Chicago Harris job placement

[Bastille]

So, I spoke with the careers office at Harris, and the woman I spoke with was extremely nice and helpful.

I asked, essentially, why Harris posts no statistics about job placement. (The closest is this, which is nice, but not the most helpful.) She said, in response, that Chicago believes that such statistics are not directly comparable across schools (apples to oranges), and Chicago does not believe that these would give students an accurate perception / fair picture. She stressed that this would be discussed at the visitation day, and that Harris has nothing to hide. (She also said that placement at organizations such as the GAO is extremely common.)

I also know for a fact that Chicago sees itself (rightly or wrongly) as having peers in Princeton and Harvard, so this apples to oranges bit is silly:

"The Harris School is growing so fast that the current facility is not sufficient,” said Raja Kamal, the Harris School’s associate dean for resource development. “Right now, some students cannot find seats in their classes. So if we are to expand the faculty and student body, we need a new physical space to compete effectively with Harvard and Princeton."

Given the curriculum's rigor, as well as the U of C's general reputation, I would expect that job placement would be solid. But this is all a bit suspect to me. SIPA, for example, posts extensive statistics, with a very high reporting percentage. And Columbia is at least as pretentious about these things as Chicago. GPPI also posts statistics, though these are less flattering (<70% employment, for example) and have only a few dozen salaries listed, out of over 100 grads.

How do you all feel about this? And how would you think placement at, say, public sector consulting would be compared to the International Finance / Economics Policy track at SIPA? Which would provide a greater breadth of non-government employment opportunities?

I know that this is all speculation. But I can't get my mind to shut up about it. What are you guys thinking?

[ugachaca]

So, I spoke with the careers office at Harris, and the woman I spoke with was extremely nice and helpful.

I asked, essentially, why Harris posts no statistics about job placement. (The closest is this, which is nice, but not the most helpful.) She said, in response, that Chicago believes that such statistics are not directly comparable across schools (apples to oranges), and Chicago does not believe that these would give students an accurate perception / fair picture. She stressed that this would be discussed at the visitation day, and that Harris has nothing to hide. (She also said that placement at organizations such as the GAO is extremely common.)

I also know for a fact that Chicago sees itself (rightly or wrongly) as having peers in Princeton and Harvard, so this apples to oranges bit is silly:

"The Harris School is growing so fast that the current facility is not sufficient,” said Raja Kamal, the Harris School’s associate dean for resource development. “Right now, some students cannot find seats in their classes. So if we are to expand the faculty and student body, we need a new physical space to compete effectively with Harvard and Princeton."

Given the curriculum's rigor, as well as the U of C's general reputation, I would expect that job placement would be solid. But this is all a bit suspect to me. SIPA, for example, posts extensive statistics, with a very high reporting percentage. And Columbia is at least as pretentious about these things as Chicago. GPPI also posts statistics, though these are less flattering (<70% employment, for example) and have only a few dozen salaries listed, out of over 100 grads.

How do you all feel about this? And how would you think placement at, say, public sector consulting would be compared to the International Finance / Economics Policy track at SIPA? Which would provide a greater breadth of non-government employment opportunities?

I know that this is all speculation. But I can't get my mind to shut up about it. What are you guys thinking?

The lady in the career office is implying "lies, damn lies and statistics," when it comes to schools and job stats. There's all sorts of tricks departments can use if they so choose, and i think that's why she says (politely) that those things aren't readily comparable across schools.

[Minerva473]

With respect to the GPPI, I hadn't noticed the section on salaries. They seem really high, particularly for the nonprofit sector.

I have heard that employment stats from these programs can be deceptive, and I do wonder if the GPPI's <70% job placement rate is just more honest than other programs. But then the salary stats just seem too weird; the fact that they are so high and the fact that they even listed them given the low number of salaries represented. Also I wonder, how long after graduation was the survey conducted?

