As a 25-34 year-old who is striving for a graduate degree.. .I find this list interesting...

 

http://www.pitt.edu/~cbriem/SelectedTables2.htm

 

Census 2000 Rankings – 60 Largest Cities

Ranked By Percentage With Graduate Or Professional Degree Among Population Age 25-34

 

1. Washington DC 22.9%

2. Boston MA 18.5%

3. San Francisco CA 17.8%

4. Pittsburgh PA 17.2%

5. Seattle WA 14.6%

6. Atlanta GA 14.1%

7. Austin TX 12.8%

8. New York NY 12.2%

9. Minneapolis MN 11.7%

10. Chicago IL 11.5%

11. Cincinnati OH 10.9%

12. Denver CO 10.6%

13. San Diego CA 10.4%

14. Oakland CA 10.1%

15. San Jose CA 10.1%

16. St. Paul MN 10.1%

17. New Orleans LA 10.1%

18. Baltimore MD 9.9%

19. Columbus OH 9.7%

20. Nashville TN 9.5%

21. Philadelphia PA 9.5%

22. Charlotte NC 9.1%

23. Tampa FL 9.0%

24. Portland OR 8.8%

25. Miami FL 8.8%

26. Albuquerque NM 8.5%

27. St. Louis MO 8.5%

28. Honolulu HI 8.1%

29. Houston TX 8.0%

30. Buffalo NY 7.8%

31. Kansas City MO 7.7%

32. Dallas TX 7.7%

33. Omaha NE 7.3%

34. Colorado Springs CO 7.2%

35. Indianapolis IN 7.0%

36. Memphis TN 7.0%

37. Los Angeles CA 7.0%

38. Tucson AZ 6.9%

39. Arlington TX 6.3%

40. Sacramento CA 6.2%

41. Tulsa OK 6.0%

42. Oklahoma City OK 5.8%

43. Milwaukee WI 5.8%

44. Wichita KS 5.7%

45. San Antonio TX 5.7%

46. Virginia Beach VA 5.7%

47. Long Beach CA 5.4%

48. Fort Worth TX 5.2%

49. Phoenix AZ 5.0%

50. Cleveland OH 4.9%

51. Jacksonville FL 4.9%

52. Las Vegas NV 4.8%

53. Toledo OH 4.4%

54. Fresno CA 4.3%

55. Corpus Christi TX 4.2%

56. Mesa AZ 4.2%

57. El Pas TX 4.0%

58. Anaheim CA 3.2%

59. Detroit MI 3.0%

60. Santa Ana CA 1.6%

Census 2000

 

So, is this info old?

Unfortunately there has been no U.S. Census since then... we tend to only have them once every 10 years... :(

A better statistic for this would be a per capita comparison...otherwise smaller cities (in the Top 60) are favored by this methodology.

Is culinary school a professional degree? I know people that were trained for that at career centers in highschool...

 

Pitt and CMU have a large grad student population don't they? Perhaps that's why. Im a little surprised to see Cleveland rank so low, that's strange. I'm never one to trust the census though!

A better statistic for this would be a per capita comparison...otherwise smaller cities (in the Top 60) are favored by this methodology.

 

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "per capita"... how do you measure "per capita graduate degrees of age 25-34 population"?    however, I agree with you on your point.    Smaller cities like Cleveland, Pittsburgh and Cincinnati... which are locked into small physical boundaries... do tend to have numbers that are distorted somewhat in comparison to cities like Indy or Columbus or Los Angeles.  However... it doesn't always result in a "favorable" number for these smaller cities.  When your core city only makes up 15-20% of the metropolitan population... numbers can turn out a little differently than a San Antonio or Columbus... which comprise close to half of the metro population.  The problem isn't with using "percentages"... the problem is that city boundaries vary so much throughout the US... and it is hard to do comparisons on a city-by-city basis.  Perhaps measuring core counties would level the playing field a bit... Cuyahoga, Hamilton, Franklin, Wayne MI, Marion IN, Erie NY, etc... but even that's not perfect.

^^Almost poetic:

 

Im a little surprised to see Cleveland rank so low,

that's strange.

 

I'm never one to trust the census though!

 

:laugh:

A better statistic for this would be a per capita comparison...otherwise smaller cities (in the Top 60) are favored by this methodology.

 

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "per capita"... how do you measure "per capita graduate degrees of age 25-34 population"?    however, I agree with you on your point.    Smaller cities like Cleveland, Pittsburgh and Cincinnati... which are locked into small physical boundaries... do tend to have numbers that are distorted somewhat in comparison to cities like Indy or Columbus or Los Angeles.  However... it doesn't always result in a "favorable" number for these smaller cities.  When your core city only makes up 15-20% of the metropolitan population... numbers can turn out a little differently than a San Antonio or Columbus... which comprise close to half of the metro population.   The problem isn't with using "percentages"... the problem is that city boundaries vary so much throughout the US... and it is hard to do comparisons on a city-by-city basis.  Perhaps measuring core counties would level the playing field a bit... Cuyahoga, Hamilton, Franklin, Wayne MI, Marion IN, Erie NY, etc... but even that's not perfect.

