YES, BUT CAN THEY EARN A LIVING? - Methods for Creating an Effective System of Measuring Labor Market Outcomes in Higher Education

Sep 19, 2026

A federal “College Scorecard” initiative will include an as-yet-undetermined measure of graduate earnings. This paper analyzes the political drivers behind the initiative and reviews early efforts by four states to build statewide systems for measuring higher-education labor market outcomes. Five principles are proposed to produce valid earnings measures across higher-education segments, down to campuses, departments, and programs, validated through a pilot tracking 44,000 California State University, Northridge students. Recommendations outline how to form a statewide, collaboratively endorsed measurement system.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryPresentations

FormatPDF

Pages15

Reading Time5 min

AccessFree to download

Abstract

Federal “College Scorecard” and the need to measure earnings

The five scorecard measures and the role of “Earnings Potential”

Pilot method for measuring earnings

Tracking 44,000 students using administrative data

Producing earnings over time down to department and program level

Background: accountability and the importance of measuring labor market outcomes

From “A Nation at Risk” to higher-education reform critique

Research & Occasional Paper Series: CSHE.5.13 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY [http://cshe.berkeley.edu/](http://cshe.berkeley.edu/) YES, BUT CAN THEY EARN A LIVING? Methods for Creating an Effective System of Measuring Labor Market Outcomes in Higher Education1 April 2013 Richard W. Moore, Kenneth Chapman, Bettina Huber and Mark Shors California State University Northridge Copyright 2013 Richard W. Moore, Kenneth Chapman, Bettina Huber, MarkShors, all rights reserved. ABSTRACT A newfederal initiative calls fora “College Scorecard”which will include a yetto be determined measure of graduate earnings. In this paper we examine the political context that drives this initiative and examine the nascent efforts of four states to develop statewide systems to measure the labor market outcomes of higher education. We propose five principles to support a system that would generate valid labor market measures that could cut across all segments of higher education in California, and disaggregate down to campuses, departments and programs. We present results from a large-scale pilot project using these principles that generated labor market outcomes for 44,000 college students from California State University Northridge. Finally, we recommend an agenda for creating a statewide system to measure labor market outcomes in California. A first step is to create a venue in which policymakers representing the three public segments (University of California, California State University and the California Community Colleges) and the private sector can come together to design a system. In the past, the California Postsecondary Education Commission (CPEC) would have been a natural body to do this, as it had representatives from all higher education segments. But it was essentially closed in the last round of budget cuts, so an alternative is needed. We believe that a system that emerges through voluntary cooperation will be stronger in the long run than one that is imposed legislatively. We recommend that each sector designate a high level administrator tojoin an ad hoc group to develop a system that will ultimately be endorsed by the boards of each system. Private institutions should be represented as well and should encourage their colleagues to join in. On January 27, 2012 atthe University of Michigan, President Obama laid out his vision fora federal initiative that would reward colleges and universities with increases in federal student aid if colleges restrained cost increases and increased their accountability to the public. 1 At the heart of this initiative is a new “College Scorecard” that, according to the White House, will“assist prospective student and their families in comparing colleges before they choose using key measures of college affordability and value.”2 There are five measures in the score card, beginning with the cost of attendance, a series of four graduation rates, student loan repayment rates, student loan debt, and of most interest to us an “Earnings Potential” measure. The “Earnings Potential” measure, unlike the other measures in the scorecard, is not specified. The model scorecard simply says the following about the measure: “We don’t have this information yet. Before you enroll, ask [your university] to tell you about how many of their graduates get jobs, what kinds ofjobs they get and how much they typically earn.”3 While fewcolleges and universities could produce such data now, a valid, reliable and reasonably cost efficient method for measuring earnings is closer than most people in higher education know. This paper reports on a pilot project which followed up 44,000 students who entered California State University, Northridge during the 1995-2000 period to measure their earnings one year and five years after leaving higher education using administrative data sets available in every state. In this paper we briefly outline the renewed interest in the labor market experience of college stude

FAQs

What is the purpose of the proposed “College Scorecard” in this paper?

It is intended to reward colleges and universities while increasing accountability through key measures, including an earnings-related “Earnings Potential” measure.

Why does the paper focus on “Earnings Potential”?

The initiative does not specify the information for “Earnings Potential,” and the paper addresses how a valid and reliable way to measure graduate earnings can be developed.

How was the proposed method tested?

The authors report results from a pilot tracking 44,000 California State University, Northridge students, measuring earnings one year and five years after leaving higher education using administrative data.

Sep 19, 2026

Upload by Sophia Brooks