that how much all graduates ever now have on a student loan, is it how much the average graduate graduates with? or is it something else? Unfortunately the link does not detail how this figure is arrived at.

Sorry for the confusion. My focus was on a different part of the data. I was looking at the data more for the grad rate and the percentage of students taking loans. The community colleges grad rate is very low and that is upsetting to me because it means the system is not working somehow.

It can also be telling that some colleges have a low percentage of people taking loans.

[Barbara H]

The community colleges grad rate is very low and that is upsetting to me because it means the system is not working somehow.

 

 

Community college graduation and transfer rates are really tricky. Yes, they probably aren't that high at a a lot of schools. One of the big problems is that many students are entering community college with need for remediation in a core subject like math, writing, or reading. Advising is also often not that good.

 

But we really lack good data to figure out community college graduation rates. Most schools do not keep any kind of data to break down people who are full time with the intent of earning a degree and transferring and people who simply want to take a few courses. Many people who enter community college have no intent to earn an associates degree. I can easily see this just among my homeschool friends - a dad who took one IT course a semester for a couple of years in order to learn a new specialty for his job, the small business owner who has taken an accounting and a marketing class, the homeschooling mom who took art history because she wanted something fun for herself. People use community colleges for a lot of purposes and many students who intend to complete a degree are doing so against pretty tough odds (needing remediation, needing to go part time while taking care of kids and working full time, etc.)

[Candid]

Sorry for the confusion. My focus was on a different part of the data. I was looking at the data more for the grad rate and the percentage of students taking loans. The community colleges grad rate is very low and that is upsetting to me because it means the system is not working somehow.

It can also be telling that some colleges have a low percentage of people taking loans.

 

It's not your fault I couldn't read!

 

Have you ever taken a community college class? Prior to having children I probably took a half dozen or so. I did so with a degree in hand and mostly for self-education, but even thought I took them in two very different states, one in the south and one in the midwest rust belt, I saw similar things.

 

Some teachers could be very good. I had the best foreign language teacher I ever had at a cc. But some teachers were not that good, and at least in one case, I felt I began to understand some facets of the material better than he did. 

 

But the students also had issues of lack of persistence and working hard on material. This was particularly glaring in foreign language. 

 

I'm not sure how you short circuit this. Sure, you can work to get better instructors, but some of those maybe discouraged by the students themselves so they two swing back and forth and never come to the right point. 

[Kareni]

 

But we really lack good data to figure out community college graduation rates. Most schools do not keep any kind of data to break down people who are full time with the intent of earning a degree and transferring and people who simply want to take a few courses. Many people who enter community college have no intent to earn an associates degree.

 

I agree entirely.  Many of our children would be a case in point.  My daughter took community college courses to enrich her high school homeschooling experience.  She then entered a liberal arts college as a freshman.

 

Regards,

Kareni

[flyingiguana]

 

Some teachers could be very good. I had the best foreign language teacher I ever had at a cc. But some teachers were not that good, and at least in one case, I felt I began to understand some facets of the material better than he did. 

 

But the students also had issues of lack of persistence and working hard on material. This was particularly glaring in foreign language.

 

But, to be fair, I've seen all these things at good 4 yr universities and LACs -- schools with high rankings.  Professors who can't teach -- or who just plain don't know the material.  Students who don't care...

 

Twenty and more years ago, a lot of the cc professors may not have even had Master's degrees in the field they were teaching in (although some may have had an advanced degree in education).  That's been changing as there are more and more PhD grads who need jobs.  These days, a lot of the people (with advanced degrees) may have had some actual teaching experience in their field before ending up at a cc.  And they may know the material a lot better, from being exposed to it a lot more.

 

I would guess you're also more likely to see better instruction at a cc in a metro area, or a town with a large university.  There are more qualified people to hire.

