3 ms·
That graph in the OP is dishonest. Here's the actual data that wasn't cherry picked (and taken directly from the same data source as the OP, using the excel fi
by cq 15y ago
That graph in the OP is dishonest. Here's the actual data that wasn't cherry picked (and taken directly from the same data source as the OP, using the excel file provided by the US government and charted in excel):
http://i.imgur.com/YTFMo.png http://i.imgur.com/YTFMo.png
Here are the tables from the report, if you'd like to do your own analysis:
http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/2010menu_tables.asp http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/2010menu_tables.asp
- angersock 15y agoThank you for the additional information! That chart did seem somewhat limited.
- esrauch 15y agoI don't understand, the graph that you linked too appears to demonstrate exactly the same effect that the OP graph is. Could you explain what was cherry picked?
- estevez 15y agoAnother point (perhaps not what the parent meant): the author pulls out computer science from the mid-80s peak. See here: http://imgur.com/XUCku http://imgur.com/XUCku
- estevez 15y agoIf we look at the table[1] upon which the article bases its figure we see that the proportion of liberal arts degrees has been steadily around 38% since the 1970s. In addition, the same table reveals that business has held the plurality at around 20% for the entirety of that same period. Visual arts has gone from 4% to 6% in that same period. [1]: http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d10/tables/dt10_282.asp http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d10/tables/dt10_282.asp