[wooldogg]

It bothers me that schools are not more forthright with the stats. I'm looking seriously at Harris and Sanford right now and neither has good data posted. On the one hand, I sympathize with the Career Services folks because I do think the stats can be manipulated. Specifically, I think programs mix in dual degree students with MPP-only grads and that really inflates salary figures, especially when the second degree is an MBA or JD. I suspect that is what's going on with some of GPPI's numbers. My other theory is that the recession has hit last year's grads hard and that's why the Career offices aren't very forthcoming. For instance, Duke has better data up until 2007 and then it stops. In the end, I think that career placement has more to do with individual performance, focus and assertiveness than anything else.

Edited March 18, 2010 by wooldogg

[Minerva473]

Syracuse's Maxwell School has some pretty rosy stats:

"Placement statistics for MPA students have remained fairly consistent over the past 5-6 years. Since our students arrive at Maxwell with such varied professional and academic backgrounds and interests, it is not surprising that they also leave Maxwell, pursing such a variety of positions serving the public around the world. In recent years almost all (96-99%) MPA graduates are working in a position of their choice within 3-6 months of graduation. Additionally, a significant number are hired well before June graduation each year."

SIPA's MIA stats dropped to 76% in 2009 which makes sense given the economy, and in previous years seem to be around the high 80s-90%. MPA stats for SIPA are generally better - 84% in 2009 and usually above 90% in previous years.

Can't find stats for HKS or Fletcher.

[stilesg57]

I wouldn't worry about a lack of publicly available hard numbers. There are lots of reasons why those can't always be made available to everyone who asks and nobody wants to make a mistake in any official writing.

Duke is an example of this. While the numbers on the website are "soft" (something like job placement is so unique that there is often no point in bothering with BS statistical methodologies ala US News' rankings), the performance of the career center is anything but. Last year was the worst hiring season in a dozen years, and the last Sanford MPP was placed in October. That's right, 100% employment by October. And that's the worst in over a decade since our current career center head has been there; it's normally reached earlier. That's really an amazing feat when you think about it: it's not easy finding a category of people that are at 100% employment in this economy.

Should you be nervous about Sanford's career services because the stats on the website are organized into broad categories and are a couple years old? Nope. I have a feeling Harris is likely similar.

[Bastille]

To be fair, Stiles, while the stats may be imperfect, they are however extremely helpful.

For example: consider that Columbia's 2009 grads suffered a slightly lower rate of employment, and that the job numbers reflect a much higher than normal percentage finding employment in random parts of Columbia's administration. Sure, it's nice that the career services wants to hook you up, but did you really go to school to be an executive assistant (i.e. secretary) at a your college? Comprehensive statistics show trends like this, and help one to know exactly what to expect.

By the way, Stiles, I really REALLY appreciate all of the helpful feedback / emails about this from Duke's ambassadors. I like Duke a lot, and it's certainly still on my list (thanks in part, again, to the helpfulness of individuals such as yourself). I love the location, Sanford's culture, the clear investment the University is making to improve the program, and the financial generosity (scholarship money, as well as subsidized visitation for all the admits!). One of the reasons have been leaning toward Harvard, however, is the clear assurance that it places into every sector. Stats really do help with this, even if imperfect.

Up until recently (I checked last week, and then again a moment ago), Duke had stats only up to 2006. This left me wondering whether something was amiss. But in fact, it seems that Duke has recently placed up some extensive information for 2007 and 2008: http://sanford.duke.edu/career/graduate/placements.php. This all looks very strong, and I am looking forward to visiting next week.

I wouldn't worry about a lack of publicly available hard numbers. There are lots of reasons why those can't always be made available to everyone who asks and nobody wants to make a mistake in any official writing.

Duke is an example of this. While the numbers on the website are "soft" (something like job placement is so unique that there is often no point in bothering with BS statistical methodologies ala US News' rankings), the performance of the career center is anything but. Last year was the worst hiring season in a dozen years, and the last Sanford MPP was placed in October. That's right, 100% employment by October. And that's the worst in over a decade since our current career center head has been there; it's normally reached earlier. That's really an amazing feat when you think about it: it's not easy finding a category of people that are at 100% employment in this economy.

Should you be nervous about Sanford's career services because the stats on the website are organized into broad categories and are a couple years old? Nope. I have a feeling Harris is likely similar.