Will college pay? Check the Scorecard

President Obama’s plan to rate colleges on affordability and success rates collapsed. But the Education Department’s new College Scorecard provides useful information for families wondering what a particular college costs by family income and what percentage of students earn a degree and begin paying off their student debts within three years.

Most intriguing, the Scorecard uses IRS data to show enrollees’ median annual earnings 10 years after enrollment and the percentage who earn more than the average high school graduate, about $25,000 a year, six years after entering college. The information includes dropouts and graduates.
PHOTO: In an undated photo, The College Board offers data and information about colleges to prospective students.

At a quarter of American colleges, the majority of students who got federal financial aid end up earning less than $25,000 per year a full decade after they first enrolled,” reports Libby Nelson on Vox.

The Scorecard can track only students who received federal aid, but that’s 70 percent of the total.

Earnings aren’t reported by program or major, masking the variations between different degrees at the same school.

The Scorecard makes it “easier to figure out which schools are a waste of money,”  writes Jordan Weissmann on Slate.

PayScale is using the federal data to calculate the 20-year return on investment at different colleges for students in various family income quintiles.

I’m sure students and parents will find the Scorecard useful. But it has its limits. The highly selective colleges have strong graduation rates and graduates who do well in the workplace, though earnings are lower at liberal arts colleges, higher at technical schools. The less selective schools have much lower graduation rates. Their former students and graduates earn less and have more trouble repaying their debts.

Does an A+ student become a high earner because he chose Georgia Tech over Duke? Does the B- student become a low-earning dropout because she chose the not-very-selective state university over the not-very-selective private college?

I’m not sure C- students will use the Scorecard. If they do, they’ll see that the sort of college they can get into has very low graduation rates and low earnings payoffs. They’ll see two-year vocational degrees, but won’t see vocational certificates.

College heads resist federal database

College presidents say their institutions should be reporting their graduates’ debt levels and job placement rates, but don’t want the federal government collecting and publishing data on student outcomes. They really don’t like Obama’s proposed ratings system.

Top higher ed stories of 2013

The rise of MOOCS lead Ed Central’s Top Ten Higher Ed Stories of 2013. Also on the list: Southern New Hampshire University’s College for America, “the first school to award federal aid based on direct assessment of students’ learning,” instead of credit hours; President Obama’s plan to rank colleges by “value” and “merit aid madness.”

Teacher ratings: Ineffective

Syracuse has no highly effective elementary or middle school teachers under the district’s new rating system, notes Aaron Pallas on the Hechinger Report.

Just two percent of Syracuse teachers were rated highly effective, and an additional 58 percent were deemed effective. Seven percent were classified as ineffective, and 33 percent as developing, categories that suggest low levels of teaching performance, the need for teacher improvement plans, and the threat of eventual dismissal.

On average, Syracuse teachers were rated effective on the state’s metric for student growth. They were rated effective or highly effective by the principals and peers who observed their teaching.  But  the school-wide measures of student achievement used by the district lowered scores significantly.

That’s because teachers had to raise test scores from 2012 to 2013 to be rated effective. But the 2013 tests, aligned with Common Core standards, was much harder. Scores went down in Syracuse — and everywhere else in the state. That was inevitable.

I wonder how State Commissioner John King, Jr. would like it if his performance evaluation were based on the same criteria applied to teachers in Syracuse. The percentage-point increase in students statewide scoring at level 3 and 4 in ELA from 2012 to 2013? Well, that actually fell from 55 percent to 31 percent. The Commissioner gets a zero. The percentage-point increase in students scoring at level 3 and 4 in math? That fell from 65 percent to 31 percent. The Commissioner gets a zero. The percentage-point decrease in students statewide scoring at level 1 in ELA from 2012 to 2013? That actually increased from 10 percent to 32 percent. The Commissioner gets a zero. And the percentage-point decrease in students scoring at level 1 in math? That rose from eight percent to 33 percent. The Commissioner gets a zero.

Commissioner King is ineffective — by unfair criteria — concludes Pallas.

Don’t worry. Keep borrowing

President Obama’s plan to rate colleges is “yet another mistaken attempt . . . to alleviate some of the symptoms of a problem without actually addressing the underlying disease,” writes Erika Johnsen. The other part of the plan — promoting income-based repayment — will make the disease worse.

The “easy, cheap and indiscriminate availability of student loans ” juices demand and helps universities raise their prices, writes Johnsen. The Obama administration keeps sending out “signals about how ‘easy’ it will be to repay these huge loans after you graduate with a little help from Your Friend, The Federal Government.”

LA teacher’s suicide linked to ratings

The apparent suicide of a Los Angeles teacher may be linked to the Los Angeles Times’ value-added ratings. Rigoberto Ruelas, 39, a fifth-grade teacher at Miramonte Elementary School,  was rated “less effective than average” with average value-added scores in English and below-average scores in math.

A teacher for 14 years, Ruelas was stressed by work and upset by his scores, relatives told KABC-TV.