 

Course, back in high school, our chem teacher had a PhD, but no one would hire her in a "real" job because she was female.  When that eventually started to change, she left for a better job at a cc.  We lost out.  In fact, I think the women's movement, paradoxically, changed our schools for the worse.  A lot of bright women suddenly had more opportunities and didn't want to just teach kids anymore.  This may have eventually improved cc's as well, but it still took years for all the BA-only guys to finally retire out of the cc's.  And this process may still be going on outside large urban areas.

[Nan in Mass]

 I haven't yet read the whole thread, so forgive me if this has been covered already...

 

Interesting.  Admittedly I don't have intimate conversations with most people on how they finance their kids' college educations so my sample consists of a few close friends and family members.  I am not sure that I know anyone who has taken out a PLUS loan.  In my world, it is not unusual for grandparents to give a hand with college costs. Family culture?

 

I would guess family culture.  The  students we know in the private elementary and high schools here are being at least partially paid for by grandparents and although the topic is apparently more taboo so I don't have a large sample size, in almost all the situations I know about, the grandparents have contributed.  They usually started saving when the child was born.  I think it is common here to start saving when a child is born, at least amongst the people I know.  I know this because a common baby shower gift is a little something with which to start a college fund.  I don't remember ever having been to a shower where this was not done.  It is fairly common for people to make their child put part of their pocket money towards college, and when they have a job in high school, part of that money is expected to go towards the college fund.  Ice cream places usually have a cup on the counter saying, "So-and-so's College Savings".  A common high school graduation present is money towards college, or things like a desk lamp.  Aunts and uncles give significant amounts of money.  My grandparents contributed to my college and my children's grandparents on both sides have contributed to my children's college.  When I was growing up, it was not unusual to send children to the state school for undergraduate degrees and save the college money for the graduate degree.  It is common for the parents to be paying the children's school loans, or for them to share the loans.  It is uncommon amongst the people I know for children to be expected to pay for their own college.  With the cost now, most families I know about take advantage of any good loans offered, but who pays them off seems to depend on how solvent the student is after graduation.  Dad tends to pay for those masters degrees in teaching, too..  This is why I keep saying that this is a matter of family culture.  Whole extended families put significant amounts of their resources towards educating the children.

 

For what it is worth, the price of my sister's small private LAC has doubled (about 30k/year to about 60k/year), whereas the price of my parents' home at that time has done much more than that.  This is true for more than just my particular expensive town.  The US census says the average house price in 1984 was $97,600 (median $79,900), and the average house price in 2010 was $221,800 (median $272,900).  The story of the rise in price of state schools is different.  I don't happen to remember enough statistics to compare that and that is heavily subsidized (or less heavily subsidized) by various governments, so I would think perhaps the story with the state school prices would be less about where-is-the-money-going and more about why-is-the-government-not-subsidizing-as-much-anymore?  But I'm pretty fuzzy-headed when it comes to money and governments, so maybe I am looking at this incorrectly?

 

Not that I don't sympathize about the difficulty of paying for college.  I do.  Very much.  It is difficult.  I just am trying to say that both then and now, there were cheaper options than private colleges and universities, and both then and now the price of the expensive ones was difficult to manage, perhaps just as difficult to manage?  Am I missing a factor, like the interest on student loans?  As I said, I'm pretty fuzzyheaded about this sort of thing.

 

Nan

 

PS  This site: http://www.thepeoplehistory.com/1980s.html says this about 1980's prices:

Money and Inflation 1980's

To provide an estimate of inflation we have given a guide to the value of $100 US Dollars for the first year in the decade to the equivalent in today's money
If you have $100 Converted from 1980 to 2005 it would be equivalent to $243.45 today

