Nearly half of master degree programs have no ROI

[davewill]

Not everyone gets a graduate degree simply to make more money. A great example is in research and academia where masters and doctorates are pretty much required, but salaries are not necessarily higher than they might make with a bachelors in industry with years experience. Just look at tech companies and how much they pay. Or MD PhDs who get multiple degrees, but dont necessarily make more than someone with just an MD.

Sure, although those students should know what they are getting for their effort rather than relying on a vague notion that a degree will mean a better career. Knowing the ROI is only one input to the decision process.

The article actually does a decent job of addressing those subtleties. The author also mentions that your average college grad likely would have earned more that the average high school grad even if they had not gone to college, just because of demographic and aptitude differences.

You can see that in action in the forum, where we see a lot of professionals without degrees who have been doing fine, but now find the desire to go back and cross that "T".

Perhaps the most useful part of this ROI calculation comes from the comparisons of the same majors at different schools. The example they give of CalPoly's fine and studio arts program's high ROI vs. that at other schools is interesting:

The same logic holds for traditionally low-paying majors. Some institutions buck the trend. The fine and studio arts program at California Polytechnic State University has an ROI of $785,000, thanks to its high starting salaries and relatively affordable tuition. Students interested in fields with low average pay can still find some schools that do well transforming those fields of study into high-paying careers.