In today’s newsletter, I mentioned the Bartik/Hershbein study on the returns to college and the Shell op-ed about that paper. I want to go into a bit more detail in this string. nytimes.com/2018/05/18/opi…
The paper finds very large returns to college for all students, including those from lower-income families. Table 8 is key. It lets you see the present value (“PV”) of expected lifetime earnings for various groups. research.upjohn.org/cgi/viewconten…
As you can see, college grads consistently earn hundreds of thousands of dollars more than high-school grads. The median college grad from a low-income family earns $443,000 more than the median high-school grad from a low-income family, for example. 
You can also see that college is often even more financially valuable for non-low-income students. At the median, for example, college is worth $514k for non-low-income students vs. $443k for lower-income.
Understanding this gap is important. But it’s clearly a mistake to confuse “Who gets the biggest benefit?” with “Does college bring any benefit to lower-income students?” The answer to the second question is: Yes, an enormous one.
When it comes to their own children, the college skeptics realize this. They make darn sure their kids go. Then they tell working-class families: *You* don’t need college.
College for me and not for thee.
College for me and not for thee.
And it’s telling that to make their case, skeptics sometimes resort to describing the data inaccurately.
For more, read Bartik’s extended response on Twitter:
For more, read Bartik’s extended response on Twitter:
Or Bartik’s essay on the Upjohn website: upjohn.org/about-us/news-…
Or this piece, by @FernandaZamudio: chronicle.com/article/Yes-Co…
The answer isn’t to make college a form of education only for the elite. Over time, mass education should grow: high school in the 20th century, college in the 21st.
[end]
[end]