In 1980 a new house cost $68,714.00 and by 1989 was $120,00.00 Check Examples of Some of the Houses and Prices For Sale In The 80s in Our 80s Homes Section
In 1980 the average income per year was $19,170.00 and by 1989 was $27,210.00
In 1980 a gallon of gas was $1.19 and by 1989 was 97 cents
In 1980 the average cost of new car was $7,210.00 and by 1989 was $15,400.00
A few more prices from the 80's and how much things cost
Camero Coupe $7,571 From Car Prices in the 80's
Pontiac Grand AM $9,965 Nike Air Force Basketball Shoes $54.90 Tailored Style Silk Blouse $15.99 From Prices for clothes and fashions in the 80's
Amiga 500 with Color Monitor $849 From Our 80s Electrical and Electronic Prices in the 80's Hands Free Operating Car Phone History of Mobile Phones $788 Leg O Lamb $2.19 per pound Milk 85 cents 1/2 gallon From Our 80s Price of Food Section
Bunk Beds with Mattress $148 Chrome Sling Chair $76.00 Cheer Laundry Detergent $1.59
 

[Nan in Mass]

...I could see the middle class folks trying to keep up with the Jones' taking on more loans where big names are important though. ...

 

Amongst the people I know, I think it is not so much a matter of keeping up with the Jones' but keeping up with oneself.  People want for their children the same college experience they and their parents had, and yet they might have more trouble paying for it.  I would be interested in knowing why.  I wonder if in my area, people are living less modestly than they used to?  Or whether house prices have risen faster than salaries?  Or whether the high cost of health care has anything to do with it?  Or whether this is a problem with perception and expectations and it isn't really any harder for my generation to pay for their children's college educations than it was for my parents' generation?  I am inclined to blame it on house prices, which rose fast while I was in elementary and high school?  Maybe?  I know this is a small subset of the people trying to pay for college and probably off topic, but I am curious.

 

Nan

[creekland]

Amongst the people I know, I think it is not so much a matter of keeping up with the Jones' but keeping up with oneself.  People want for their children the same college experience they and their parents had, and yet they might have more trouble paying for it.  I would be interested in knowing why.  I wonder if in my area, people are living less modestly than they used to?  Or whether house prices have risen faster than salaries?  Or whether the high cost of health care has anything to do with it?  Or whether this is a problem with perception and expectations and it isn't really any harder for my generation to pay for their children's college educations than it was for my parents' generation?  I am inclined to blame it on house prices, which rose fast while I was in elementary and high school?  Maybe?  I know this is a small subset of the people trying to pay for college and probably off topic, but I am curious.

 

Nan

I think this is also regional, because the folks that came to mind when I wrote that post either had not been to college themselves or went to a small state school.  They just want their kids to be able to do "better" in line with what they feel their socio-economic class either "is" now or where they wish it were.  I can easily see it happening in your scenario too.

 

I also agree that the rise in house prices (or rent) hurts today's parents.  It's great if one bought low and can cash in on the rise by selling, but certainly not so great for those trying to pay the mortgage at today's prices in many areas.  For many, salaries have not increased as much as the rise.

[J-rap]

One thing that really frustrates me is that we know several families who push for their children to go to college -- often smaller private colleges -- and take out loans to do so. BUT, the parents expect their children to pay back all the loans. Now, I don't have a problem with that arrangement if it's discussed and understood, but in these families the children really have no idea what's going on; they are just doing what their parents are telling them to do, not understanding what all that debt means for them. And they are getting degrees in things like worship music and camp director. Again, not that I'm against those careers, but they need to have a thorough understanding of job opportunities, income they will get, etc, before taking on such heavy loans.

[flyingiguana]

 

 

Not that I don't sympathize about the difficulty of paying for college.  I do.  Very much.  It is difficult.  I just am trying to say that both then and now, there were cheaper options than private colleges and universities, and both then and now the price of the expensive ones was difficult to manage, perhaps just as difficult to manage?  Am I missing a factor, like the interest on student loans?  As I said, I'm pretty fuzzyheaded about this sort of thing.

 

 

 

Back when I went to college, we basically paid room and board, fees and books.  Because we (everyone I knew) went to public universities.  There was no tuition.  It was affordable with a part time job and some parental help.  Some kids didn't even pay room and board.  They lived at home.

 

*These* days, there's tuition no matter where you go.  A very few kids are lucky enough to get scholarships that pay it all.  Most don't.  They have to take out loans to do it.  It's called "financial aid".  Loans are what most kids get, not scholarships. 