 

True, I think the census should do all home counties across the US. When these numbers come up and don't explain that there may be a lot of wealth in the adjacent communities they do a disservice to the city and cause the general populace to think a whole town(metro area) is doing poorly.

All,

 

Let's keep the discussion on topic and refrain from the snide, meaningless references to "culinary school grads" and other name-calling.  Everyone's entitled to an opionion, but if we can't keep it civil I will recommend the thread be locked.

 

There's a lot of good information in census numbers, even the old ones, because it shows you trends and tells a story that may be less obvious but more important: not always telling the "what", but almost always illuminating the "why".

 

Carry on.

These numbers probably will change drastically because many more people go to grad school today than even seven years ago. The order may or may not change that much, but the % certainly will.

I'm not for sure if these statistics are really all that meaningful. What defines this "largest city" term? Lexington, KY is #10 in a list of America's most educated cities with a population of over 250,000 (bachelor degrees aged 25+), with a bachelor/master/doctorate rate of 22.4/11.4/3.1%. Just pinpointing out doctorate degrees is meaningless, unless you are willing to look at bachelor and master degrees, and widening the scope to include other "large" cities.

You can add me...I have attained mine since 2000.  I live in Cincy/NoKY.  We keep getting better. :wink:

I live in downtown Cleveland and I have a PhD.  I am a partner in a consulting company of two (my business partner and me).  Because my partner takes care of the paper work and lives in Texas, we are technically based in Texas.  I mention this because there are probably many people in similar situations who are going totally uncounted in all of these surveys.  I have never been contacted in any survey regarding anything?  Who does these surveys and why should we have any faith in these statistics? 

 

That question also applies to the census data.  How can the city of Cleveland be continually losing population when all of the new apartment and condo buildings in downtown Cleveland are continually filling up?  I see the new homes , apartments, etc. throughout the city, especially Downtown, Tremont, Ohio City, Little Italy, University Circle, etc.  Every year I read that Cleveland leads the county in housing construction.  What is going on with these stats?

^ i think the people that are moving into the most modern new apts tend to be single or empty-nester couples or in situations like yourself. not sure, but i hear that for nyc too (ie., the city pop doesnt grow too much despite all the new apt construction). the same is true for the poor, they get undercounted too. only the shrinking middle class is probably accurately caught by the census, as they are for evrything.

 

i always say for a stat like the one in this thread to be relevant i would compare equal plots of land across regions and cities. standardize it to say 50 sq mi or 75 sq mi or 100 sq mi or more chunks around the center of town. of course colleges, hospitals and other big institutions like that would skew it, but it would still be more fair and accurate (ie., it could catch suburbanites in the cleve region who are still living in the city limits in a san antonio or indy). that is, i would bet if you look at ne ohio as a region, it is much much more formidable in % of young people w/ grad degrees than just the city of cle itself.

 

 

2010 will tell the story for several Ohio cities.  I think C-land and Cincy are going to post some surprising #'s.  I am pretty worried bout T-do and Dayton though (Come across to me as late starters but seeing positives lately).  A lot will be riding on this ONE.

Not to get too off-topic, but I'm always puzzled by the Census estimates, too.  The PD and people in the Cleveland area seem to take them as gospel, but seriously, if they actually looked at the numbers you'd think there would be questions about them.  Cuyahoga county lost around 18,000 people between 1990 and 2000, but the PD reports that we lost 16,000 just between 2005 and 2006?  The percent decline in population in the city of Cleveland has been dropping by about half every decade since the 70s (it was something like 5.4% between 90 and 00,) but somehow Cleveland's lost 7% of its population in the last 6 years?  I know the economy hasn't been as strong in the 00s as it was in the 90s, but I still find those numbers hard to swallow.  It hasn't been that bad around here.

 

2010 will tell the story for several Ohio cities.  I think C-land and Cincy are going to post some surprising #'s. 

 

I agree.  Cleveland and Cuyahoga county and Cincinnati and Hamilton county may all show net losses, but I bet they're going to be much smaller than the Census Bureau is predicting.  I wouldn't be surprised by a small gain for Cincinnati, but I think that's less likely for Cleveland.

 

Back on topic:  As more desirable housing gets built in Ohio's downtowns, I think the influx of highly educated professionals will continue.  I think mrnyc's "standard candle" idea makes a lot of sense for this kind of data, because as it's presented here, it's pretty meaningless.

I want to see central city, metrowide, and total market percentages if they exist. That would show the more regional picture and give an idea of central city/suburban differences.

 

Not that I know anything, I recall that Washington, DC is tops in that area when looked from a metro perspective. I could be wrong, but I'd also guess any metro dominated by a college (Austin?) is usually very high up there.