 

There has been a huge change in how college is paid for, for the majority of students -- those who do the "cheap" option at public colleges.  Tuition is no longer paid by the state govt.  It's no longer seen as a common good.

 

Community colleges are a sort of cheap way of getting part of a 4 year degree, but they don't cover the last 2 years.  In other words, for most kids, there is absolutely NO WAY to do college in a financially responsible way.  Unless they can get a decent paying job right out of college.  But many, many kids do not.  The jobs just aren't there.  The kids I know with college degrees are waitressing, babysitting, serving up ice cream at a local joint...  These jobs aren't going to pay off the college debt. 

 

My perception is that there a LOT more kids opting for private colleges these days, but when you look at the tuition discount they get at a private school, you see that it costs about the same (sometimes less) as at a public college/university.  Why not go to the private one?  It doesn't cost any more.  So they're not being financially foolish by going to a private school.  The game has just changed.

 

We have tenants who are turning 30 -- three gals sharing a house.  They're not even considering getting married, having kids, buying a house etc, because they're still mired in their 30+K debt (one is up to 100K, but that's also due to some medical bills when she wasn't on insurance.  She couldn't get insurance.)  They can't get "real" jobs.  Nothing that pays well, anyway.  And certainly nothing in the fields they got degrees in.  They're not dumb, or lazy.  They went to a "cheap" public university.  They did everything right.

 

They've got terrible credit scores, because of the college debt.  They are sharing the rent in the house we're renting out to them, but according to their income and debt there is NO WAY we "should" have rented to them.  We only did it because their past landlords said they always paid their rent on time.  And they have.  But they're definitely not going to be improving their economic lot any time soon.  THEY CAN'T.  Because of their debt, and because they can't get full time jobs with benefits.

 

They're smart, responsible people.  Employers ought to be happy to have them.  But they still can't get jobs that will get them out of the hole of their "minor" debt.  "Minor" seemed to be how some on here were describing the 26K avg for college debt.  So "minor" that "kids borrow that much money all the time for a new car".  Fact is, they DON'T do this.  Not if they're responsible.  Many people that age don't have cars.  Or would never dream of buying a new one.  They're buying clunkers, if they HAVE to have one.

 

Maybe this is all anecdote, but I'm guessing there are figures out there to support this.

 

This is the future of our country. 

 

This may not cause the impressive "clunk" that was heard after the mortgage collapse debacle, but I suspect it's going to have just as much drain on our economy.

 

And it's interesting that we're still hearing people say that it's the fault of the people who took out the loans in the first place (mortgage or college).

[Barbara H]

Costs have gone up and not just due to inflation. PBS has put together a great calculator to illustrate this process. Can You Work Your Way Through College Calculator.

[regentrude]

  In other words, for most kids, there is absolutely NO WAY to do college in a financially responsible way.  Unless they can get a decent paying job right out of college.  But many, many kids do not.  The jobs just aren't there.  The kids I know with college degrees are waitressing, babysitting, serving up ice cream at a local joint...  These jobs aren't going to pay off the college debt. 

 

And again, a big factor is their major.

Not to beat a dead horse, but since we always hear about the dire situation, let me put things into perspective, because I do not want people to be discouraged and think it is useless to go to college:

 

For the 2012-13 graduating class, 93% of our university's graduates reported firm plans upon graduation, with 80% having a job, 4% continuing in their previous job, 8% grad school and only 7% still looking for employment (the remaining 1% is not seeking employment at this point). Their average starting salary with an undergraduate degree is 59.5k.

 

With perspectives like this, they can easily afford to have 26k in debt, because they'll have paid off in a year or two.

So, it absolutely matters for WHAT degree you go into debt, and that needs to be the message we are giving our students. 

 

We have tenants who are turning 30 -- three gals sharing a house.  They're not even considering getting married, having kids, buying a house etc, because they're still mired in their 30+K debt (one is up to 100K, but that's also due to some medical bills when she wasn't on insurance.  She couldn't get insurance.)  They can't get "real" jobs.  Nothing that pays well, anyway.  And certainly nothing in the fields they got degrees in.  They're not dumb, or lazy.  They went to a "cheap" public university.  They did everything right.

 

What is their degree field?

[Nan in Mass]

Flyingiguana said, "Back when I went to college, we basically paid room and board, fees and books. Because we (everyone I knew) went to public universities. There was no tuition. It was affordable with a part time job and some parental help. Some kids didn't even pay room and board. They lived at home." (Sorry - quote feature doesn't work for me and this is easier than doing the bracket thingy.)

 

Hmm... Maybe this is regional? When I graduated from high school, there definately was tuition at the state uni. I knew people who were working their way through, but it was pretty hard to do unless you took semesters off or happened to have a very good job. There was a six week break at Christmas that helped some. There were people in my high school class who could not afford to go to the state uni. I'm sure there would be a whole lot more now. But that wasn't my point. With public schools, the difference between then and now is MUCH greater but I can see possible reasons for the PUBLIC school difference(and I certainly agree with you that it is a problem) - it could be how much the public schools were subsidized when we were younger compared to how much they are subsidized now. It is the PRIVATE schools, which (at least for my family) cost about the same then as now, but are so much harder to pay for now, that I was wondering about. Why is it so much harder now? (I'm not arguing with the fact that managing to pay for college IS much harder now, and that the cheaper options ARE more difficult to manage now.)

 

And a second wondering - are scholarships to private schools much more common now? I don't remember a lot of people getting scholarships when I was in high school, but it might well just be that it was more taboo to discuss one's finances or that I was less aware of the issue then. I did know some people who got them, but they were geniuses.

 

Nan

[creekland]

 

We have tenants who are turning 30 -- three gals sharing a house.  They're not even considering getting married, having kids, buying a house etc, because they're still mired in their 30+K debt (one is up to 100K, but that's also due to some medical bills when she wasn't on insurance.  She couldn't get insurance.)  They can't get "real" jobs.  Nothing that pays well, anyway.  And certainly nothing in the fields they got degrees in.  They're not dumb, or lazy.  They went to a "cheap" public university.  They did everything right.

 

Besides major, I'm wondering about the "cheap" public U.  There are schools that are respected in their fields (majors) and schools that are not.  School A is not always equal to School B even if the major is the same.  It's not always a private > public either.

 

It is really worth it to do research ahead of time to see where recent grads are getting employed.  At some schools, paying for a degree is often worthless compared to the same (or sometimes higher) cost at another school.  Don't let the school advertising fool you, see what the recent grad stats are (like Regentrude offered) or where real grads have gone (in your chosen major).  Different schools provide different info.  Beware of schools/departments that offer nothing, esp when asked.

[J-rap]

Their average starting salary with an undergraduate degree is 59.5k.

Are you sure about that number? I think I have read more like $42,000 for 2012 graduates.

[regentrude]

Are you sure about that number? I think I have read more like $42,000 for 2012 graduates.

 

In my post I was talking about our university's graduates (that's what the stats were from). Their starting salary was 59.5k.

 

 

 

For the 2012-13 graduating class, 93% of our university's graduates reported firm plans upon graduation.... Their average starting salary with an undergraduate degree is 59.5k.

 

I am not talking about a national average.

[J-rap]

In my post I was talking about our university's graduates (that's what the stats were from). Their starting salary was 59.5k.

 

 

 

 

I am not talking about a national average.

Oh okay. Thanks for clarifying. Sorry, I missed that part!

[flyingiguana]

Besides major, I'm wondering about the "cheap" public U.  There are schools that are respected in their fields (majors) and schools that are not.  School A is not always equal to School B even if the major is the same.  It's not always a private > public either.

 

It is really worth it to do research ahead of time to see where recent grads are getting employed.  At some schools, paying for a degree is often worthless compared to the same (or sometimes higher) cost at another school.  Don't let the school advertising fool you, see what the recent grad stats are (like Regentrude offered) or where real grads have gone (in your chosen major).  Different schools provide different info.  Beware of schools/departments that offer nothing, esp when asked.

 

It's a good school.  Two of them are in the sciences.  One, admittedly, got a degree in art, but she's making the most money.  Maybe the 2 in sciences would do better if they went on to grad school.  But maybe not.

 

I think you're assuming students can control the job market by just choosing the right major.  Not sure that's true.  This is blaming the victim rather than looking at the societal reasons.  The best a student can do in choosing a major is try to salvage their own chances.  It won't fix the overall problems.

 

Also, starting salaries of graduates may be skewed in various ways -- choosing to average over a number of years, only including those who get jobs etc.  Even dropping those who go on to grad school is problematic, as many may go on to grad school only because they don't see a viable financial option otherwise.

 

I think there are grads coming out right now who do fine.  I think there are a lot of others who don't.  And it wasn't really their fault.  If they all HAD chosen one of the majors that people think would make them employable, there'd be too many grads with those degrees and there'd still be a lot of underemployed grads. 

 

The point is, kids entering college these days just don't have it all that easy.  Society is not set up to give them a hand like it was when many of us were back in college.  So blaming kids today for how things turned out because WE had it a lot easier due to lower tuition (it really was a LOT lower if you chose the right state school), is just silly.

 

But skipping college TODAY is probably an unwise decision for most.  What the article is pointing out is that you have to have a college degree to get a job that a high school dropout could have done a few years ago.  So retelling stories about someone we know who didn't get a college degree  back in the old days and how it didn't make any difference -- that if one worked hard one could still get ahead financially -- is just citing old data that is no longer relevant.

 

The point of the article is that things have really changed.  And that many in the generation just previous really don't understand.

[Nan in Mass]

Flyingiguana said, "...you have to have a college degree to get a job that a high school dropout could have done a few years ago." I think this is the crux of the problem. I'm not sure how one would fix it, but I think this is where a lot of the blame for the college situation should be placed. Not that I have any idea what I am talking about. Sigh.

 

Nan

[JumpyTheFrog]

A few years ago, Rutgers did an extensive study on college grads from the classes of 2009 and 2010. The median starting salary for these 4 year grads (from many colleges, not just Rutgers) was $27,000, which was down from $30,000 a fee years before. So half the students were earning less than that! If I remember, I will try to find a link because it showed how poor the prospects were for many students. If it's that bad for the graduates, imagine how bad it is for those who dropped out.

[regentrude]

A few years ago, Rutgers did an extensive study on college grads from the classes of 2009 and 2010. The median starting salary for these 4 year grads (from many colleges, not just Rutgers) was $27,000, which was down from $30,000 a fee years before. So half the students were earning less than that!

 

I do not find it helpful to look at national averages for starting salaries, because there is such a wide discrepancy, depending on field. The value is pretty much meaningless for any individual student.

Our students need to go into the entire process open eyed an look at starting salaries in their own, and closely related, fields to make any inferences from these data.

[flyingiguana]

Is this the Rutgers study you were referring to?

 

http://news.rutgers.edu/news-releases/2011/05/unfulfilled-expectat-20110523#.UjRYBT9jFm0

 

"College graduates who obtained their first job during the recession in 2009-10 suffered a 10 percent “penalty†in reduced starting salaries compared to those who entered the workforce in 2006 and 2007. The survey also shows that half of all recent graduates are working in jobs that did not require a Bachelor of Arts or Bachelor of Science degree."

 

Another article on the same study: http://news.rutgers.edu/news-releases/2012/05/chasing-the-american-20120510#.UjRYDj9jFm0

"The report offered some good news for students
who completed internships during college. Those graduates earned nearly 15
percent more on average than those who did not. Graduates who completed
internships also felt better prepared in certain skills areas, such as
leadership, written and verbal communications, and quantitative skills."

 

In reference to the other topic on doing double majors in college -- I would advice a student who had to choose between a double major and an internship to choose the internship.  A couple more math classes to fulfill a math major, for example, are not going to impress a future employer as much as some actual work experience in the field.